Dogma-Style: Why The Rolling Stone Gang-Rape Story Will Never Be Deemed A Hoax
Ashe Schow writes at WashEx about the brutal gang rape of Jackie, reported in Rolling Stone, that it now seems clear did not occur:

Activists have clung to the idea that something probably did happen to make a young woman tell a tale of a brutal gang rape and become a campus activist to keep the hoax claims isolated to a small subset.

...The faint possibility that Jackie may have suffered some other horrific event is not the reason this story will not be labeled a hoax by activists or most in the mainstream media.

No, the reason it will not be labeled a hoax comes from an anonymous McGill University student, using the pseudonym Aurora Dagny, who wrote last year that dogmatism is in part to blame for activists' refusal to accept evidence contrary to their worldview.

"One way to define the difference between a regular belief and a sacred belief is that people who hold sacred beliefs think it is morally wrong for anyone to question those beliefs," Dagny wrote. "If someone does question those beliefs, they're not just being stupid or even depraved, they're actively doing violence. They might as well be kicking a puppy. When people hold sacred beliefs, there is no disagreement without animosity."

Because the activists behind the Rolling Stone story hold a "sacred belief" that thousands, perhaps even millions, of college students are sexually assaulted each year, any evidence to the contrary is seen as detrimental to the cause.

This sort of "sacred belief" religiosity enters many areas, including science. That's what caused supposed lofty skeptics (including "elite" science writers) to believe unquestioningly that Bora Zivkovic was guilty of "sexual harassment," when his behavior in no way met the legal or even reasonable standards for it.