Re: And yet

Well...

Although I mentioned it on a subthread about Dawkins, my point was really about *all* claimed cases of child-adult sex, with a particular sample in the RCC cases.

The RCC cases are a good example to me, because it's clear they have a core of truth but have been exaggerated; and because the consequences far surpass what would have been a reasonable reaction to real sexual abuse. In the same way, I think the way child-adult sex is treated in mainstream media today really make it so that cases are exaggerated, even when sexual abuse is real, that reactions are not reasonable and that consequences to others are too large to be justifiable. But, while in the RCC cases it is more obvious, this is true of all cases. And hence why I nearly always question some of the assumptions in almost every case brought to my attention. Many cases don't have a core of real abuse, and even in those that have, reactions are not being reasonable or helping the children, not the ones who were victimized and not the others who haven't.

That point isn't confined to Church-related cases; and it sure is not very related to Dawkins on pedophilia.