You're right about this, Toady, but I bet if you looked you'll find a difference here...I am willing to bet that the protected child molester has no criminal record whereas Tony-boy is a convicted felon or whatever on these charges.
Just like you state here: They operate on :
the image of the group is far more important than the welfare of any individual of the group.
I am willing to bet that allowing a convicted child molester to receive services or have membership will be considered a tarnishment on the "image" of the group and what a "Scientologist" represents.
That's what I've seen...convicted criminal record on account = ten foot pole between you and Church status and lines.
It's so stupid that I bet if you went back to 1940's Nazi Germany and you were convicted of aiding Jewish people and other "undesirables" escaping the Nazis in violation of their "law" or if you went back to slavery in the U.S. and assisted slaves to escape in violation of the law and were convicted you'd be denied Church services as a "criminal". Yet, simultaneously, if you were a high and mighty respected member or official of the Nazi party with no documented criminal record and with plenty of clout then you'd be an OL and a shoe in for Scientology...or if you were a high society plantation owner with no documented criminal record and with tons of slaves and plenty of influence and clout in the South then you'd be welcomed with open arms in Scientology.
Scientology is all about the image and nothing about the substance.
"Money changes everything", Cyndi Lauper