The prejudice is that you pretend that's what the book says when it doesn't. For instance, Aristotle's Politicssays of Cretan pederasty:
The lawgiver has devised many wise measures to secure the benefit of moderation at table, and the segregation of the women in order that they may not bear many children, for which purpose he instituted association with the male sex.
That's a straightforward reference to legal permission. But when Talmudic law describes child abuse for the sake of varying punishments, you act like it's an approval like Aristotle. So yeah, you're prejudiced, not because you don't like pedophiles, but because you charge a certain group with being pedophiles without consulting the evidence.
What "prejudice"? That I don't like people who's holy book says to rape 3 year olds?
The prejudice is that you pretend that's what the book says when it doesn't. For instance, Aristotle's Politics says of Cretan pederasty:
That's a straightforward reference to legal permission. But when Talmudic law describes child abuse for the sake of varying punishments, you act like it's an approval like Aristotle. So yeah, you're prejudiced, not because you don't like pedophiles, but because you charge a certain group with being pedophiles without consulting the evidence.