The Instigator
Curci
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Vitezamotors
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Prostitution should be legal.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Vitezamotors
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 955 times Debate No: 48214
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Curci

Pro

Side note: This is my first debate on debate.org. Okay, my opinion is that prostitution should be legal because what people do consensually should not be regulated. If x thinks y is attractive, and goes up to y and offers money for sex, and y accepts, what's the problem?
Vitezamotors

Con

I accept the debate. Please state your argument.
Debate Round No. 1
Curci

Pro

Personally, it should be a fundamental right to have sex with whoever you want, whenever you want, and whichever way you want as long as both parties agree to the proceedings. (Aside from an adult having sex with a minor, that's a separate matter) Some arguments against the legalization of prostitution are semi-valid, usually to the theme of health risks and such. Whether or not that argument is valid should not effect one guy, who wants to have sex, and one girl, who is willing to perform sexual acts upon said person for money, to make a transaction of mutual gain. Other arguments attempt to define Prostitution as a moral issue by saying it's demeaning and should therefore be illegal, but what they don't see is that something being demeaning is only a subjective judgement, and besides, both parties would be accepting the alleged demeaningness. That argument is like saying that if someone doesn't like a movie because he/she thinks it demeaning, then he/she can make it illegal to see that movie based on subjective value judgements. You should not enforce subjective morality onto others. I'll restate my point one more time, for good measure: If it's consensual and doesn't directly affect anyone else, then it should be legal.
Vitezamotors

Con

Thanks for the debate.

Introduction:

Prostitution should not be legal for various reasons. My opponent and I still have to go through 4 rounds of debate. I will not lay out my entire argument in the first round of debate, as I am sure most of it will get lost along the way.

"The average age of entry into prostitution is 13 years (M.H. Silbert and A.M. Pines, 1982, "Victimization of street prostitutes, Victimology: An International Journal, 7: 122-133) or 14 years (D.Kelly Weisberg, 1985, Children of the Night: A Study of Adolescent Prostitution, Lexington, Mass, Toronto). Most of these 13 or 14 year old girls were recruited or coerced into prostitution. Others were "traditional wives" without job skills who escaped from or were abandoned by abusive husbands and went into prostitution to support themselves and their children. (Denise Gamache and Evelina Giobbe, Prostitution: Oppression Disguised as Liberation, National Coalition against Domestic Violence, 1990)" [1]

1. Take this source as my first reason prostitution should not be legalized. I am fully aware that you believe sexual intercourse with an underage person should not be allowed. If we use some deductive reasoning, how many teenagers smoke before they are the age of 18 (the legal age to smoke). What about alcohol? If prostitution is legalized, it is highly likely that underage females from very low income areas will try to capitalize on an opportunity to make some money. It is very possible that they would lie about their age and begin a career in prostitution.

I feel that this source is a good place to start the debate.

Rebuttal to my opponents argument points:

"Personally, it should be a fundamental right to have sex with whoever you want, whenever you want, and whichever way you want as long as both parties agree to the proceedings."

-People already have the right to do this. No issue needs to be addressed there.

"Some arguments against the legalization of prostitution are semi-valid, usually to the theme of health risks and such"

-Health risks are a small part of the issues associated with prostitution. I prefer to look into the dramatic increase in physical abuse and sexual assaults that would create a much larger burden on law enforcement agencies across the United States. I will jump into those statistics in later arguments. Further, we will also talk about the high rate of victims of child molestation jumping into prostitution. We will also talk about how many drug addicts (meth, crack, heroin), quickly lose money and revert to prostitution as a means to finance another criminal offense.

"Other arguments attempt to define prostitution as a moral issue by saying it's demeaning and should therefore be illegal"

-Prostitution is very demeaning to women and is also immoral. However, I will address other issues associated with Prostitution.

"That argument is like saying that if someone doesn't like a movie because he/she thinks it demeaning, then he/she can make it illegal to see that movie based on subjective value judgement"

-First, this is not the greatest comparison in the world. Watching movies is absolutely nothing like prostitution. I will give my examples in upcoming arguments.

"You should not enforce subjective morality onto others"

-Are you suggesting we legalize all criminal behavior? My arguments will focus on the prostitutes as victims. When you encourage prostitution, a large percentage of females that will start prostitution will start at a very young age as my source identified earlier. How many people start smoking in their thirties?

