The Instigator
zealot362
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
Masterdebatr91
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Prostitution should be legalized

Do you like this debate?NoYes+7
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 5 votes the winner is...
Masterdebatr91
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/1/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,417 times Debate No: 33172
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (5)

 

zealot362

Pro

This is the first debate that I posted. I am new to this side but looking forward to debating this topic. As shown above, I am arguing in favor of legalizing prostitution.

Just for you information, I am not used to this debating format and so I will almost inevetibely make some sort of mistake. I do know how to make a point however and so don't expect the debate to be a pushover. Finally, have fun. This is a serious topic but some light-heartedness goes a long way.

Good Luck.
Masterdebatr91

Con

First off, I would like to welcome you to debate zealot362! I will not judge you on debating format or expect you to be completely serious either. Thanks for the heads up!
To start off my arguments on why I believe that prostitution should be illegal, I would like to quote of my favorite writers, Victor Hugo. "We say that slavery has vanished from European civilization, but this is not true. Slavery still exists, but now it applies only to women and its name is prostitution." Not only is Prostitution morally wrong, it is responsible for many deaths in almost all countries alike.
Contention 1: Prostitution is not a victimless Crime
Prostitution creates a setting whereby crimes against men, women, and children become a commercial enterprise.... It is an assault when he/she forces a prostitute to engage in sadomasochistic sex scenes. When a pimp compels a prostitute to submit to sexual demands as a condition of employment, it is exploitation, sexual harassment, or rape -- acts that are based on the prostitute's compliance rather than her consent. The fact that a pimp or customer gives money to a prostitute for submitting to these acts does not alter the fact that child sexual abuse, rape, and/or battery occurs; it merely redefines these crimes as prostitution. You can see a great example of this in the famous musical Les Miserables. Another problem is the trafficking of women. I believe that we will never succeed in combating trafficking in women if we do not simultaneously work to abolish prostitution and the sexual exploitation of women and children. Particularly in light of the fact that many women in prostitution in countries that have legalized prostitution are originally victims of trafficking in women. Watch a true story about the trafficking of women called the Whistle Blower.
Contention 2:
Even if a prostitute is being tested every week for HIV, she will test negative for at least the first 4-6 weeks and possibly the first 12 weeks after being infected.... This means that while the test is becoming positive and the results are becoming known, that prostitute may expose up to 630 clients to HIV. This is under the best of circumstances with testing every week and a four-week window period. It also assumes that the prostitute will quit working as soon as he or she finds out the test is HIV positive, which is highly unlikely. This is not the best approach for actually reducing harm. Instead, in order to slow the global spread of HIV/AIDS we should focus our efforts on abolishing prostitution.
i look forward to my opponents response.
Debate Round No. 1
zealot362

Pro

I am looking forward to this. I am going to start off by addressing my two main points and then I will address the major points that Masterdabatr91 has made.


Point 1: Prostitution already happens, the least we can do is to take some ownership over it to help prevent unnecessary problems.

It is a fact that prostitution is already happening in our country, contrary to the law. How is it going to be stopped? As long as there are consumers, the service to fit that desire will be provided. There has never been a time in any nation's history, that I can think of, where prostitution was never heard of. It has always been among us. How has banning prostitution helped anyone? What is worse is that people who are obliged to prostitute (either by their own wills or the wills of others) will often be faced with other illegal activities such as drug smuggling, child pornography, ect... By removing prostitution from that fringe of society, we actually stand a chance at causing damage to the illegal human-trafficking business. I do not and will not support practices that force others into engaging in activities that violates their own moral code. So by legalizing prostitution for those who wish to do so, it separates legal prostitution from those who wish to remain an enemy to society by keeping hold of prostitutes against there will.


Point 2: People who are compelled to become prostitutes against their wills are victims. And yet because the law treats them as criminals, we are unable to do anything to help their plight.

If a prostitute is assaulted, raped, or in some other way abused by a crime, they have no way to report the crime without feeling like they will also be arrested. Much of a pimp's power comes from keeping the women under his charge feeling powerless and that there is no other option to take. But a legal brother would be much better informed and the women who work there would be under the protection under the same laws as any other worker.


"Prohibition gives cover to traffickers. It allows them to use the laws against prostitution to intimidate, especially when it comes to children. Women and girls being held against their will are afraid to go to police because they will be treated as criminals." -Rita Nakashima Brock, PhD



Now I wanted to address several important points you have made.


