proplog2; Well, if you are trying to establish your credability by making clearly inflated statements (99% etc.), then you have a strange way of doing it.
Also, your obvious anger does you no good what-so-ever, as it also diminishes the impact of your message.
And now I suppose it's other peoples' fault that you don't have enough self control to get your message over in a calm and credable manner?
Really.
What are you trying to say? That most people charged with sexual abuse of children are innocent? I've read your links. They contain nothing new; false memory syndrome is a known problem, alleged pedophiles are social pariahs, and defending them is considered questionable by some people.
But you are implying that the trial process is faulty and that innocent people often go to jail. Now, the American legal system is not a great one; since they started judicial killings, more people have had their convictions for which they receieved the death penalty OVERTURNED (i.e., they didn't do it) than have actually been executed.
But there are statistics for that, proof. All you have are articles that say that x amount of allegations are false. They don;t say that these allegations have resulted in x amount of people being sent to jail for crimes they did not commit.
Sadly, there are probably people who have been falsely convicted of pedophilia. Why not concentrate on their cases, if you are such a champion of justice? The way you are doing it casts doubts on ALL the victims, rather than highlighting a particular miscarriage of justice.
Basically, you may have a point, but you are presenting it in a very unthought-out, aggressive, alienating fashion, and thus not receiving a hearing, for which YOU are responsible. You are also implicitly attacking, by the statistics, the 40-95% of the people who make truthful allegations of abuse, who are not deserving of your anger.
So, if you want respect and a listening ear, make your case better.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
