Apparently you don't read the board like I thought that you did, so I'll lay it out for you. My decision to default to the term rapist rather than anti is prompted by your own friends at AZU. You don't understand the use of the term? I'll help you understand it, then. It has nothing to do with whether or not someone agrees with me, it has everything to do with one's attitude.

To put it simply, anyone foolish enough to declare that paedophile is synonymous with child rapist/child molester and refuses to make the distinction and admit openly that they are not even linked together, much less the same thing, will be slapped with the label Rapist by me.

The majority of child molesters are your people, not mine. The number of actual molesters (consensual contact does not count) that are paedophiles are very low and it has nothing to do with their being paedophile. If it was an issue caused by paedophilia, then it wouldn't be your people who molested children most of the time.

My question to you was if you are able to make the educated deduction and stand by it that paedophiles as a people are not child molesters, they are not molesters that haven't found victims yet, and are not inclined to abuse anyone simply because of their orientation. If you can make that distinction and stand by it, then I won't consider you a rapist. If, however, you can not make that distinction, then I won't make the distinction between you and the minority of assholes present in your people who rape.

Does it make sense now? You state publicly and stand by it that paedophiles are in no way connected to child molestation by default and that we abhor it every bit as much as you do, and I will never refer to you personally as a rapist and will support giving you the chance to prove yourself on your forum.

Demosthenes