Con 1. "I believe that we will never succeed in combating trafficking in women if we do not simultaneously work to abolish prostitution and the sexual exploitation of women and children."

I see why you would think that. It is a common belief that prostitution and human trafficking are directly correlated. But the truth is that the reason they are associated with each other is that they are both on the fringes of society. One illegal act is often associated with another. Ex. Prohibition era; alcohol and crime.

"The intersection of the highly emotive issues of sex work and human trafficking generates a lot more heat than light. Some anti trafficking activists equate 'prostitution' with trafficking and vice versa, despite evidence to the contrary. The U.S. government leaves no doubt as to where it stands: According to the State Department Web site, 'Where prostitution is legalized or tolerated, there is a greater demand for human trafficking victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children trafficked into commercial sex slavery.' By this logic, the state of Nevada should be awash in foreign sex slaves, leading one to wonder what steps the Justice Department is taking to free them. Oddly, the Netherlands, Australia, and Germany--all of whom have legalized prostitution--received top marks from the Bush administration in the most recent Trafficking in Persons Report." -David A. Feingold, PhD



Con 2.


I had actually never heard of these statistics before. I went ahead and looked them up and the only major difference was that some of the STD's only take a half week to detect but some do continue for several months before being detected. I do acknowledge that this is a major issue in the field of prostitution in general and I will make no attempt to say that it is not. However, is the issue with STD's going to be any less major if prostitution is illegal? I contend that prostitutes who do engage in their practice outside the law will often experience the same problem as sanctioned prostitutes, but face several more challenges. First off, a prostitute working outside the strictures of law will not take major considerations into preventing STD's. Especially with pimping, there is little, if any screening. Also, illegal prostitutes are more likely to engage in higher risk sexual activities by not using a condom (men have been known to pay extra for the privilege of not needing to use a condom.) Also, an illegal prostitute may feel no moral obligation to stop their practice because they are infected. These issues would not be so prevalent in sanctioned prostitution. To finish off this point, I will share one last quote.

"Prostitutes overwhelmingly work outside the law. This has implications for their health that are hard to quantify. In one Australian study carried out in 1998, the prevalence of sexually transmitted bacterial infections was 80 times greater in 63 illegal street prostitutes than in 753 of their legal brothel counterparts.... Legally sanctioned encouragement of prostitutes to use condoms or access screening services, both major determinants of the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases, is impossible because of their illegal status. Occupational health and safety law is applied to prostitutes in lawful brothels but not to their counterparts on the street." -Bebe Loff, LLB, PhD



Masterdebatr91

Con

I am going to go over his case and point out some flaws and then structure my case.

His first point:
It is a fact that prostitution is already happening in our country, contrary to the law. How is it going to be stopped? As long as there are consumers, the service to fit that desire will be provided.

The United States was founded on rules and laws that keep citizens safe and secure in life. Laws are carefully thought out and engineered as need arises to provide, basically, safety and financial security. Once in place, they are enforced by various levels of government. This system works only if everyone adheres to the rules, and, for the most part, we do; however there are those who either forget or intentionally ignore the law for their own selfish gains. A simple example is the person who is speeding in their car. If, for any given situation, there is a "law" or "rule", stop and fully consider how NOT obeying the rule might negatively impact or hurt another person. What my opponent is arguing is his first point is that prostitution is everywhere and there is no way to stop it. That is a terrible way to look at the system. Just because everyone is cheating on a test, that makes it right? I am assuming your answer would be no. My opponents idea is to just give up on the law and just let it happen. As I said before these laws are designed to provide the maximum security to the citizens.

In his second point he states:
People who are compelled to become prostitutes against their wills are victims. And yet because the law treats them as criminals, we are unable to do anything to help their plight.

I can see where my opponent is coming at with this argument, but at the same time, legalizing Prostitution will still not solve the problem. When the prohibition era ended in December 5, 1933, the rise of alcoholism grew for one simple reason. People felt no fear because the law was no longer holding them down. This applies to prostitution, if it is legalized, then the numbers will rise. With this being said, the younger generation could see prostitution as a career choice. Which would increase the amount child pornography, rapes, and it can't help with the STD's issue. Now I would ask that you think about this scenario in your head. A mother asks her sweet little girl what she wants to be when she grows up. Instead of the classic answer that you would expect a little girl o answer, such as a princess or fashion star, she responds by simply saying "A prostitute!" I don't know about you, but I believe that is morally wrong.When the law is taken out of the equation, everyone can see it as a potential career choice in life.

