Debate Rounds (4)
Legalize: "To make (something) legal : to allow (something) by law"
Prostitution: "The act of having sex in exchange for money"
Rules (Made by bsh1 and edited slightly):
1. No forfeits
2. Any citations or sources must be used within the character limit of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final round
4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling or semantics
6. No K's of the topic
7. My opponent accepts all of the following definitions and waives his/her right to challenge these definitions
8. The BOP is shared
9. Both debaters must follow this format:
R2: Arguments (No rebuttals)
R3: Rebuttals and arguments
R4: Conclusions (No new arguments or rebuttals in this round)
10. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a loss of a conduct point and due to the severity of the breach may merit an entire forfeit of the debate
Thank you and good luck.
Legalizing prostitution would inevitably lead to girls taking shameful jobs. When prostitution is legalized, the government essentially tells their citizens that such activity is "acceptable" or even "normal" to partake in. Girls could be lured into this business, thinking that the job is acceptable, and find out that the opposite is true. Currently, prostitutes suffer from mental and physical abuse coming from both their clients and their "pimps". This includes manipulation of money, beatings, and rape.  Legalizing prostitution would only succeed in popularizing it, causing more women to suffer through this harsh cycle. Many prostitutes also have families and children, who suffer along with them each time their mother (And rarely, their father) is abused or emotionally destroyed by their work. The children of prostitutes then essentially lose their childhood as they are forced to live with a mother who is in terrible condition and may not even be with them, leading to poor child development.
Clearly, legalizing prostitution would lead to harmful effects that are undesirable as they ruin careers, lives, and even our children.
Thank you for spending your time reading and considering this argument.
"It would be nearly impossible to erase prostitution"
I'm not arguing we can completely erase it. I'm merely contending that the legalization of it would popularize it even more and would lead to negative side effects. My opponent commits the straw man fallacy here because he is essentially rebutting an argument that I never made.
"it is a law not particularly enforced by law officers"
This article goes into detail about how police catch prostitutes: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...
Even if it is not too priority, police officers still have it on their mind and will attempt to catch prostitutes.
"Violent people wishing to hurt a prostitute are more likely to abuse them if they are confident about not being caught by the police"
As mentioned before, police are keen on actually catching pimps and prostitutes. Making prostitution completely legal would make most police officers fail to see much encouragement to go out and catch abusive pimps and prostitutes, as the prostitution itself (The reason they are going out in the first place) would be completely legal. Keeping it illegal keeps police motivated to catch them, thus decreasing the violence caused.
"Not only is there violence within the prostitution rings, but it is comitted by those who enforce the laws themselves. Every year, there is more and more police violence against prostitutes. An article by Chi Mgbako on rhrealitycheck.org says that in South Africa, where prostitution is illegal, police officers often fine sex workers immense amounts of money"
We are discussing the United States of America here, not South Africa. My opponent does not give any evidence that indicates police brutality towards prostitutes in America, nor does he give evidence that it would decrease if we made it legal. If police are already breaking laws and beating citizens for little reason, they probably won't see a reason to stop.
Thank you for reading what I had to say. Have a nice day, and good luck Pro!
"My opponent commits the straw man fallacy here because he is essentially rebutting an argument that I never made."
My opponent misapprehends my words here. There is no rebuttle to his arguments he made in the first round. Why make something illegal if you do not hope to eradicate it?
Also, the question of whether or not prostitution should be illegal can be applied to every country, not only the United States. Even if that was the case, I can assure the accounts of violence against sex workers are not specific to South Africa. People will discriminate and commit acts of violence against prostitutes everywhere around the world. In the words of one of my personal favorite Yiddish proverbs, "Everyone is kneaded out of the same dough."
Now that that misunderstanding is resolved, I would like to make another argument for the legalization of prostitution. If kept illegal, there will be no way for young men and women to recover from the mistakes they have made if they are convicted. The gap between crimes such as murder and prostitution is not thin. If someone is convicted of murder, they most likely deserve to be put in a federal prison because murder is hardly ever a mistake, but with the type of economy and low amount of opportunities given to young people in modern-day America, oftentimes young people are forced to do things like sell their bodies for money in order to stay alive. The well known Pew Research Center produced a study in 2013 announcing that 34% of those in the millenial generation still live in their parents' homes. Imagine those who have parents that have died or have kicked them out of their house. How can someone who has no economic support survive in a country with a median annual rate of $26,695 per person a year. The United States government supplies for its citizens an economy so weak, that people are forced to sell themselves to survive, and the best solution they have for this problem is to make it illegal. What are people to do?
"There is no rebuttle to his arguments he made in the first round"
Regardless, the point is still irrelevant to the debate as I never argued that making it illegal would completely eradicate it. In addition, the fact that it will never truly be eradicated does not mean that we should make it legal. The harm that prostitution causes is still minimized by keeping it illegal, and like I said earlier the defects of prostitution would only get worse if it were legalized.
"Why make something illegal if you do not hope to eradicate it"
Although I personally "hope" for it to lose all popularity, I'm not arguing that it's practical to contend that we would completely eradicate it. Again, I'm arguing that the legalization of it would increase prostitution.
"The question of whether or not prostitution should be illegal can be applied to every country, not only the United States"
The full resolution (Which Pro agreed to debate in the first round) stated: "The United States of America should Legalize Prostitution". This confirms that the debate is in fact about America, and information/arguments about other countries are essentially irrelevant.
"I can assure the accounts of violence against sex workers are not specific to South Africa. People will discriminate and commit acts of violence against prostitutes everywhere around the world"
I agree. However, there has been no evidence given to indicate that making prostitution illegal would make the violence decrease. My opponent must prove that it would in fact decrease in order to make this point valid, which he has failed to do.
Pro's second argument is faulty because there are multiple other jobs that are more viable than prostitution. Even if there are none available (Which there are many, some young people just decide to not work at a fast food restaurant but then they would not want to go into prostitution either) the government should focus on making more jobs. This is super simple, as it does not take much to make a job better than selling your own body for sex.
Let's go over the points that have been made so far:
(A) Prostitution will not go away, even if it remains illegal:
Pro had argued that prostitution would never truly be eradicated even if it was made illegal. However, as I mentioned above, whether it's completely eradicated or not is irrelevant as keeping it illegal will still decrease the negative effects that come with prostitution (IE: Torn families, physically and mentally abused women, devastating blows to many children's development will essentially be minimized if prostitution remains illegal). Again, the goal is not necessarily to get rid of it completely, rather it is to minimize the harm done by it.
My opponent has offered little evidence, has failed to provide an actual link for his claims, and has made illogical claims in this debate. I have refuted his arguments and have shown how it would not be in our interest to legalize prostitution. My opponent has done little to rebut this and his arguments have been refuted.
Good luck in the last round Pro! Again, thank you for debating me. I'd also like to thank anyone who takes the time to read this debate and consider the arguments made.
ShaneTheTrain forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by NateTheFirst 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con was the only one who linked his sources. Conduct to Con for pro's forfeit on the last round. Con's argument showed how it would be harmful to society to legalize prostitution. Pro may have won this if he could have countered Con's rebuttals in the final round.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.