I agree with the majority in all 4 questions in the survey, especially # 3. As to # 4, while I am against gay marriage, I don't believe that "any sexual expression of love between gay couples is immoral". I have to consider that homosexuals & lesbians are born with their orientation, just as I was born heterosexual. I can imagine a "parallel world" where gay was the norm, and straight was perverted. Would I stop liking girls?-Of course not! However, I believe that marriage is properly an institution between 1 man and 1 woman. Civil Unions are fine, for gay couples. Those survey answers, I feel, would be similar, here in the U.S.A.

Murph46, good point on the paedo priests.

I WISH THEY WOULD DO A SURVEY AS TO HOW MANY IRISH CATHOLICS LIKE AMERICANS OR BETTER STILL AMERICANS TRYING TO BE IRISH... I DONT THINK THE STATS WOULD BE AS HIGH haha!!!

Did Amarach (Tomorrow) Research not survey people in the east [Leinster] and west [Connacht] of Ireland, as well as north [Ulster] and south [Munster]? If the 'faithful' of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church (HRC&AC) only conditionally be[lie]ve the Churches' dogma/doctrine, (i.e are a la carte or cafeteria Catholics), does that not mean they are not officially RC, thereby nullifying the research? That is, Roman Catholics are what the HRC&AC dic[k]tate. What people 'be[lie]ve' (sic) is largely irrelevant. What they know is far more important. Children be[lie]ve in Santa Clause and tooth fairies, largely at the insistence of their silly parents. Does that mean they exist? Ironically - yes! The more people be[lie]ve anything, the more they will it into existence. Be[lie]f is premature knowledge. Sadly, it is also deductive subjectivity in epistomologically terms. Be[lie]fs are an impediment to authentic spirituality. What do the IACP be[lie]ve?

Look at all the "defects" of birth that would be diminished. I'm sure Mike Cleary wishes it was so in his day, so too Bishop what's his name who was sent off to Africa for R&R, I wonder if there are any 'little bishops' left behind there. We would never know, at least Michael was faithful.

This is a change long overdue. It's time to get the church back to operating according to the Bible.

KatieMurphy if you are crazy enough to think that marriage would stop pedophile priests,you need counseling.They are two totally distinct categories ,but don't dare to confuse the two.There are enough problems already.

Just recently there was a big flap over the german pope saying never neve never re priests marrying. One would think that given the propensity of unmarried priest to rape children he would change his mind..........................In the old days they called altsheimers disease "hardening of the arteries". Now we know better about the apprent cause, but it sure sounds like Pope Bennie has a hardening of the arteries and hardening of the heart......................May he live long and a long papacy. Its obvious he was sent by God to destroy the Islamic like church of the west. hates gays, hates birth control, absolute truths etc etc.

It's a mistake to assume that a married priest would try to transfer church property to his family or that his parish would have the burden of supporting his wife and children. Among the ECUSA male priests I've known, their wives have careers and have bought homes in which to raise their children. The wives make more money than their priest-husbands. But, I suppose, wives of Catholic priests might be perennially pregnant unless the RC Church changes its teaching on contraception!

I suppose you could make the case that the Church is not much different than the Augusta National Club, and can choose who they want as part of their membership. Of course, the Vatican wants as many women members as possible, but not as priests, bishops, etc. The hypocrisy of allowing married Anglicans in while claiming marriage is a detriment to pastoral duties says it all for me.

There is no doubt that the married priesthood should be considered more strongly. There has to be some paperwork done ahead of time. If you think that the divorce proceedings involving the Los Angeles Dodgers got to be messy, what about if it involved the Archdiocese of Los Angeles? The Orthodox allows marriage for a deacon. Once he is ordained, it is not allowed. You just cannot be out there chasing women if you are the pastor. What is holding it up? Now, there have maneuvered into places of authority gay priests and lesbian nuns. That is the holdup. They want the entire "cup of tea" where marriage is "spread around the shop". Bernardin ensured the turmoil with his outlandish concept of the "seemless garment". Now, gays have a foothold and want the entire basket of fruit.

The Church is not a democracy run by politicians and polls. Although it may be entertaining for some to note the results of polls of public opinion, but they will have as much effect on Church teachings as they might on the weather. Nine out of ten people indicating a preference for sunny days will not stop the rain!

I completely agree that priests should be allowed to be married, and women should be allowed to be ordained as priests, too. From what I learned in College about the enactment of celibacy is that originally priests were allowed to be married and have children. The Church was a thousand years old before it definitively took a stand in favor of celibacy in the twelfth century at the Second Lateran Council held in 1139. This was because the Roman Catholic Church wanted to keep all the wealth within their religion... not allowing priests to pass along their wealth to their family when they passed away.

All this fuss is caused by the God's Clerk making a few spelling mistakes when taking down His Commandments. (spelcheckir hadn't been created yet!) ~ "What'll I put down for Sex? - says he. God said "Celebrate"; but the fool mis-heard and left out the 'r'. The same happened when he described Satan! The clown got his 'l' and 'n' mixed up and put Cult!

OK, Let's analyze this. I bet "the farm" that if a similar survey was conducted in the US, the remainder of Western Europe and Australia,the results would be the same if not with higher percentages.Africa, South and Central America and other places in the world where third world countries exist may be different as the populance in these countries probably don't have the sophistication as of yet, to see the hypocrisy and con games promulgated by the Roman Church. Why are Episcopal priests who have wives and children allowed to become Catholic priests because of their opposing views with the Episcopal(Anglican) Church? That is; because of their homophopic and anti-women views that they share with the Roman Church. What kind of spirituality does that reflect? Shouldn't these priests be celibate as well, based on the Roman Church's rationale for single clergy? Why is the Roman Church so adament about the evils of homosexual expression when the Roman Catholic Priesthood is one of the most obvious homosexual cultures on earth? Finally, in an world economy where people in all walks of life want to raise their children in a wholesome lifestyle without having an unmanageable brood of children, does the Roman Church want to govern what goes on in folks' bedrooms? The days of the Roman Church's need to ignore the cares and needs of Roman Catholics are coming to an end. The folks who blindly accept the Roman Church's nonsense are in their 70's, 80's and 90's. They soon will be gone and then the money and the blind obedience will no longer exist. May God, who is probably despondent over what these idiots have done to his Church, help these pathetic bastards.