Now moving on to his first contention:
The intersection of the highly emotive issues of sex work and human trafficking generates a lot more heat than light. Some anti trafficking activists equate 'prostitution' with trafficking and vice versa, despite evidence to the contrary.

In order to answer this contention I will look to my first contention and once again look to the law. When a pimp compels a prostitute to submit to sexual demands as a condition of employment, it is exploitation, sexual harassment, or rape -- acts that are based on the prostitute's compliance rather than her consent. My opponent is trying to draw a line between prostitutes that are victims and prostitutes that are not. If you look at the big picture, it will never be able to function like that. The acceptance of prostitution will open my doors to sexual crimes and larger cases of rape or harassment to all age groups.

Now to his last contention:
I do acknowledge that this is a major issue in the field of prostitution in general and I will make no attempt to say that it is not. However, is the issue with STD's going to be any less major if prostitution is illegal? I contend that prostitutes who do engage in their practice outside the law will often experience the same problem as sanctioned prostitutes, but face several more challenges.

My opponent is basically saying is that if Prostitution is abolished that STD's will decrease. This is simply not true. Whether the law is in place or not, the prostitute is there because of money, that does not simply mean that they will take better precautions to protect their other sexual partner.
What we have so see in this debate that not only is prostitution dangerous through STD' s and an increase of rapes, and harassment, but by legalizing it, it will lead to damaging our future generation.
I look forward to my opponents next response. :)
Debate Round No. 2
zealot362

Pro

I am going to address the the four main contentions and leave it at that for now.

Con 1. "What my opponent is arguing is his first point is that prostitution is everywhere and there is no way to stop it. That is a terrible way to look at the system. Just because everyone is cheating on a test, that makes it right?"
Do you really think it is fair to equate prostitution with cheating on a test? Currently, prostitution is against the law and those who break that law are criminals. What I am saying is that law should be amended because it is wrong to criminalize prostitutes just for the sake that they are prostitutes. The concept that prostitution is immoral has often always been a contentious topic. Ancient Greece and Rome were actually quite accepting of prostitution and allowed prostitutes to be seen as notable people in society. America's traditional sense of the idea that prostitution is immoral stems from the Bible, which condemns it. I hope that it is not believed that I am saying we should make coercion into prostitution legal. I am stating that we should make it legal for those who wish to prostitute to do so, and I don't see anything immoral about that.

Con 2. "When the prohibition era ended in December 5, 1933, the rise of alcoholism grew for one simple reason. People felt no fear because the law was no longer holding them down."
"Reported," alcoholism grew after prohibition ended. People were not going to be seen in any drunken state in public and so the number of reported cases of alcoholism would naturally be less than after the prohibition.

"With this being said, the younger generation could see prostitution as a career choice. Which would increase the amount child pornography, rapes, and it can't help with the STD's issue."
Yes, if prostitution was legalized, many people would indeed see it as a career choice. It would be just as legitimate as being a lawyer, which is arguably at the same level of immorality. The only difference is that a prostitute stops screwing you after you die (I told you I would jest a bit.) However, I don't see why child pornography cases would rise. Would you mind elaborating your thoughts on that and providing a source for that?

"Now I would ask that you think about this scenario in your head. A mother asks her sweet little girl what she wants to be when she grows up. Instead of the classic answer that you would expect a little girl o answer, such as a princess or fashion star, she responds by simply saying "A prostitute!" I don't know about you, but I believe that is morally wrong.When the law is taken out of the equation, everyone can see it as a potential career choice in life."

While this situation could happen, this is a major extrapolation and dramatization of foreseeable reality. Most people don't seriously consider prostitution until they reach mid-teen to adult age. The morality, as I have stated before, is a matter of opinion and I am of the belief that sex between two consenting adults rendered as a paid service is not immoral. And the law won't be taken out of the equation if prostitution is legal.


