Everyone deserves equal rights

Thank you for your relatively quick response. I look forward to a well-done, cordial final round. Now let's get down to business: Q1: Just because someone was convicted of molesting a child doesn't necessarily mean they're going to do it again. Doesn't everyone deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt? A second chance if you will? I never specified one time offenders. Regardless I simply asked if child molesters should be able to be around children. This includes people who have raped and molested tens or even hundreds of children. Would you trust your child with someone has has molested five children? Ten children? Do you think repeating offenders should have the right to be a teacher or a daycare worker? Repeating child molesters are humans. They are born on this planet and their bodies are made from the same things as the rest of us, they are human, however if one has molested many children do you think they should be denied the right to work with a job that involves mostly children? I don't think they should have that right. This successfully negates your resolution. Q2: Same thing goes for thieves. We all deserve a second chance right? See above. A person like Bonnie Parker, Clyde Barrows, Al Capone, and Jesse James (repeating offenders) do not deserve the right to work at a bank. Why? Because they are repeating offenders. Q3: Just because someone has a restraining order doesn't necessarily mean that the stalker isn't going to go against said restraining order and kill or rape that person anyways. Also, there's a difference between rights and laws. It's against the law to stalk someone, therefore punishment (So to speak) is reasonable. Though you are correct that it doesn't always work, it is denying them the right to meet with the victim. Don't you believe it is worth a try? Murder is against the law, but people still do it anyway. Would you make the same argument for murder? Q4: Again, just because someone has killed in the past doesn't mean they're going to do it again. Besides, if you knew the person was a serial killer they'd be in jail for life or dealing with the death penalty and thus wouldn't even be a part of society. See Q1 and Q2... I even said serial killers (repeating offenders). Someone who has killed hundreds of people should not have the right to live amongst regular citizens. Q5: Reasonably you have stooped me here. However, I feel an argument is necessary. Not all 5 year old's are completely immature and uneducated. In fact when I was 5 I knew quite a bit about politics, and I myself had an opinion of who the president should be. Look at the average kindergarten classroom. Most of the boys are probably picking their noses and nearly all of the children will likely not know how to read. They simply do not have the ability to make such informed decisions at such an age. I know five year old's who don't even know their last name! It is still a vital time of learning how to do basic things like read and write and do addition. Plenty of kids can barely do that, let alone vote for the the president. Their parents would likely vote for them, making the votes in this country unfair, bias, and would likely screw up the popular vote's results. Q6: Sex isn't really a right so to speak. It's more of an action. I can't think of a single place where sex is outlawed amongst adults and therefore wouldn't really consider it to be a right. Your misinterpreting what I intended to write. I mean that children shouldn't have the all of the same rights as adults, sex included. I mean adults (18+) have the right to have sex without getting in trouble, but young children shouldn't have that right for obvious reasons. I will gladly go into more detail in this argument in the next round if you wish.Quotes by Pro are in a larger font. My bold thing isn't working for some reason.Back to you, Pro.