RCC says making a woman a priest is as sinful as abusing a child.

[Ziploc Surprise]

This is sick, absolutely sick. Crimes should be weighted by the damage they do. The sexual abuse of a child causes horrible mind scarring (and some physical scarring) I've known many adults who were raped as a child.

....

Now let's weigh the negative consequences of being ministered by a female or having a female as (some sort of) overseer in the church......I hear crickets chirping....can anyone think of the emotional and physical scars that can come with this?

Wtf?

So what are you complaining about? Do you think pedophiles should be given a harsher punishment? Because legally speaking, the Church is already giving them the maximum possible. No one is denying that being raped is a scarring thing. Don't lecture me on that.

OR are you complaining about women's ordination having too harsh of a punishment? Do you think bishops who ordain women should be shown more leniency?

There are a lot of offenses which receive the maximum possible penalty in the Church. Its weird how you cherry pick these two and then proceed to complain on how "sick" it is, but you give no justification for the sickness other than "raping kids really hurts people" (naturally, which is why it receives the maximum penalty). The only thing left is that you are complaining that bishops who ordain women should get off easily, but of course Holy Orders is a Sacrament, and any abuse of it should be met again, with the harshest punishment.
[/quote]

I'm now wondering if you're a poe.

You said "Both sins receive the highest level of discipline, as they should." (BTW my jaw dropped when I read that).

I said " Crimes should be weighted by the damage they do." Then I contrasted the damage that child rape does vs. any damage a female in the ministry might do. The former is horrible and long lasting the latter does no damage whatsoever. There is no equating these two things. There is no reason to put these two things on the same level. One is a crime and the other isn't. If you look at in terms of how much damage these things do to a person it is sick and callous to equate them. At a time when the RCC is repeatedly getting in trouble for covering up child abuse the last thing they need for their public relations is yet another comment and/or action that suggests a flippant attitude. Yet they keep doing it.

I'll say it again it's sick to call something that does no damage a sin that is anywhere near the gravity of the sin of child abuse. The RCC have their heads in their asses.

As for your comments about cherry picking and giving no justification for the sickness blah, blah, blah, go back and read what I wrote; this time with a little better reading comprehension.