Con 3. "When a pimp compels a prostitute to submit to sexual demands as a condition of employment, it is exploitation, sexual harassment, or rape -- acts that are based on the prostitute's compliance rather than her consent. My opponent is trying to draw a line between prostitutes that are victims and prostitutes that are not. If you look at the big picture, it will never be able to function like that. The acceptance of prostitution will open my doors to sexual crimes and larger cases of rape or harassment to all age groups."
How do you suppose that a line cannot be drawn? The way I see it, there is the prostitute that wishes to raise herself out of poverty by prostituting herself and must constantly watch her back for cops. And is unable to report crimes because she will be convicted as well. There is the woman/girl who is pimped and where the illegality of prostitution is used as leverage to keep the girl from reporting to the police the illegal actions of the pimp. There is a woman who has lived her life as a prostitute and wants to save other woman in the profession and so opens a brother as an organized business to unite the woman together to create some solidarity. (Or the owner could just be wanting to make a lot of money but I don't see the necessity of making a difference in distinction between the two). Then, on the other side, there are the pimps who use the naivety of young girls to pressure them into a life long service to them. There are the preachers that condemn prostitution on their pulpits, and yet engage in their services when they are feeling lonely. And finally, there are the police who arrest a woman for being a prostitute. There seems to me to be a clear line and legalizing prostitution will allow the distinction to be more easily noticed. As to your last comment, how do you think that sexual crimes and rape will increase, logically, one would expect a decrease. What is your logical reasoning?

Con 4. "My opponent is basically saying is that if Prostitution is abolished that STD's will decrease. This is simply not true. Whether the law is in place or not, the prostitute is there because of money, that does not simply mean that they will take better precautions to protect their other sexual partner."
I believe you are mistaking when you claim that a legal prostitute will be just as careless in their protection as a illegal prostitute. First off, legal prostitutes will be more educated and so will understand the necessity of taking every precaution necessary. You seem to be making a prostitute out to be some selfish woman who just desires to get as much money from the men she services as a prostitute. This just wouldn't be the case. Prostitutes do have moral standards and by giving them a legal facility to practice their service, that fact would be made quite clear. Especially the woman who are kept in the dark by their pimps. I would have a hard time finding their actions as malicious because their utmost focus is self-preservation, which would be keeping the pimp happy.







Masterdebatr91

Con

Ok, I will first begin by going over my opponents arguments, although I have to say that the lawyer/ prostitution comment was really funny! I am going to bring up some statistics to attack zealot362'"s arguments!

zealot362's 1st argument:
Currently, prostitution is against the law and those who break that law are criminals. What I am saying is that law should be amended because it is wrong to criminalize prostitutes just for the sake that they are prostitutes. The concept that prostitution is immoral has often always been a contentious topic. I am stating that we should make it legal for those who wish to prostitute to do so, and I don't see anything immoral about that.

My response to that:
What we have to see and what I have been saying throughout this debate is that it is immoral. Not only for for the women that are in the trade of prostitution but for society in general.The health consequences to women from prostitution are the same injuries and infections suffered by women who are subjected to other forms of violence against women. The physical health consequences include: injury (bruises, broken bones, black eyes, concussions). A 1994 study conducted with 68 women in Minneapolis/St.Paul who had been prostituted for at least six months found that half the women had been physically assaulted by their purchasers, and a third of these experienced purchaser assaults at least several times a year. 23% of those assaulted were beaten severely enough to have suffered broken bones. Two experienced violence so vicious that they were beaten into a coma. Furthermore, 90% of the women in this study had experienced violence in their personal relationships resulting in miscarriage, stabbing, loss of consciousness, and head injuries (Parriott, Health Experiences of Twin Cities Women Used in Prostitution) As you can see, there is a law against prostitution for many reasons.

zealot362's 2nd argument:
"Reported," alcoholism grew after prohibition ended. People were not going to be seen in any drunken state in public and so the number of reported cases of alcoholism would naturally be less than after the prohibition.

My response to that:
Weather it is reported or not, it is the moral that I was trying to state. Here is another example. If cigarettes became illegal, there would be a lot of people that still smoked, but the overall numbers of smokers would most likely dramatically decrease simply because citizens do not want to get in trouble with the law. As I stated before, the numbers of prostitutes would most likely rise, then the younger generation would be affected.

zealot362's 3rd and 4th arguments:
Yes, if prostitution was legalized, many people would indeed see it as a career choice. It would be just as legitimate as being a lawyer, which is arguably at the same level of immorality. The only difference is that a prostitute stops screwing you after you die (I told you I would jest a bit.)

