Ripped from today's headlines!

So, those of you who follow the news know that one of the recurring fluff stories right now involves a Philadelphia day care and a local country club swimming pool. The short version is this:
Due to the closings of a number of city pools, the day care center contracted with said country club to use their pool once a week.
At the first visit, some of the members of the country club made derogatory remarks about the kids, many of which were racial in nature.
Shortly thereafter, the country club cancelled the contract and returned the full check to the day care center.

The slant that the day care center and liberal activists are taking is that this turnabout on the contract was racially motivated. After all, if a handful of the members of this club are bigoted, then obviously the entire organization must be.

The story according to the country club is that participation was unexpectedly high and they couldn't legally support having that many people using the pool. They cancelled similar contracts with other, predominantly white day care centers, too.

I don't really care at the moment which side is right. What I care about is that the obvious slant from the media is that the day care center is. The day care center is insisting that the entire board of the country club resign and that members who are identified as having made racist comments be expelled from the organization. What gives them this authority? Nothing, at least not until actual wrongdoing is proven. Until then, this is blackmail, plain and simple, and it's disgusting; and yet, it's not going to be seen as that in the press. It's going to be seen as a justified crusade against the ghosts of systemic racism.

I hate that, as soon as racism or homosexuality enters the picture, innocent until proven guilty flies out the window. Any time these issues arises, we start confusing correlation with causation; and not just in the lack of evidence, but often times (such as in this case) in the face of evidence to the contrary. I understand why we do it. We want to make sure that the system can't be abused to protect bigots. To borrow a phrase from the Green Lantern Corps, we want to ensure that no evil escapes our sight. I'm not sure that we go about it the right way, though, when we give our entire sympathy to the "defendant", particularly when they abuse their supposed weakness in this fashion.