Present arguments that show what's wrong with pedophilia

Why is pedophilia generally a bad thing? According to who or what? By using the term "general"General:affecting or concerning all or most people or things- This is what I meant. Do you realize your giving some ammunition to the pedophilia supporters? I don't think I was. If they are wrong they are wrong. it's been argued that consent is irrelevant to knowledge. Can I hear the argument? I don't see what I have to go with. Well then what's the argument for those that are the occasional cases that have the knowledge of consequences, Would those be acceptable acts of pedophilia? Even if you tell a child something is bad they still do it or they rebel. Children for the most part do not listen to reason instead go by emotions or short term happiness. In regards to the development of the brain, It seems to have no effect on people that are well over 25 years of age and still make decisions to things that they were ignorant to the consequences of. They have the capacity to do the right thing since they have the developed brain to do so. Adults are not ignorant to the consequences. They didn't assess the cause and effect properly. Yes you can find outliers but in law it can be filed as negligence. Meaning even though they did not know they were supposed to know. The law blames the parents of the child. The reason is the child cannot do the best with what they have. A less superior brain that requires time and the right developed to make it helpful. So even after the expected age of having a fully developed mental faculty, Aren't we still battling the consent with knowledge issue? With enough knowledge you can give consent. Without said knowledge you cannot give consent. Since you mentioned a specific age about brain development and we're discussing consent with decision making and all that, Wouldn't this overrule the 18 years of age law for a person being legally an adult? I don't why that is the case. 18 years is old enough to the law but to brain development it requires 25 years. Paedophilia is under the age of 18. Mind you, This is legally where people are put into a bracket of being left to their own vices if you will and no longer require parent/guardian overseer. Laws do and can change. It seems the 'fully formed brain" idea doesn't perfectly fit, Because wisdom comes with age as we get older. Contradicting evidence will surely be helpful in helping me see your point. At 25 the brain is fully developed. Meaning you have the necessary internal functionality to help make an informed decision. Yes generally wisdom comes with age but like you said before there are outliers and Adults can still make decisions to things that they were ignorant to the consequences of. So I do not see how you made a point here. If 75 year person can make a mistake then this is not an absolute statement. The brain fully developing at the age of 25 is not an absolute but more of an average. Difference circumstances will cause to increase the time or decrease the time. Our decisions tend to become better as we learn from our mistakes even well past the age of this fully formed mental capacity. What do you mean by "no one below the age of 25 can do the examples above sufficiently"? What examples? Much better statement above then wisdom comes with age as we get older. There can be a thing of bad wisdom which is not helpful and tend also makes it clear it is not an absolute statement. I'll just copy what I said before:I am not saying no one below the age of 25 can do the examples above sufficiently but as the brain is developed a more informative choice can be madeThe basic point of this debate is to be prepared for future progressive, Political and societal climates. In the future children might develop at any earlier age and can cause 16 year olds to be deemed adults or maybe it will get increased to 25 because more evidence has shown that adults are fully capable of making at that age. Who knows. I hope you do win the debate because that would mean we'll be ready most likely for these groups that will come forth like those on YouTube looking for special rights. I don't care about wining instead I care about learning something new. Special rights, I am using loosely, Are already a thing. Take a plane ride. Celebrities can be a nuisance all they want and the business more often then not would offer their services to them. Non-celebrities doing the same act more then often will them kicked out of the flight. Youtubers already have special rights since they are celebrities. They have the public fame, Attention and also the money to have special rights. If you mean Amos Yee stating paedophilia is not wrong should not be given special rights. To me he has made a sizable audience and it is free speech even if he states something that you oppose. If he is right he should be able to say. If he is wrong he should also be able to say it. Lets say for argument sake that we both can agree if we had a sit down with Amos Yee that paedophilia is not wrong. How would that even happen if speech that you do not like is banned? So this is the trial run and I'm playing the devil's advocate so to speak. Okay but you still have to make a defence for it. You didn't include one in Round 1 why not include one in Round 2? I would like you to give counter arguments. Like paedophilia is not wrong because. I didn't see your rebuttals sufficient in proving me wrong. The point of brain development still stands. About Amos Yee: I think his channel was deleted for defending paedophilia. That is wrong it goes against free speech. If we silence speech then how do we have a discussion? To me if we do not discuss paedophilia it will go on in the shadows like in sex cults. Without bringing it into the public we can as a society come to a decision with both sides and see a resolution. Maybe paedophiles are mentally ill maybe not. We cannot know if we do know speak about it and given scientists a yes to research and find out why this happens in order to find a resolution.