My response to that:
If you have non consensual sex with a prostitute is it rape or shoplifting? just kidding....
The emotional health consequences of prostitution include severe trauma, stress, depression, anxiety, self-medication through alcohol and drug abuse; and eating disorders. Almost all the women in the Minneapolis/St. Paul study categorized themselves as chemically-addicted. Crack cocaine and alcohol were used most frequently. Ultimately, women in prostitution are also at special risk for self-mutilation, suicide and homicide. 56% of the women in the Minneapolis/St. Paul study had attempted suicide, and 19% had tried to harm themselves physically in other ways. So prostitution should be considered a career choice? Even if people don"t think of prostitution as a career choice until they are a mid-teen, does anyone really want them thinking that way I don"t know about you, but I would not want my child to be accepting of that kind of behavior.

zealot362's 5th argument:

How do you suppose that a line cannot be drawn? The way I see it, there is the prostitute that wishes to raise herself out of poverty by prostituting herself and must constantly watch her back for cops. And is unable to report crimes because she will be convicted as well. There seems to me to be a clear line and legalizing prostitution will allow the distinction to be more easily noticed.

My response to this:
If there is a line, I am not seeing it. Simply because in a realistic society, things will never turn out like that. As I brought up before, A 1994 study conducted with 68 women in Minneapolis/St.Paul who had been prostituted for at least six months found that half the women had been physically assaulted by their purchasers, and a third of these experienced purchaser assaults at least several times a year. 23% of those assaulted were beaten severely enough to have suffered broken bones. Two experienced violence so vicious that they were beaten into a coma. Furthermore, 90% of the women in this study had experienced violence in their personal relationships resulting in miscarriage, stabbing, loss of consciousness, and head injuries (Parriott, Health Experiences of Twin Cities Women Used in Prostitution). There are other studies like this one and they are all pointing to the same thing. Even is a line was magically drawn and the law is still taken away, the number of victims will still be terrible.

zealot362's 5th argument:
Legal prostitutes will be more educated and so will understand the necessity of taking every precaution necessary. You seem to be making a prostitute out to be some selfish woman who just desires to get as much money from the men she services as a prostitute. This just wouldn't be the case. Prostitutes do have moral standards and by giving them a legal facility to practice their service, that fact would be made quite clear. Especially the women who are kept in the dark by their pimps. I would have a hard time finding their actions as malicious because their utmost focus is self-preservation, which would be keeping the pimp happy.

My response to this:
Women in prostitution suffer the same broken bones, concussions, STDs, chronic pelvic pain, and extreme stress and trauma that women who have been battered, raped and sexually abused endure. In fact, the case can be made that women in prostitution -- because they are subject to being battered, raped and sexually abused all at the same time over an extensive period of time -- suffer these health consequences more intensively and consistently. For example, in another survey of 55 victims/survivors of prostitution who used the services of the Council for Prostitution Alternative in Portland, Oregon, 78% were victims of rape by pimps and male buyers an average of 49 times a year; 84% were the victims of aggravated assault and were thus horribly beaten, often requiring emergency room attention and hospitalization; 53% were victims of sexual abuse and torture; and 27% were mutilated (Documentation available from the Council for Prostitution Alternatives). Whether prostitution is legal or not, the prostitutes will still be physically hurt, either through STD"s or through their pimps. No matter the amount of education that is given to the prostitute, it is the pimps decision to hurt her or not, regardless whether the law is abolished or not!

So what we have to see is that prostitution effects everyone in only a negative way.
Where I got my crap:
http://www.uri.edu...
Debate Round No. 3
zealot362

Pro

1. The health consequences to women from prostitution are the same injuries and infections suffered by women who are subjected to other forms of violence against women. The physical health consequences include: injury (bruises, broken bones, black eyes, concussions). A 1994 study conducted with 68 women in Minneapolis/St.Paul who had been prostituted for at least six months found that half the women had been physically assaulted by their purchasers, and a third of these experienced purchaser assaults at least several times a year. 23% of those assaulted were beaten severely enough to have suffered broken bones. Two experienced violence so vicious that they were beaten into a coma. Furthermore, 90% of the women in this study had experienced violence in their personal relationships resulting in miscarriage, stabbing, loss of consciousness, and head injuries.
This is exactly the kind of issues you can expect to see when prostitution is labeled as a public menace and cast of to the streets. However, in countries where prostitution is legal, crime rates show a completely different picture. I read an interesting article by Kirby R. Cundiff that shows prostitution and rape cases to be inversely proportional. His data and models show that rape could be expected to drop by as much 25% with a 90% confidence interval. (http://www.independent.org...). An article from Liberater.net holds similar findings (http://www.liberator.net...).


