The Instigator
FullForce
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MikeTheGOd
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

The Government Should Force Female Murderers to be State Prostitutes

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
MikeTheGOd
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/13/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 426 times Debate No: 84933
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (1)

 

FullForce

Pro

Apply in the comments if you're interested.

Definitions:
Female Murderers-Women who have murdered (not counting accidental murders) and have been found guilty by a court of law.
State Prostitutes-Prostitutes owned by the government. Have to fulfill any sexual requests (assuming it's possible). Kept in jails and regularly tested for STDs.

Rules:
1. No forfeits
2. No new arguments in the final round
3. First round is acceptance only
4. No trolling
5. No kritiks
6. Violation of rules results in automatic loss.
MikeTheGOd

Con

I have stated my apology in comments for accepting. I saw the resolution and had at least 4 arguments pop up in my mind immediatily. As i stated in comments if you would like to not debate we can forfiet every round. However if you would like to i await your argument.
Debate Round No. 1
FullForce

Pro

C1-Less Innocent Rapes:
I’m sure my opponent agrees rape is bad. So, I will argue that allowing female murderers to become state prostitutes will lead to less innocent women being raped.
Prostitution in general has been shown to lower rapes. For example, it was discovered that there was loophole in Rhode Island law that essentially made prostitution legal. This led to rape rates plummeting in Rhode Island. (1) Now, Con may say this is a coincidence. However, no other crimes saw any significant drops in Rhode Island, nor did any other states with similar populations see a drop in rape during this time period. (1)
It should be fairly intuitive that legalized prostitution lowers rape. This is because sex is easier to access when prostitution is legal, so that means men have less incentive to rape women.
Now, if female murderers are made into prostitutes this will also lower the rape rate, perhaps more. Not only would sex be easier to access than normal, but also state prostitutes could be a lot cheaper since they don’t set their cost, the government does. Also, normal prostitutes could be unwilling to do certain sexual acts, which some guys would desperately crave. However, state prostitutes would be forced to do these, so it just makes it more attractive to certain guys and a better option than rape.

C2-Deter Murders:
I will now argue that forcing female murders to become prostitutes will lower murder rates. This will be much like the death penalty. Simply put, this is the idea that if a punishment is severe enough people will be deterred from committing the act. This can be seen with the death penalty, where executions have been shown to have a deterrent effect. (2)
I probably don’t have to argue that most women do not want to become state prostitutes. Whether or not they consider this worse than being sentenced to death is subjective, however, a considerable portion likely would consider becoming a state prostitute to be a worse punishment. The same way a bunch of people would rather die than be tortured, it is reasonable to assume a lot of women would rather die than be constantly forced to commit sexual acts.

C3-Economic Benefits:
By selling state prostitutes the government will gain revenue. This revenue can help make up for the court costs for these women’s trials. Plus, any additional profits made can be used to invest in developing society.

Sources:
1- https://business.baylor.edu...
2- http://cjlf.org...
MikeTheGOd

Con

C1-Less Innocent Rapes:

I have 3 responses for this contention

Response 1: RAPE
I agree with my opponent that rape is bad. What's ironic however is my opponent simply suggest legalized government supported rape over non government supported rape. In a sense it's like saying smoking crack is bad unless the crack you are smoking is provided by a funded and supported government manufacturer. But viewers I ask you not even to look at his first contention but rather the resolution itself "The government Should Force Female Murderers to be State Prostitutes". Now look at the Synonyms for rape.
Synonyms: assault, force, violate, ravish
Explanation: By forcing a female entity to participate in a sexual act you are still committing rape.
Response 2: ERA
In a sense this method really goes against the ERA. Not only is this supporting something that has been pushed in some mainstream hip hop music, woman as objects but also this again creates and unequal gender based issue. The gender earnings ratio of women's median weekly earnings to men's is 0.95 or lower. Economically women are already in a bad position, this policy if implemented will make punishments for women far more severe then men making women also at a disadvantage in the judicial system. Also Women account for 14% of violent offenders while men of course account for 86%. Both men and women experience domestic violence, but women experience it considerably more. Next the majority of mass killings are committed by males. My point is simply that why punish the gender that is not committing a preponderance of killings? This doesn't just violate the ERA by targeting a specific gender but this method also doesn't have the imperics too justify its use.

Question for opponent: Are you suggesting the government sets cost for all prostitutes or just the ones in jail?
Response 3: Religion/morality
This method forces individuals too commit sins. Sure they committed murder however punishing someone by forcing them to commit sins isn't moral at all let alone right.
  • Deuteronomy23:There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.
  • Leviticus 19:29 Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness.