"Very little data about smoking is regularly collected for kids under 12, but the peak years for first trying to
smoke appear to be in the sixth and seventh grades, or between the ages of 11 and 13, with a considerable number starting even earlier. In 2011, 6.1 percent of eighth grade students reported having had their first cigarette by fifth grade (ages 10"11), and 15.5 percent had tried smoking by eighth grade. More than half of twelfth graders who were current smokers had tried smoking by the end of ninth grade." [2]

-As you can see in the source I provided, a large number of kids start smoking between the ages of 11 and 13. However the legal age to smoke tobacco is the age of 18. Prostitution carries a very similar path, and if we allow mere children to partake in prostitution so they can make money, we will fail young girls all across the United States.

I await your response.

[1] http://www.rapeis.org...
[2] http://www.tobaccofreekids.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Curci

Pro

Alright! Good arguments! Here are my refutations.
Your first argument is this:
"The average age of entry into prostitution is 13 years (M.H. Silbert and A.M. Pines, 1982, "Victimization of street prostitutes, Victimology: An International Journal, 7: 122-133) or 14 years (D.Kelly Weisberg, 1985, Children of the Night: A Study of Adolescent Prostitution, Lexington, Mass, Toronto). Most of these 13 or 14 year old girls were recruited or coerced into prostitution. Others were "traditional wives" without job skills who escaped from or were abandoned by abusive husbands and went into prostitution to support themselves and their children. (Denise Gamache and Evelina Giobbe, Prostitution: Oppression Disguised as Liberation, National Coalition against Domestic Violence, 1990)" [1] 1. Take this source as my first reason prostitution should not be legalized. I am fully aware that you believe sexual intercourse with an underage person should not be allowed. If we use some deductive reasoning, how many teenagers smoke before they are the age of 18 (the legal age to smoke). What about alcohol? If prostitution is legalized, it is highly likely that underage females from very low income areas will try to capitalize on an opportunity to make some money. It is very possible that they would lie about their age and begin a career in prostitution.

My refutation to that is even if prostitution remains illegal, this same kind of underage of prostitution would occur. Your points heavily imply that underage girls would lie about there age to begin a career in prostitution, however, therefore slightly increasing the number of people being introduced to the trade of prostitution. Whether or not your point is valid or not, that still should NOT affect just some random, normal people who want to conduct a safe business transaction. I.e. The x and y example I gave in round 1. Your reason is basically painting everyone with the same brush. Isn't it better to legalize it and regulate it to eliminate the problem of underage prostitution? Oh, one more thing: "Others were "traditional wives" without job skills who escaped from or were abandoned by abusive husbands and went into prostitution to support themselves and their children." Well, if they didn't have any other skills, and they needed to support their family, isn't it a good thing that they went into prostitution?

"Personally, it should be a fundamental right to have sex with whoever you want, whenever you want, and whichever way you want as long as both parties agree to the proceedings." -People already have the right to do this. No issue needs to be addressed there.

Well, actually, no. X couldn't go up to y, offer him money for sex, and then have consensual sex, because of this draconian, invasive law. In this example of prostitution I give, all the criteria I listed above is met, and they are still not allowed to do it. Therefore, it is an issue that needs to be addressed.

SIDE NOTE: They are not hurting anyone. X wants sex, y wants money, they make a deal that helps both of them! Maybe y likes having sex? Who knows!

"Some arguments against the legalization of prostitution are semi-valid, usually to the theme of health risks and such"
-Health risks are a small part of the issues associated with prostitution. I prefer to look into the dramatic increase in physical abuse and sexual assaults that would create a much larger burden on law enforcement agencies across the United States. I will jump into those statistics in later arguments. Further, we will also talk about the high rate of victims of child molestation jumping into prostitution. We will also talk about how many drug addicts (meth, crack, heroin), quickly lose money and revert to prostitution as a means to finance another criminal offense.

Ready to address this when it comes up.

"Other arguments attempt to define prostitution as a moral issue by saying it's demeaning and should therefore be illegal"
-Prostitution is very demeaning to women and is also immoral. However, I will address other issues associated with Prostitution.
Some prostitutes might actually enjoy sex and do not necessarily view it as immoral. What is so wrong about mutually beneficial transaction that does not hurt anyone else? What's so demeaning about that? And besides, when prostitutes entered the biz, they accepted the premise that it would be "demeaning" (Which it isn't.)

