[Dr. Eckleburg]

From the article...

"...At a minimum, the scope of the suspensions underscored the grand jury’s contention that the archdiocese had failed to clean house after a grand jury report in 2005 found credible accusations of abuse by 63 priests. And it suggested that potentially, predatory priests had had access to thousands of children for years..."

This story was on page 13 of the "New York Times."

Does anyone not believe that if this story had been "21 Baptist or Presbyterian or Methodist ministers suspended for sexual abuse in Philadelphia," it would be front page news instead of buried on page 13?

[buccaneer81]

Does anyone not believe that if this story had been "21 Baptist or Presbyterian or Methodist ministers suspended for sexual abuse in Philadelphia," it would be front page news instead of buried on page 13?

It wouldn't have been in the paper at all.

[Antoninus]

Does anyone not believe that if this story had been "21 Baptist or Presbyterian or Methodist ministers suspended for sexual abuse in Philadelphia," it would be front page news instead of buried on page 13?

Nope. It wouldn't have appeared at all. Your particular sect has less adherents nationally than there are Catholics in the New York Archdiocese. And there are sex abuse cases out there dogging the Presbyterian church. I could start linking to them for you, if you'd like.

[starlifter]

You hate the Catholic Church.

We get it.

[RnMomof7]

Does anyone not believe that if this story had been "21 Baptist or Presbyterian or Methodist ministers suspended for sexual abuse in Philadelphia," it would be front page news instead of buried on page 13?

At least here at FR :)