Arguing with antis

Some people are just impossible to argue with. It seems that whenever I make a case that's different from American standards, my opinion becomes invalid, I cease to be human, I favor anything else that's against the standards, I can be flamed endlessly without repercussion...

So I'm discussing the case of the 10-year-old girl who was killed and raped by her neighbour, and everyone's saying the guy deserves is a pedo-and-necrophile and that he deserves to be brutally raped and beaten to near-death

I then proceed to say pedophiles aren't child molesters, and I get this:

"While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, you are the only person I have ever heard make a distinction between the two. I think you are playing a very dangerous semantic game by trying to distinguish between them, but that's just me."

"If you read the article you will see that the Police said it was his intention to rape her, torture her, kill her, rape her again, then cannabalize her. So that means he had his way with her before he killed her. I guess that would "classify" him as a pedophile as well."

Then, I ask how countering unspeakable violence with unspeakable violence is absurd, and I get flamed because the guy committed a crime against an "innocent child". How is a child different from an adult (or a sedated adult who can't fight back), I still don't have an answer

I keep hearing about those people who respect pedos' opinions and can have a civilized argument, but I have to see them :/

This post is perhaps silly and redundant, but I needed to vent