My judgment standard with abusers: Methodology and penology of my anti-child abuse efforts

Many people are worried about my judgment standard. The idea is that the children's rights movement is going to teach a young pedophile like me to "snipe out all the abusers in the family, thus tearing it apart". This is an anti-children's rights myth, in fact. My judgment has gotten more lenient, and for trauma's sake...Statistics show that my abuser is literally everywhere I go in life, so I can't be lashing out at everyone and interrogating everyone. There's a time to be a child advocate/vigilante, and a time for ordinary work.

It says in John 7:24 KJV:

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgement

The Greek root word translated both "judge" and "judgment" is κρινο (Latin: krino) and refers to circular courtroom judgment, meaning the presumption of innocence, beyond a reasonable doubt, with superficial judgment "beyond what they eye can see". Meaning, whatever evidence that exists, exists. No evidence, no crime. The idea is not to assume evidence, but look for leads to new evidence, like a weed popping out of a grate. That weed signals the need for investigation, and certainly leads somewhere. Assuming things about people, in conversation or elsewhere, based on minority or majority status, is the moral crime of antisocial "assume", meaning presumptuously assuming things about your neighbor that are untrue, based on fake privilege standards up or down. I know nothing about anyone's life apart from what I hear. 

However, when a credible witness, such as a child, makes a report of abuse, I must believe it until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, regardless of my bias towards any adult or the situation at hand. If the confession doesn't make sense, maybe they are scared and frightened so badly that it doesn't make sense. But, all they have to do is say "that adult is scary/creepy/a menace" or "I'm afraid of my parents" and said entities are guilty until proven otherwise, in which case child abusers would plead guilty or innocent to me, and state their intent in dealing with the child, and if the intent doesn't reassure the child, and/or isn't stated in a reassuring manner, they are entitled parents/adults, and receive the ban from me. However, I judge alongside the child, not on behalf of the child. The child decides perhaps over my own judgment whether to avoid their parents, based on fear of parents and not merely their opinions defending abusive parents - their emotional safety, based on fight-or-flight response to parents. A child is much more likely to "lie" in order to cover up for their parents than "abuse them" with false accusations. Any forceful activation of the fight-or-flight receptacles in a child is abuse, regardless of the child's testimony, due to hidden biblical rules on damages. 

It reads in 1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with one an no not to eat.

There are levies of punishments for various infractions among fellow believers, and many which I do not enforce unless I know you to be a Christian, meaning an individual who believes in the God of Israel, and that Jesus Christ lived, died on the first day, and was resurrected on the third day, and seek to adhere to the Holy Bible to the best of your ability. The strongest penalty I may invoke is refusal to eat with a certain individual, and in family dining situations, that can be sensory gaslighting, or perhaps asking for a break suddenly after someone said something that indicated an abuser. Otherwise, imposition of law is based on existence based on sensory gaslighting. You shall not exist in relation to me as a pro-spanking parent, meaning within my periphery of perception, meaning I shall not perceive you, at all, at all, at all. I shall shun you for all time, for all time, for all time, for your existence is proved worthless to God Almighty for your attitudes towards children.

Children's rights anger comes up in conversation as an understandable slip, that leads to a huge barrage of anger that any ally of children can understand, and any enemy of children can discard and laugh at, and is rarely deposited in polite company, but is so on blogs like this, where I may keep a blotter of all the child abuse cases in stores involving lawful means that thus I cannot solve, and only shun. It is anger at the very lowest, gut level, that drives the plaintiff into action. 

Only present tense offenses can be prosecuted, unless an adult makes a threat on a child or children as a constituency, or defends past tense actions towards children, or else makes entitled or graven threats towards children as individuals or children as a constituency. Otherwise, I must presume innocence towards everyone in my life, regardless of whether I like them or not.

Many adults will be chosen to care for or about children, but few do so to the favor of the best interests and rights of children. This world hates children, and will be destroyed in due time by Divine Justice being imposed on the land, with all of earth scorched and annihilated. All adults, by default, are deserving of DEATH and DESTRUCTION, and will die in a fire of torrent for their collective individual abuse and oppression of children, with only children being saved. God terrorizes the evildoer, but always sides with the vulnerable in society, the "least of these", especially children...But, I hold that anger, not expunge it everywhere, and it is a calm, soothing anger. I am ANGRY at the world for how it treats children, and demand legal change in favor of the rights of children, including their right to be free from physical battery and harassment.