I think the word "choice" is misleading. Personally, I don't think homosexuality is a choice, per se, but something that arises out of environment and past experiences. But natural it is not, and while a gay person can't "choose" to be attracted to someone of the opposite sex, with enough stimulation their sexuality CAN be realigned, just as the sexuality of a straight person can we changed with enough work.

"And I never made the claim that a pedophile has no choice but to abuse a child, I am making the claim that they have no choice but to want to abuse a child."

This is like saying that a homosexual has no choice but want to rape other men. You ARE misunderstanding: by definition, pedophilia is simply the attraction to children and adolescents, just as homosexuality is only the attraction to people of the same sex--neither necessitates rape and abuse. A pedophile could want to have sex with children, but still be against rape and want their partners to consent.

"Any sexual activity between an adult and a child is abuse, do you understand that much at least?"

"Consent is impossible in the case of pedophilia, social or legal."

A child can have just as much right and ability to consent to sex as an adult does. I think you're severely underestimating the maturity a 14 or 15 or 16 year old might have: everyone matures, psychologically and physically, at a different rate. To say that anyone under 18 is completely unable to consent to what is done to their own bodies is just fallacious. As a person under 18, technically "illegal" myself, I find the legal presumption that all sex with someone underage is considered statutory RAPE absurd.

"1. it's reversible

2. it's chemical, no knives involved"

You proposed cutting off the genitals, unless I'm either misreading or you were being sarcastic (in which case, you're not very good at it).

"By your logic, one found guilty could never be jailed, because they may be found innocent later."

You can be let out of jail. You can't sew a penis back on. This is why the death penalty is taken so seriously and used so sparingly, but YOU want this treatment to be "mandatory," and if they acted on the desire to give them the death penalty. I don't think you realize how utterly ridiculous this is. You said yourself that "attraction is not something one chooses," so if that's true, you want to cut someone's dick off because of an attraction they had no control over, and to KILL them if they do what feels right to them? Then why not do the same to homosexuals?

And some ad hom, because I can't resist: it "weekens" you argument too when your comment is riddled with spelling and grammar errors.