Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel
And the more priests, the more rapes. I assume that you thus consider priests responsible for rape and would support a measure banning all priests? Or would you accept the reality that it's a third factor: The more people there are the more priests and the more rapes.
Likewise, such profiling is a reaction to a threat--is it any wonder that it shows a relationship to the threat??
Arguing by analogy as you are trying to do does not make for logically valid conclusions as there is nothing remotely similar between the situation you mentioned and the situation at hand. So much for the "likewise". Even if one were to suspend logic, your claim that "the more priests, the more rapes" is rather factually suspect and certainly seems not true -- especially as a decline in the numbers of priests seems to have been an indicator -- leading, lagging or coincidental? -- of a rising number of reported rapes in more than one area.
Furthermore, there's been demonstrated causal relationships where racist/tribalist profiling fuels a problem and/or creates problems (i.e., new problem individuals) that were not there (as problems) before. And racist/tribalist profiling is not always or routinely a reaction to a threat; it's often a power play and nothing more than a lazy "thinker's" approach to a matter beyond their power. Communal punishment -- that's what racist/tribalist profiling comes down to -- is the antithesis to individual liberty and justice for all.