Bad choice of author?

you mean tautology?

EDIT: that was @WW

Ha, indeed catcher caught.

Tynan, you say it has to be said but does it? On here anyway? You may write longer and more vociferous posts about religion but I doubt you are in the minority or facing an audience that doesn't already agree with you. Preaching to the converted, more likely.
And I don't think these men raped because they were religious though like most paedophiles they may have constructed some twisted rationale that included their faith in some way; that is speculation. It's also speculation as to whether or not someone who abused 200 boys used force or 'coercion' in each case. Though I would say that in these incidences force and coercion are really the same thing anyway.
Paedophiles, not surprisingly, are drawn to jobs where they will have contact with children and where they will be in a position to exploit their position of power and trust. This duty of care has been betrayed in the church, in children's homes, in youth organisations and many other places and in most cases there has been an attempt at a cover up. Covering up is what institutions tend to do. It certainly damns the Catholic church as an institution but I am not convinced it says much about religious beliefs outside that context. I utterly despise the men, and it looks more and more likely that the Pope was among them, who chose to protect the reputation of the church at the expense of children's lives but I am not surprised by it. Religious and non religious people were involved in covering up child abuse as a matter of routine until really quite recently. One of the things that has improved a lot during the last twenty years or so is that children are more likely to be believed if they report abuse and cover ups are much less likely to be successful though it's a continuing battle.