Using a gay activists logic, a pedophile should never be let out of prison.

You know, I'd actually like to see this universal gay activist my opponent keeps referencing - he sounds like quite a character. I would like to apologize for making my argument as long as it was - if my opponent had had enough room to quote me, then perhaps his own arguments would have been more logical. Let's take a look at a few of them: "Heterosexuality is genetic." (in context, the implication here is, "unlike homosexuality") I have no reason to challenge this - the hypothetical "gay activist" agrees with it whole-heartedly. But not just in the sense of "heterosexuality," - in the sense of "sexual orientation." Sexual orientation is genetic, and heterosexuality is the more prevalent of the two (or three, if one includes bisexuality) possibilities. According to a gay activist their orientation is normal because it is genetic. I provided sources from gay activists and other places that insinuates that it is genetic. I also provided sources that insinuate that pedophilia is genetic. My opponent says that pedophilia is not normal behavior. Again, show me this gay activist who considers himself, a part of a 5-10% minority, to be "normal." Of course homosexuality is not normal, the same way that geniuses, good coffee and triple-word scores aren't normal. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument in the first place. And neither is pedophilia. But what does that have to do with anything? And this I must quote in its entirety, because I feel it forms the crux of the disagreement: "The gay activists have a delima, if it is found that homosexuality, pedophilia , and any other type of sexual preference is genetic, it would make their behavior abnormal and give credence to the idea that pedophiles should be locked up for life once they act on their sexual need to molest little children. It would also cause the gay activist a lot of other problems with the gay marriage issue. This is the political aspect which I refer to. Being a pedophile can not be a genetic disorder other wise homosexuality would be a genetic disorder and both would be considered abnormal. Political correctness will keep it separate at the expense of the children. The gay activist must insist that a pedophile can be rehabilitated even if they can't and it is found to be genetic. If the gay activists were to admit in any way that pedophilia was genetic and abnormal, they to would be considered abnormal as heterosexuality is the normal way to be." Here's the thing: homosexuality is not a crime. Pedophilic actions are. One requires rehabilitation, another does not. A homosexual and a pedophile can both be "rehabilitated" to similar degrees - forced to restrain themselves at the expense of their preferred tendencies. Neither would be turned "normal," however. The homosexual will continue to be attracted to the same sex, as the pedophile will to children, but both will show extreme self-control. This is actually what most post-"rehabilitation" homosexuals will tell you. Here's the big difference: there's no good reason to make a homosexual suffer like this, but there is a pretty good reason to make a pedophile do so. "'My opponent never comes out and says, 'homosexuality and pedophilia are alike,' I affirm this statement. With that said........ http://www.stoptheaclu.com...; It's kind of difficult not to play the bigotry card when my opponent presents an article about the ACLU supporting NAMBLA on freedom of speech grounds - there's no point in doing something like that, particularly in the context of those two sentences. I cannot help but point out that that sentence is there for a very clear reason - to incite a particular reaction from his audience. About bisexuality - this was off-topic two rounds ago, but I argued it for the sake of completeness. Let me, therefore, out this in the simplest terms possible: You like blue shirts and red shirts. You own a bunch of them. Through process of elimination, you've narrowed your choices for what you're wearing down to two - a red flannel t-shirt and a blue sweater. You don't care about the color. You're feeling more like a sweater today, so you choose the blue shirt. But you didn't choose between blue or red - you chose between a t-shirt or a sweater, and its color was irrelevant. That's how a bisexual "choice" often works - the choice is in the person, not in the gender. "My opponent attempts to minimise [the relative guilt involved in viewing child pornography], It is just as bad as molesting children to buy, sell and poses child porn. A child must be molested in order for one to view it." Yes, a child has to be molested in order for the pornography to be created, and it is only created for the viewers, so of course they are guilty. But to personally molest somebody is not the same as to watch somebody else do it, if at least because viewing child pornography means that less children are involved - if a pedophile chooses to watch the pornographic material, he is making the choice not to get even MORE children involved. It's not a lot better, but for small reasons like that and others, it is a BIT better, and, therefore, not the same, not "just as bad." And finally, my opponent has, contrarily to his own statement, proven none of what he has set out to prove. He has shown that homosexuality is PROBABLY genetic, and that pedophilia is PROBABLY genetic, but he has yet to prove why the lack absence of 100% effective treatment for pedophilia would mean that a pedophile who has acted once cannot be SUFFICIENTLY rehabilitated for him to not be permanently incarcerated. It is a known fact among gay activists that a homosexual can be sufficiently "rehabilitated" to not behave homosexually, but will still be internally homosexual, and the same goes for a pedophile, in whose case all we care about is his behavior. So, even if homosexuality and pedophilia followed the same rules (which I do not agree with, but IF), then a pedophile can still eventually be released from prison using "gay activist logic."