"You should not enforce subjective morality onto others" -Are you suggesting we legalize all criminal behavior? My arguments will focus on the prostitutes as victims. When you encourage prostitution, a large percentage of females that will start prostitution will start at a very young age as my source identified earlier. How many people start smoking in their thirties?

No, I'm not suggesting we should legalize all criminal behavior. When someone, without the other persons consent, harms them in a significant way, that's illegal. However, prostitution has consent on both sides and no significant harm, therefore relying on a subjective moral value judgement in order to make it illegal. For example, if I started a religion that said drinking tea should be punished by getting stoned to death, that obviously would not become law since that's a subjective moral value judgement, and not one that everyone needs to take.
1. Legalizing something is not encouraging it.
2. Prostitution and smoking are two very different things. I doubt prostitution would be "the next big thing" for kids if it got legalized. All it would show is that two people can engage in consensual sex for money without fear of going to jail.

All right, once more, good arguments from you. Good luck with your response.
Vitezamotors

Con

Thank you for your quick response.

Rebuttal for Round 3 Arguments:

"My refutation to that is even if prostitution remains illegal, this same kind of underage prostitution would occur".

-That is absolutely true, but when you legalize something, people will find ways to take advantages of those opportunities. The fact that something is illegal and can be punished acts as a deterrent. It will not deter all crime, but it will deter some crime. I will briefly explain why some punishments are implemented. The prison system acts as a deterrent to criminal activity and it also protects society by incarcerating those who may do additional harm to others. As I mentioned, the criminality of something will not deter all crime, but it does deter some.

"Whether or not your point is valid or not, that still should NOT affect just some random, normal people who want to conduct a safe business transaction"

-I would like you to define what safe is?

"Estimates of the prevalence of incest among prostitutes range from 65% to 90%. The Council for Prostitution Alternatives, Portland, Oregon Annual Report in 1991 stated that: 85% of prostitute/clients reported history of sexual abuse in childhood; 70% reported incest." [1]

-Take this statistic for example! In 1991, 85% of prostitutes/clients reported history of sexual abuse in childhood; 70% reported incest! Would you consider that to be a tragedy? For arguments sake, lets say over 75% of prostitutes were sexually abused as children. Is it fair to conclude that many if not most prostitutes were sexually abused as children? That being said, do you feel that prostitution is justified knowing that a majority of them were abused as young children? Is there a link between sexual abuse as a child and prostitution? I believe there is, and to truly fight prostitution, we must fight the sexual abuse of children. Further, we must find a better way to identify these children (schools would be the greatest place).

"Well, if they didn't have any other skills, and they needed to support their family, isn't it a good thing that they went into prostitution?"

-I believe you did not address the "Abusive Husbands" part. If husbands did their job, and were not abusive, we may of had a different result. This still does not justify prostitution and the fact that at least 75% of these individuals were sexually abused as children.

"Well, actually, no. X couldn't go up to y, offer him money for sex, and then have consensual sex."

-I agree, that would be entirely illegal, you must have not provided that information in your initial argument. Please refer to the sentence I used as reference for your argument.

"SIDE NOTE: They are not hurting anyone. X wants sex, y wants money, they make a deal that helps both of them! Maybe y likes having sex? Who knows!"

"About 80% of women in prostitution have been the victim of a rape. It's hard to talk about this because..the experience of prostitution is just like rape. Prostitutes are raped, on the average, eight to ten times per year. They are the most raped class of women in the history of our planet. " (Susan Kay Hunter and K.C. Reed, July, 1990 "Taking the side of bought and sold rape," speech at National Coalition against Sexual Assault, Washington, D.C. ) Other studies report 68% to 70% of women in prostitution being raped (M Silbert, "Compounding factors in the rape of street prostitutes," in A.W. Burgess, ed., Rape and Sexual Assault II, Garland Publishing, 1988; Melissa Farley and Howard Barkan, "Prostitution, Violence, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," 1998, Women & Health.)" [1]

-You mention that nobody is getting hurt? 80% of women in prostitution have been the victim of a Rape. Additionally, 68% - 70% are being Raped! Based on that statistic, can you still conclude that "They are not hurting anyone"? You need to understand the vulnerabilities of Prostitutes. First, a majority of them were sexually abused as children and started prostitution by the age of 12-14 years. Then not only were they sexually abused as children, exploited as minors, 70% of them are RAPED while on the job? How is nobody getting hurt? Where do you not see exploitation?