2. If cigarettes became illegal, there would be a lot of people that still smoked, but the overall numbers of smokers would most likely dramatically decrease simply because citizens do not want to get in trouble with the law. As I stated before, the numbers of prostitutes would most likely rise, then the younger generation would be affected.
Have you ever heard of the phrase, "Strict parents create sneaky kids?" Again, you are holding society to your particular set of morals. Having morals is not bad, but expecting others to heed them can often yield unpleasant results. Say I were to throw a curve ball and claim that the fact that you are trying to keep prostitution is immoral? "However disturbing the idea of commercial sex may be to some of us, it's naïve to believe that prostitution can ever be eliminated. The demand will be met with supply one way or another, no matter what is legislated. Turning our backs on the women (and men) who do this work may be far more immoral - even criminal - than prostitution itself. Only when we recognize and validate the work of professional prostitutes can we expect them to practice their trade safely and responsibly." -Alexa Albert, MD. I acknowledge that the immorality of prostitution is controversial, but it is based solely on personal opinion and has no actual evidence to back it up one way or the other. It's a futile effort to back an argument with morality as the banner. By leaning on it, you will appeal people who already agree with it, but people against it and critical thinkers will be less apt to lean to your side. (I don't mean any offense with this, I just want to explain the issue with leaning on morality in a debate.)


3. The emotional health consequences of prostitution include severe trauma, stress, depression, anxiety, self-medication through alcohol and drug abuse; and eating disorders. Almost all the women in the Minneapolis/St. Paul study categorized themselves as chemically-addicted. Crack cocaine and alcohol were used most frequently. Ultimately, women in prostitution are also at special risk for self-mutilation, suicide and homicide. 56% of the women in the Minneapolis/St. Paul study had attempted suicide, and 19% had tried to harm themselves physically in other ways.
Again, these studies are performed in the streets where there is much more going on then prostitution. Pimps, drug dealers, rapists also share the streets with prostitutes, and I'm certain that they would have very similar issues.
"This study provided evidence that female indoor sex workers in the Netherlands do not exhibit a higher level of work-related emotional exhaustion or a lower level of work-related personal competence than a comparison group of female health care workers (mostly nurses)... The fact that findings were partly contrary to expectations and contrary to suggestions from others that sex work is intrinsically traumatizing may be explained by sample differences. Here, indoor sex workers were studied, whereas many other studies focus almost exclusively on street workers..." -Ine Vanwesenbeeck, PhD.


My above arguments also apply to the rest of the points you made, namely more citations from your Minneapolis/St. Paul reference. This is the last round to bring up new points and then the last round will be conclusions. I await your next reply.


Masterdebatr91

Con

I am going to go over my opponents case and prove why I am winning this debate.

zealot362's 1st argument:
This is exactly the kind of issues you can expect to see when prostitution is labeled as a public menace and cast of to the streets. However, in countries where prostitution is legal, crime rates show a completely different picture. I read an interesting article by Kirby R. Cundiff that shows prostitution and rape cases to be inversely proportional. His data and models show that rape could be expected to drop by as much 25% with a 90% confidence interval. (http://www.independent.org......). An article from Liberater.net holds similar findings (http://www.liberator.net......).

My response to that:
I going to provide some statistics in yet another study I came upon to attack my opponents case. These article talks about whether prostitution is a law or not, the women that are in the trade of Prostitution are still in some kind of danger. Meanwhile similar results " rampant violence, harassment, substance abuse, health and housing problems " were documented in a Chicago study released in 2001 by the Center for Impact Research. That study found 1,800 to 4,000 girls and women are involved in on- or off- street prostitution activities in Chicago in any given year, along with about 11,500 people who trade sex for drugs. These numbers " comparable in other major cities " show that the mistreatment of sex workers is a significant national civil and human rights situation that affects thousands and thousands of women (and men) and by extension their children or other family members. So as we can see whether the law is set in place or not, many of the prostitutes are still harassed or attacked in some way, shape, or form.
http://www.rapeis.org...

