It's a fallacy where one brings up aspects (especially negatives) as if it's particularly significant to be included or insinuated in their description of a group for optics purposes.
Especially when it's not a consequence of their membership.
An example is the accusation of Catholic priests as pedophiles which is not a consequence but lack thereof.

This fallacy is often committed as an act of compensating. Akin to the atheist who accuses Catholic priests of being pedophiles when, aside from labels, it's just atheism in practice.

>>513878927 (OP)
go back there

>>513878927 (OP)
we're going to destroy the vatican
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FYtNQ8izM0

>>513879224
seek help

>>513878927 (OP)
>Catholic priests as pedophiles which is not a consequence but lack thereof.
It is a consequence when the church shuffles the pedo priest to new areas and they don't report to the police.