In the end Jails are for punishing people who commit crimes but not to turn them into permanent criminals are Ex-felons who are released from prison and acquire gainful employment, have the support of their love ones, and are connected to a higher power are much more likely to stay out of prison longer and in many cases never return. Providing job opportunities and supporting prisoners through rehabilitation programs will not only help them but of course provide benefits for the preponderance of society as well. Local tranquility for the areas they move into as well as economic benefits. When a ex-felon gets an occupation they become consumers and benefit the economy. The long-term psychological and physical effects of the experience are devastating. And they're likely exacerbated by the shame our culture insists on this particularly detrimental activity. A conviction is like the metaphorical scarlet letter. When people see you they see your conviction because many folks in America will never let you forget that you committed a crime. Imagine how much worse it would be for a woman to not only be known for a conviction but also known as the girl who got it in while facing incarceration. This solution proposed in the resolution is intrinsically not the right policy to be implemented in order to enforce the law.




C2-Deter Murders:
I will now argue that forcing female murders to become prostitutes will lower murder rates. This will be much like the death penalty. Simply put, this is the idea that if a punishment is severe enough people will be deterred from committing the act. This can be seen with the death penalty, where executions have been shown to have a deterrent effect. (2)
I probably don’t have to argue that most women do not want to become state prostitutes. Whether or not they consider this worse than being sentenced to death is subjective, however, a considerable portion likely would consider becoming a state prostitute to be a worse punishment. The same way a bunch of people would rather die than be tortured, it is reasonable to assume a lot of women would rather die than be constantly forced to commit sexual acts.
Response: If this would even work at such a high rate as my opponent claims then this contradicts his contention 3 even more. I already demonstrated in my response of contention 1 that the market isn't very big but if this were to even keep women from committing this action the government wouldn't benefit from this policy economically at all. It's also logical that any punishment that's insanely cruel will lower murder rates. If the government said that the punishment from stealing was Saw Torture the crime rates would of course go down, however that's not a morally correct punishment to enforce. There are certain things that distinguish the American government from like corrupt governments in the Sahel region and some sense of morality is one of them.


C3-Economic Benefits:
Response: If the government were to make a government brand of any product or service they could utilize the funds to essentially contribute to infrastructure development, tranquility, welfare, military funding, education, trade etc. If the government had its own state funded weed sure it would benefit economically but its the morality behind the action and how it affects other people that must be considered. Also again as I pointed out the market for male killers is considerably bigger then the market for female. Thus the government would be able to make more money at a time with male prostitution then female anyway.

Sources: (they should be in order as I responded)
4 My KJV bible
Debate Round No. 2
FullForce

Pro

FullForce forfeited this round.
MikeTheGOd

Con

FF made by the opponent so vote me.
Debate Round No. 3
FullForce

Pro

FullForce forfeited this round.
MikeTheGOd

Con

Yeah vote for conduct
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Franklin.Nord 1 year ago
Franklin.Nord
I cant vote on this, but i think The Contender won this one.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 1 year ago
MikeTheGOd
Also going off my opponents rules if he presents a new argument in the final round he loses
Posted by MikeTheGOd 1 year ago
MikeTheGOd
In the end Jails are for punishing people who commit crimes but not to turn them into permanent criminals are Ex-felons who are released from prison and acquire gainful employment, have the support of their love ones, and are connected to a higher power are much more likely to stay out of prison longer and in many cases never return. Providing job opportunities and supporting prisoners through rehabilitation programs will not only help them but of course provide benefits for the preponderance of society as well. Local tranquility for the areas they move into as well as economic benefits. When a ex-felon gets an occupation they become consumers and benefit the economy. The long-term psychological and physical effects of the experience are devastating. And they're likely exacerbated by the shame our culture insists on this particularly detrimental activity. A conviction is like the metaphorical scarlet letter. When people see you they see your conviction because many folks in America will never let you forget that you committed a crime. Imagine how much worse it would be for a woman to not only be known for a conviction but also known as the girl who got it in while facing incarceration. This solution proposed in the resolution is intrinsically not the right policy to be implemented in order to enforce the law.

Clarification: I didn't word this well. At first I am talking about benefits from prisoners who come out well. The psychology consequences are referring to women who get raped. I then go to show how bad a conviction already is. So being known for rape and the mental consequences of rape ultimately do not manifest a proper figure or beneficial figure for society.
Posted by FullForce 1 year ago
FullForce
Ah, don't worry I forgot to lock the debate. I'll debate you, no problem.
Posted by sidah 1 year ago
sidah
Well I guess that would mean convicted men would then be prostitutes - a whole lot of buggery going on.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 1 year ago
MikeTheGOd
eh my bad for accepting didn't realize I had to specifically apply. I just saw this resolution and felt like it was ludicrous. However I compete in debate in real and I have done so on the district and state level so far also got to finals on a national qualifying tournament.

I am on the lower end age wise however and might not be the age you are looking to debate. If so we can just forfeit every round and you can restart another one.

My bad for accepting.
Posted by persianimmortal 1 year ago
persianimmortal
I will be glad to accept this debate should you allow it :)
Posted by PsyInsti 1 year ago
PsyInsti
This would be my first debate, but I'll take a gander at it if possible. I'm interested.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
FullForceMikeTheGOdTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.