zealot362's 2nd argument:
Have you ever heard of the phrase, "Strict parents create sneaky kids?" Again, you are holding society to your particular set of morals. Having morals is not bad, but expecting others to heed them can often yield unpleasant results. Say I were to throw a curve ball and claim that the fact that you are trying to keep prostitution is immoral? "However disturbing the idea of commercial sex may be to some of us, it's na"ve to believe that prostitution can ever be eliminated. The demand will be met with supply one way or another, no matter what is legislated. Turning our backs on the women (and men) who do this work may be far more immoral - even criminal - than prostitution itself. Only when we recognize and validate the work of professional prostitutes can we expect them to practice their trade safely and responsibly." -Alexa Albert, MD. I acknowledge that the immorality of prostitution is controversial, but it is based solely on personal opinion and has no actual evidence to back it up one way or the other. It's a futile effort to back an argument with morality as the banner. By leaning on it, you will appeal people who already agree with it, but people against it and critical thinkers will be less apt to lean to your side. (I don't mean any offense with this, I just want to explain the issue with leaning on morality in a debate.)

My response to that:
I completely see where my opponent is coming at with this argument. He believes that I am holding every citizens to a certain standard of which they must abide by. In all actuality, I am not necessary holding citizens to a certain standard, but explaining what the law is designed for and why it is there. As I have brought up many times, earlier in this debate, the United States was founded on rules and laws that keep citizens safe and secure in life. Laws are carefully thought out and engineered as need arises to provide, basically, safety and financial security. Once in place, they are enforced by various levels of government. Now I understand no one can be held to a certain standard, I am only saying that the law is there to protect us. My opponent is saying that the trade of prostitution is already happening and therefore should banish the law based on the fact that everyone is doing it. Just because a majority of citizens are doing drugs or drinking under age, does it make it alright? The law is here to protect us from not only ourselves, but the dangers from the crimes that continue to happen around us.

zealot362's 3rd argument:Again, these studies are performed in the streets where there is much more going on then prostitution. Pimps, drug dealers, rapists also share the streets with prostitutes, and I'm certain that they would have very similar issues.
"This study provided evidence that female indoor sex workers in the Netherlands do not exhibit a higher level of work-related emotional exhaustion or a lower level of work-related personal competence than a comparison group of female healthcare workers (mostly nurses)... The fact that findings were partly contrary to expectations and contrary to suggestions from others that sex work is intrinsically traumatizing may be explained by sample differences. Here, indoor sex workers were studied, whereas many other studies focus almost exclusively on street workers..." -Ine Vanwesenbeeck, PhD.

My response to that:
Obviously there are going to be great studies for both sides of this debate. We must look at one key factor, are the women in any physical danger. Even if women are treated "kinder" by the justice system, it the "pimps" or the "demanders" choice to physically attack or hurt the prostitutes. If the law is there or not the prostitutes still in danger, not because of the law, but simply because the trade of prostitution has never been as easy as 2+2=4. There are almost always drugs, gangs and as I have brought u in earlier contentions, STD"s involved. If prostitution became legal, the U.S. would be accepting of that kind of behavior.

I would like to state that after this speech, no new arguments can be posted. I guess if there is something cool that my opponent would like to point out, I will not care. Thanks :)
I look forward to zealot362's last speech.
Debate Round No. 4
zealot362

Pro

I believe that this is now the conclusion speech, so I will make it short and sweet. I am just going to highlight my main points throughout the debate and will make a few concluding remarks.


1. Prostitution has always been around and always will. If we continue to try to keep it in the outskirts of our society and prosecute women who are forced into prostitution or do it of there own will, we are just as bad as the pimps who force them to do it in the first place. We need to be a nation where people of all trades can make money without fear from the federal government.

2. As long as we treat prostitutes like criminals, issues revolving around prostitution will remain. The only way we can make any inroads in the industry of sex trafficking and modern-day slavery is to take some ownership out of this market that exists whether we want it to or not.

3. By making prostitution legal and by regulating it, we will be able to eliminate several factors that make prostitution such a hazardous practice such as drug use, rape, pimping, and trafficking. By keeping it outlawed, we will have no control over the lives of these men and women.

4. Prostitution is only immoral if we think of it as such. Much of what we consider to be immoral of prostitution has come from our outdated reliance on religious philosophy and is becoming more minute as human progress and morality advances at it's own accord. And so if we stop immediately considering prostitution to be immoral, we will notice that much of the issues we have with prostitution comes from our outdated sense of morality.

5. All of the statistics my opponent has come up with is what we see in places that keep prostitution illegal. Evidence has actually shown that by legalizing and taking ownership of prostitution, much of the crime that has often been associated with it will lesson considerably and may even, in some cases, disappear entirely.


