text: 1.)"That’s not the definition of homosexuality. " - I said
  2.)"It_is_not." - You said
  3.) "It_is_a_definition_of_who_is_at_risk_for_abusing_children" - You said
  
  1. & 2.) Then we agree. Why are you arguing then? 
  
  3.) The male/female adult is at risk abusing children? Or, I imagine you mean the child is at risk being abused? Because, the subject doing the abusing is the adult, not the child. And thus wouldn't, I imagine mean what you mean/intended to come to that conclusion. The error is in logic/reasoning. You have your argument outlining a direction to the conclusion you do not intend, I believe. So, can you refine that statement?