Is it nothing more than a distinction without a difference? If so, then it is nothing more than a sly attempt to feign tolerance.

There has been lots of commentary on the Pope's comment about gay priests--a comment made on the return flight from Brazil to Rome. With very few exceptions, the comment has been applied to gay persons in general without any reference to priests. The Pope's statement, in part,"who am I to judge?" has been parsed by Cardinal Dolan and others and rendered as "We don't judge persons; we judge behaviors." This restatement is offered as evidence that the Pope is simply reaffirming long held moral beliefs.

What criteria are used to judge a person, if not behavior, words, or thoughts of the person being judged? How can behavior be judged apart from the agent of that behavior? If the actor and the action are not inextricably linked, how can we hold one another responsible for our individual actions? If I refuse to judge other persons, I can say that a particular behavior is inappropriate for me to participate in, but I cannot say that same behavior is inappropriate for someone else. The claim that one judges behaviors and not persons is a distinction without a difference. It does not foster clarity; rather, it intentionally compounds the confusion.