His post was centered on the fact that marriage in the priesthood would solve this problem. However, married men are just as likely to molest people as are unmarried men. In fact, I would argue that they are MORE likely as an unmarried man would be suspect, whereas a married man would not be (I mean in the sense of leaving your children unattended with a single man verses unattended with a married one).

As a result, I see his attack as illustrating the fact that I'm correct. I mean, why else not refute it? To say it's simply a "waste of his time" or "he sees no merit in a reply to me" is a little suspect, since, after all he did reply.

The fact that so many of you are coming out to defend it shows that, just like at wotmania (but much worse here) there is a double standard to how people are treated according to the views they represent, regardless of whether or not they merit the attacks on their character.