[A.J.Armitage]

Well, that's not really a good analogy. After all, the mom and the child molester will never change places, but elections do change officeholders. Suppose, however, you were deciding whether or not the little girl should be left alone with the guy who lives next door. Not that one particular person, but the person next door whoever he is (this is to make sure it stays in line with the way our political system works, powers gained by one president being almost always retained for others). Now, say the guy next door right now is a nice guy, but in a short period of time he'll move. You know that the last guy there was a child molester, and there's a very good chance whoever replaces the current resident will be like the last one. What do you do then?

[rdb3]

As a dispassionate outside observer of your debate with Southack, I must say that Southack handed your head to you.

Your smugness does you no good in the process. It makes you appear like an average politician tap-dancing around specific questions rather than answering them.

[Southack]

"You know that the last guy there was a child molester, and there's a very good chance whoever replaces the current resident will be like the last one. What do you do then?"

Precisely. That was my point. It matters which person is in there, not the generic principle that the kid either can or can't be allowed into that place.