"Ready to address this when it comes up"

-This was in reference to the prostitutes caught up in drug addictions.

"Up to 95% of women in prostitution are problematic drug users, including around 78% heroin users and rising numbers of crack cocaine addicts (Home Office 2004a)." [2]

Conclusion of Round 3.

-Let me break this down. We have "75% of women involved in prostitution started as children" [2]. A large percentage of prostitutes reported sexual abuse as children. While conducting the act of prostitution 70% of prostitutes reported they have been Raped. Lastly, "95% of women in prostitution are problematic drug users including 78% of them identified as HEROIN users.

I await your response.

[1] http://www.rapeis.org...
[2] http://www.object.org.uk...
Debate Round No. 3
Curci

Pro

Alright, sorry for taking so long! Good arguments once more!

"My refutation to that is even if prostitution remains illegal, this same kind of underage prostitution would occur".
-That is absolutely true, but when you legalize something, people will find ways to take advantages of those opportunities. The fact that something is illegal and can be punished acts as a deterrent. It will not deter all crime, but it will deter some crime. I will briefly explain why some punishments are implemented. The prison system acts as a deterrent to criminal activity and it also protects society by incarcerating those who may do additional harm to others. As I mentioned, the criminality of something will not deter all crime, but it does deter some.

True, but I think it's a pretty low number as to be completely significant, but I get your point. I'll give that one to you, it's valid. However, underage prostitutes should not affect everyone else who is completely of age and can make there own choices. You can have sex for every other reason you want, except money. The crime is completely determined by motivation! It's basically convicting someone and throwing them in jail for having the wrong motivation to have sex. I'll replace having sex in this situation I'll replace the words "having sex" with say, eating a burrito. If I eat a burrito because I like the burrito, it's fine, but when I do it because I want money, it's suddenly illegal? What? You should not send someone to JAIL just because they engaged in the benign act of paying someone for sex. Nothing inherently bad about that. What people who don't support the legalization of prostitution need to understand that money for sex, when cut down to the basics, there is nothing inherently bad about that. It's paying someone to perform an act which does not harm anyone else. The problem isn't the act itself, the problem is the industry which surrounds it, so wouldn't it be better to legalize it so we could take steps to eliminate this abusive industry and keep the prostitutes safe?

"I would like you to define what safe is."

Maybe I used the wrong word there, but my point is still valid and it still stands.

-Take this statistic for example! In 1991, 85% of prostitutes/clients reported history of sexual abuse in childhood; 70% reported incest! Would you consider that to be a tragedy? For arguments sake, lets say over 75% of prostitutes were sexually abused as children. Is it fair to conclude that many if not most prostitutes were sexually abused as children? That being said, do you feel that prostitution is justified knowing that a majority of them were abused as young children? Is there a link between sexual abuse as a child and prostitution? I believe there is, and to truly fight prostitution, we must fight the sexual abuse of children. Further, we must find a better way to identify these children (schools would be the greatest place).

Okay, it's fair to say many prostitutes were abused as children. But how about the prostitutes that weren't and chose the profession from their own free will? And even if there was a link between all of them, isn't the damage already done? Why should something that could be, but not always, a result of something that's illegal be declared illegal simply because it's the result of illegal activity? That doesn't make any sense. Say, hypothetically, getting hit by a car can lead to becoming a burger flipper, a less than desirable job. Does that mean that burger flipping should be declared illegal? No. Your point, no offense, is really muddled.

"Personally, it should be a fundamental right to have sex with whoever you want, whenever you want, and whichever way you want as long as both parties agree to the proceedings." -People already have the right to do this. No issue needs to be addressed there.
"Well, actually, no. X couldn't go up to y, offer him money for sex, and then have consensual sex, because of this draconian, invasive law. In this example of prostitution I give, all the criteria I listed above is met, and they are still not allowed to do it. Therefore, it is an issue that needs to be addressed."
-I agree, that would be entirely illegal, you must have not provided that information in your initial argument. Please refer to the sentence I used as reference for your argument.

