Pedophiles should not be stigmatized as they are today.

...was actually referring to pedophilia no longer existing, my whole argument is based around how the stigma should continue existing.Ah, it was a little ambiguously written. Sorry for the mistake. I'll address both of these below quotes by my opponent though:Stigma exists in society for people that murder or rape, rightfully so, stigma therefore should also exist for anything criminal - for which pedophilia, in all of its forms, is.And: It is unfair, but it is not something that means stigma surrounding pedophiles should go away, this isn't something to be normalized in the public imagination like transgender or homosexuality, it is a crime that needs to cease.But pedophilia isn't a crime. If you're going to claim that the attraction to young children is a crime, you need to provide evidence it is, such as the specific law that makes pedophilia a crime. There are laws that make child molestation a crime and viewing/creating child porn is a crime. The stigma should exist for child molestors and child porn viewers, but why for pedophiles who do neither of these things? Having attraction to children is NOT a crime. You haven't explained why pedophiles themselves should have the stigma. You've explained why child molestors and child porn viewers should, but why all pedophiles? I fully disagree that any influence would arise from being around other children at a young age.I don't think I argued for this. Looking back, I don't see where you got that I suggested the liklihood to watch child porn arises from being around other children at a young age. What I did say was that while you are a child, and you swap nude pictures, if you have those nude pictures while you go into adulthood, you may acquire an attraction to that nude picture of a child. There is no justification to be made for any such imagery or allowance for the attractionWell, we can try to treat pedophilia. I am an advocate of that.Re: Porn desensitizes and leads people to possibly do the acts they see in pornI decided to summarize what you were saying since the quote would be too long. I bold when I do this.Now, as I said though, those who choose to watch porn are those who are sexually active already and more likely to do things that are seen as odd to some people sexually. The pedophiles who watch child porn are the ones who already want to molest children. A vast majority of pedophiles don't watch child porn, I would say based off of what I concluded earlier. For someone to be accused of being sexually attracted to children, my guess would be they would have to have been caught viewing it, or acting on it.However, there are things people pick up on. There are many physical displays that occur when someone is attracted to someone. A person can accuse someone of being a pedophile just based off of them showing these outward displays that indicate they are attracted to a child around them. If more awareness was around to begin with then maybe the condition wouldn't occur. For example, if you believed murder was inexcusable and such a horrible ordeal for the families that have to go through it, and the witnesses, not to mention the victim etc - my guess is you would not want to do it.The problem is that for some people, it's difficult to control their urges. Child molesters may very well recognize the potential harm they will cause to the child and families of the child, but if they are put in tempting situations, it becomes increasingly difficult to resist and you act in the moment. As for the "condition" not occuring if there was belief these things were inexcusable, I think this is false. As evidence by how majority of pedophiles also suffer from depression and low self-esteem, they probably do recognize it is a terrible thing to do a child. That doesn't stop them from having the attraction though, or have thoughts enter into their heads about sex with a child or whatever. Now, I am personally a believer in determinism and that free will does not exist. So, I view it that it often isn't the choice of the child molester to molest the child. I was going to discuss more about this, but I feel like it would be getting off-topic. If you disagree with me, perhaps we can have a debate on free will and determinism.The same view should be instantly recognized in pedophilia, it is a crime after all and the harm it causes is there for all to see.Pedophilia isn't a crime... as I said previously. Religion gets a lot of stick to begin with, no more so from me, but I do believe it is unfair for all priests to be labelled pedophiles because of the actions of a few.This isn't the only reason it's wrong to label them as pedophiles: 35% of people who molest children aren't even pedophiles! You need to stop connecting pedophillia with child molestation. Pedophilia is not a good factor for determining whether someone will molest a child. Less than a third of pedophiles even molest children, and 35% of child molestors are not pedophiles. Sure, there is an increased chance someone will molest a child if they're a pedophile, this is true, but they are far more likely to not do it than they are to do it. Perhaps what is needed is a re-education of the term pedophilia for the people that exhibit this attraction, but are not viewers of pornography or molesters. I do not think many people would fall under this new classification to be honest.Why don't you think people would fall under this new classification? As I pointed out, a vast majority of pedophiles don't molest children, and through the logic of how the people who usually act out on their sexual urges are more likely to view pornography, I made the connection that it's likely mostly the pedophiles who molest children who even consume the child pornography. Therefore, it would also likely be the case that a majority of pedophiles do not view child pornography.You haven't offered any reason to believe that many pedophiles wouldn't fall under this "new classification", whereas I have. Conclusions:My opponent has only offered reason to stigmatize child molesters and child porn viewers. They haven't offered reasons why pedophiles as a whole need to be stigmatized. I've offered reasons why not all pedophiles deserve the stigmatization by bringing up how a vast majority of pedophiles don't molest children, and thus that likely a vast majority of them don't view child pornography. A vast majority are law-abiding citizens who suffer from major depression likely due to having their sexual disorder and from stigma society holds for them. I have offered strong sources for my facts, including a few scientific studies. My opponent hasn't provided any sources or supporting evidence as of yet. For these reasons, I believe voters should clearly vote for me for both convincing arguments and sources.Thank you for this debate. Note: I would like to remind my opponent that they have, as of yet, waived a round from argument. One of the agreed upon rules was that we each would not use one round for argument. So, I would suggest you use round 4 for waiving the argument, or else this would be reason for voters to vote for me in conduct as well. You're allowed to offer a conclusions section, kind of like the one I did at the end of this one, if you want. I don't mind that. Just no more rebuttals or arguments please. Thank you.