But what was their problem, with the priests who abused kids, or the bishops who covered it up?
If it's the latter, have they not lied and covered their own ass before?
Sure, what the bishops did is criminal negligence, but is that really going to be the line of demarcation here?
So I agree, the flaws are not the same, but they are similar in type (not magnitude), and if we're going to use flaws as a reason for straying from anything, shouldn't we go to something that is flawless?