Alright. In the example I gave of X paying y for sex, and then having it consensually, that met the criteria that I presented. Then you said that we already have the right to do this. And then I said no, we don't have the right to do this because the example I gave met all the criteria for the rights we should have and it's still illegal. Then you agreed with me and said that yes, it would be entirely illegal. However, your statement is illogical, since before you said that we do have the right to do the things that meet the criteria, and my example certainly met the criteria. Your contradicting yourself. Look, I think you're a skilled debater, yet you're not being reasonable.

"SIDE NOTE: They are not hurting anyone. X wants sex, y wants money, they make a deal that helps both of them! Maybe y likes having sex? Who knows!"
-You mention that nobody is getting hurt? 80% of women in prostitution have been the victim of a Rape. Additionally, 68% - 70% are being Raped! Based on that statistic, can you still conclude that "They are not hurting anyone"? You need to understand the vulnerabilities of Prostitutes. First, a majority of them were sexually abused as children and started prostitution by the age of 12-14 years. Then not only were they sexually abused as children, exploited as minors, 70% of them are RAPED while on the job? How is nobody getting hurt? Where do you not see exploitation?

I was reffering to the example I gave where x and y have consensual sex, not rape. I do understand that rape is a huge problem in the prostitution industry. It is sick and it is wrong. However, in the example I gave where x and y have consensual sex and hurt nobody, my point was that that harmless act of consensual sex is considered illegal by these draconian prostitution laws. And since there's this trend of abuse and rape in the prostitution industry, wouldn't it be better to legalize it so we can regulate it and make sure this stuff doesn't happen?

"Up to 95% of women in prostitution are problematic drug users, including around 78% heroin users and rising numbers of crack cocaine addicts (Home Office 2004a)." [2] Conclusion of Round 3. -Let me break this down. We have "75% of women involved in prostitution started as children" [2]. A large percentage of prostitutes reported sexual abuse as children. While conducting the act of prostitution 70% of prostitutes reported they have been Raped. Lastly, "95% of women in prostitution are problematic drug users including 78% of them identified as HEROIN users.

Yes, so why don't we legalize the industry so we can regulate it. The problem here isn't the prostitution itself, it's the heroin and rape which can occur as a result of that. Whether or not heroin should be considered legal is honestly a matter of opinion, so I'm not gonna debate that, however, allow me this allegory. At bars and such and such, people can get really rowdy and beat each other up. Does that mean bars should be illegal? No. That is all.

Good arguments all around, from both sides if I might say myself.
Vitezamotors

Con

Rebuttals to Round 4 Arguments:

"However underage prostitutes should not affect everyone else who is completely of age and can make their own choices."

-I think that your arguments are slightly off point. As I mentioned before, an overwhelming percentage of prostitutes are brought into that lifestyle at a very early age.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The crime is completely determined by motivation! It's basically convicting someone and throwing them in jail for having the wrong motivation to have sex."

-I believe you are taking prostitution and criminality in the completely wrong perspective. First, the crime behind prostitution is exploitation. Exploitation is a crime, and it is actually very common with underage girls. Ironically, most prostitutes, as we identified earlier, were exploited at a very early age, and as a result, they have become battered by the lifestyle.

Take this following source for example:

"Prostitution is consuming thousands of girls and women and reaping enormous profits for organized crime in post-communist countries. In addition, each year, several hundred thousand women are trafficked from Eastern European countries for prostitution in sex industry centers all over the world. The practices are extremely oppressive and incompatible with universal standards of human rights. The sex trade is a form of contemporary slavery and all indications predict its growth and expansion into the 21st century." [1]

-If we digest this statement, and use some deductive reasoning we can jump to a couple solid points. First, the regulation of prostitution will just expand on human trafficking. Pimps and greedy businessmen will target young girls and groom them to partake into the sex trade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I will replace the words 'having sex' with say, eating a burrito. If I eat a burrito because I like the burrito, its fine, but when I do it because I want money, its suddenly illegal?"

-You have mentioned a couple times that my reasoning was illogical. Now, I would really like for you to explain how you compare the exploitation of minors into prostitution to eating a "burrito"? I hope you understand that this is a very real issue. You bring up points about eating burritos, and I am bringing up points about; exploitation, physical abuse, drug addiction, and rape.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The problem isn't the act itself, the problem is the industry which surrounds it, so wouldn't it be better to legalize it so we could take steps to eliminate this abusive industry and keep the prostitutes safe?"

