Assuming the presence of disparaging motives but then validating them by acting as if they're true is too serious to be left to hunch.

This sounds like religious belief to me. No citations, no evidence. Just a belief that something exists and merits a response as though it is not just a belief, but is real and true.

Now if the same superstition was applied without prejudice ( the self-affirming "intuition" ) then it would be superstition but consistently applied superstition.

The incidental conformity of myth to fact ought to be irrelevant to the affirmation of a superstition.

If someone believes that Rock 'n' Roll is harmful because it is a tool of Satan, that ( name any minority ) are minions of Satan, and that Radon Gas is poisonous because it is released by Satan then they are just plain wrong. No matter how much I care to avert the harm caused by Radon Gas, I cannot allow the censorship of the arts and genocidal attacks on minorities by affirming their erroneous belief.

Even selectively affirming their belief when a hunch suits my purposes would be irresponsible.

Your error lies in assuming that the myths designed to harm us may be employed to liberate us; even if by casting aspersions at Pedos you wish to distance yourself from.

Dante