I thank Masterdebatr91 for this wonderful debate. It has been very fun and enlightening for me and I hope me feelings are reciprocated. I just ask the audience to ponder this in their own gut and let their mind and heart decide which outcome would lead to a better future for America. Adieu.
Masterdebatr91

Con

This is my last speech as well and I will just go over some main points in this debate and give some voters for this round.

1. By legalizing prostitution, the younger generation could see prostitution as a career choice. As I have brought up earlier in this debate, I would not want my teenage child thinking of prostitution as a future job just because it is legal. My opponent has stated throughout this debate that a line legal and illegal prostitution. In reality a line will never be able to be drawn. Simply, because the trade of prostitution will almost always involve drugs, rape or some other form of law breaking.

2. The United States was founded on rules and laws that keep citizens safe and secure in life. Laws are carefully thought out and engineered as need arises to provide, basically, safety and financial security. I have been saying throughout this debate that the law is designed to protect us. My opponent wants to abolish the law simply because everyone is doing it. My only argument here is when people take the law out of the picture society generally starts to travel in a downward angle.

3. My opponent has stated throughout this debate that by making prostitution legal many other bad factories such as drugs, rapes and attacks would decrease. This is simply not true, the demander may not necessarily follow a law that is set in motion while with his prostitute. If the law is there or not, it will always be up to the demander to harm or attack the prostitute. This is why we need a law to ban prostitution, to protect the women in the trade and to protect younger generations that come.

4. As for morals, prostitution in my views will always be immoral. Prostitution as I have brought up in this debate lead to a life of immorality and crime. Prostitution spreads diseases such as many STD"s. Without the law the crimes against the women while being the prostitute would still a problem. That is what I find immoral about prostitution.

I will ask you please vote based on whoever was the better debater.
I would like to thank zealot362 for this great debate. Hopefully we can debate other topics in the future.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by AriellaSoulliere 3 years ago
AriellaSoulliere
Prostitution should NOT be legalized. That is such a disgusting, animalistic thing to do to yourself. Having sex for money??? Nasty!!! And it spreads disease such as aids, blue waffles, and other Nasty sexually transmitted diseases. That is just downright wrong.
Posted by Bitemenow 3 years ago
Bitemenow
Yes it should, it is not the governments job to enforce what people do with their body, if they want to do that then fine, not our problem. Put up the argument with drugs. It doesn't apply. You may say but then if they want to do that why not let them? It puts others and themselves in harm through the effects it has on them. Prostitution should be legalized.
Posted by Stebo 3 years ago
Stebo
It would be better if prostitution was legalized
Posted by Celina 3 years ago
Celina
Both people involved in this debate have done a very good job on presenting relevant information. I agree that prostitution should be legalized on the point that it already happens anyway. If we can't stop it, why not at least try to make it safer?
Posted by Mandavb515 3 years ago
Mandavb515
Prostitution should be legalized. If you want to be a prostitute then you should be able to. If it is legalized then the whole thing would be cleaner and the government would make money with it.
Posted by TheConservativeLiberal 3 years ago
TheConservativeLiberal
wow! this is a good debate
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by peterthepoledancingPANDA 3 years ago
peterthepoledancingPANDA
zealot362Masterdebatr91Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Con has had a better conduct and done a better job of convincing me otherwise
Vote Placed by DDO.votebombcounter1 3 years ago
DDO.votebombcounter1
zealot362Masterdebatr91Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering fastfood.
Vote Placed by fastfood 3 years ago
fastfood
zealot362Masterdebatr91Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: I am going to have to give my vote to con... simply because the immorality of prostitution is enough to make me sick and his contentions mainly concentrated on that.
Vote Placed by jackintosh 3 years ago
jackintosh
zealot362Masterdebatr91Tied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons main argument it seemed is that since it is immoral (in their opinion) it should not be legal. Morality is not universal as Pro basically proved by saying "those who wish to prostitute to do so, and I don't see anything immoral about that." If you don't want your kid to be a prostitute, then teach them that and hope they make the decision you see as being right. Also counter Vote bomb, i am giving up my real vote to counter it. I would have done Conduct:tied, S&G:tied Sources:tied
Vote Placed by Fatfood 3 years ago
Fatfood
zealot362Masterdebatr91Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a great debate! Both sides had extremely convincing arguments. I will have to go with Con simply because his laws followed the morals of laws.