-Now we are getting somewhere. The real nuts and bolts into why some people feel prostitution should be regulated.

I present this source as an argument:

"Considering the extreme conditions of exploitation in the sex industry, those distinctions are nothing but abstractions that make for good academic debates. They are, however, meaningless to women under the control of pimps or traffickers. Certainly, the sex industry doesn't differentiate between "free" and "forced," and my research reveals that men who buy women and children in prostitution don't differentiate either. Legalization and regulation aim to redefine prostitution as a form of work, indicated by the use of the term "sex work." The renaming may clean up the image of prostitution, but it doesn't end the violence and exploitation."[1]

-What can we conclude from this particular statement. How do you intend to control the pimps and the businessmen that will traffic minors into the industry? How do you intend to regulate or control the drug addiction? We can't even control the heroin epidemic that is on the rise in this country. Do you really believe we can control rape of physical abuse? Can you guarantee me that all prostitution will be conducted in some facility, where security personnel manage a camera system? What do you intent to do when men decide to sneak camera's into the room and film their sexual intercourse, then sell it on the internet? To what ends do you expect to take prostitution, and please don't tell me its for the income the governments will receive through taxation?

-Lets look into healthcare for these prostitutes. Do you really think insurance companies will provide very cheap insurance to women who are likely to obtain some form of STD? What about all the males that could catch some of these STD's? Is it possible that STD's will rise in this country? If that's the case, what will happen to our insurance premiums? Will the government now force those who can actually afford healthcare to also pay for the treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases? I am using a little logic here. However we still have one more argument.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, it's fair to say many prostitutes were abused as children. But how about the prostitutes that weren't and chose the profession from their own free will? And even if there was a link between all of them, isn't the damage already done? "

-So from what I can conclude from your statement, the damage is already done to minors, why not let them have a career in prostitution. Is that the point you are trying to make?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Then you agreed with me and said that yes, it would be entirely illegal. However, your statement is illogical, since before you said that we do have the right to do the things that meet the criteria, and my example certainly met the criteria. Your contradicting yourself. Look, I think you're a skilled debater, yet you're not being reasonable."

-I don't see where I contradicted myself. I told you people could have sex of their own free will. However, men who pay women for sex are guilty of exploitation. They are exploiting a sexual service from someone who was likely brought into prostitution through; phsyical abuse, mental abuse, molestation, drugs, or manipulation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion:

-Lets break down prostitution in a different way. Why do men pay women for a sexual service? To gratify a sexual desire? To fulfil a sexual fantasy? Is it a taboo for them? Are they cheating on their wives?

-Women sell their bodies for money, not because it feels good. Now there may be a very small percentage of women that cope with the lifestyle of prostitution, but that does not make it right. When taking into consideration the amount of minors that are manipulated and driven into prostitution, it is completely rational and fair to conclude exploitation is the crime.

"Women's bodies and emotions must belong to them alone. They must not be traded or sold. The sex industry targets and consumes young women, usually under age 25, often girls in their teens. If a state permits prostitution to flourish, a certain portion of each generation of young women will be lost. Prostitution causes extreme harm to the body and the mind. Women who survive the beatings, rapes, sexually transmitted diseases, drugs, alcohol, and emotional abuse, emerge from prostitution ill, traumatized, and often, as poor as when they entered."[1]

On to you!

[1]http://www.uri.edu...
Debate Round No. 4
Curci

Pro

Curci forfeited this round.
Vitezamotors

Con

I don't know if my opponent had other matters to attend to.

Thanks for the debate!
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Kleptin 3 years ago
Kleptin
CurciVitezamotorsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:34 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct point given to Con due to forfeit of Pro, especially during a crucial point in the debate. Pro exhibited a very casual, enjoyable method of debating, however, could have done with a little bit of spell-check. Con was the only one to provide legitimate sources. The issue of defining the exact criminality of prostitution should have been brought up much sooner, not midway through. The concept of exploitation being the core of criminality could have provided a much more scintillating exchange. Con was still incomplete in defending against Pro's simple, straightforward message: Can prostitution ever be completely consensual? If so, what is the legitimacy of criminalizing it? Would legalization provide better opportunities for regulation? Con's focus was thrown in the wrong direction and spent too much of the debate focusing on the consequences of prostitution, which Pro called out as "Post Hoc" fallacy in his own casual way. This was never fully defended against.