pedophilia

I have used "scholarly sources" because they support my argument that I have chosen to debate with you. That is the object of debate. Use approved reliable sources to show one has the more reasoned & valid argument. I have continually shown my argument against pro pedophilia, that sexual contact with children causes harm to them & family using reliable scholarly sources. Pro has used a barrage of illogical "Age does not exist because there is no natural system to support it's existence." when it comes to having sex with children. Pro states, "Both (age and pedophilia) was created by people who desired to show bias towards others and divide/suppress the people." No, they were not created because of that. Pedophilia is classified as a mental disorder because it harms children as my many sources elaborate. Pro also attempts to convince us that laws created to protect children from sexual abuse are made by archaic "conservative" leaders. and these laws should be changed because "we the people" want them changed. Thing is, pro has not given any evidence other than his own personal opinion regarding any of the many questions I have asked, or statements he has made regarding the stance he holds. Pro's evidence throughout this debate is typified by his latest entry of, "All of my statements are facts and truth. Only a fool would lie in a debate." Pro expects us to believe his stance is correct by thinking all of his personal opinions, with no actual evidence to back up his argument. He states again that, "I gave you proof of the conservative agenda but you chose to ignore me and dismiss my facts as "meaningless". He failed to state any evidence other than his own opinion even after I had asked him several times to provide facts to back his statements up. Pro says, "People do not rely on "professional studies"to "determine what is right or wrong. We think for ourselves. It's called common sense." Sorry, you have it wrong here. Professionals are experts in their fields to help better understand any difficulties that we may encounter. They specifically have helped parents & children of abuses such as pro wants to make legal as sexual predators. I think that pro would benefit from the same professionals he deems worthless. Pro's, "The law shoud [sic] never discrimate [sic] or control someones sex life or any aspect of their lives. No to "big brother". You have it wrong again pro. Laws are made for the benefit of the innocent. In this case it is the children these laws are protecting from people like you. (Please refer to past sources). Your statement regarding, "Homosexuals are victims just like people who are punished for having sex," is a deflection from the debate subject matter that has no place in this argument. Pro has stated several times that, "The law should not be used as a dictatorship and slave master of the people." I have asked pro repeatedly to show how sex with children does no harm to them or their families, and he repeatedly refuses to answer that most important point. Since pro's main point here is to prove sex with children is beneficial to all concerned, I would have thought pro would like to answer this and therefore win this debate. But pro has kept absolutely silent regarding this central point. My arguments throughout this debate have shown that pro has argued from opinion only, without one source to back any claims he has made. I have brought this up to pro many times, only to have pro ignore those many requests. Ignoring such requests indicates he has nothing to substantiate those claims, and therefore remain only his personal opinion that goes against the children's health and welfare, including their families. I feel I could have use this very same paragraph in rounds three through five and felt comfortable knowing I have proven my contention that sexual abuse of minors is harmful because pro has has given no substantive argument throughout this debate that supports his "age does not exists," and "sex with any age," should be allowed. OK pro, here's your final opportunity regarding proving sex with young children with your latest quip of, "... sex is a good thing for both parties." Please show studies of qualified sources that agree that "sex is a good thing for both parties," even if they are 6 years old and the other participant is an adult. The floor is yours.