A while back a friend and I were discussing groups in society and I asked him why was it that some groups are defined by their extremes and others not so.
He was bitching about BLM and ANTIFA and was going on about how these groups are violent and terroristic. I then asked him to explain why some groups are defined by their relatively minuscule extremes and other groups are not and even when those other groups are doing more actual damage than groups like BLM and ANTIFA.
I pointed out to him that if you look at groups like BLM and examine their main mission, (that the value of black lives is equal to all lives but they are not treated as such), and the extreme outliers that make up a very small portion of such groups and then say compare them to the Catholic Church, just which group comes out on top when it comes to the harm created by their extremes.
So, if under the same standards of BLM being portrayed as being made up mostly of violent rioters and terrorists, then why do organizations like the Catholic Church escape the same sort of labeling?
And, then, this report comes out of Illinois - that during a 70-year period (up till 2018), 451 clergy personnel abused nearly 2000 children.
I'm not trying to suggest the entire Catholic Church apparatus is full of pedophiles and that all Catholics are bad, but groups such as this, to me, seem to get a pass when it comes to documentable behavior of its members, while other groups do not.
