query: Should prostitution be legal?

positive: Prostitution should be illegal. Thanks! Prostitution should not be illegal for four reasons, and should be legal for a few other reasons: (1) If a person chooses to act a certain way, knowing it can be harmful, that's their choice. Just like a BMXer or Skateboarder or Skydiver - it's dangerous, but it's their choice. (2) Nobody said this is the reason anybody would legalize prostitution. Not eliminating violence? That's like saying "let's not fund Lung Cancer research because it won't eliminate Breast Cancer." (3) If a woman chooses to sell her body for sex, then yes, it increases human trafficking, but that would be legal, and the woman's choice, so I don't see how this is a bad thing. (4) ....If someone has the option to make easy money, do it. Who cares if someone else can't, maybe they could find another way to make money.Now, for the reasons it should be legal: [1] Primarily men, who are incapable of finding a partner or really any form of sexual release, can easily fulfill their sexual desires by paying for it. No talking, no flirting, no "game," just money, and sex. [2] Legalized prostitution can decrease the rape numbers by upward of 25%. [3] Legalized prostitution can lower the number of sexually transmitted diseases, much like in porn. [4] Legalizing prostitution is disallowing the government to control our own bodies.(1) - You have forgotten to take into account that your stats are coming from illegal prostitution. I agree to an extent that currently, illegal prostitution is very hard to live with and can easily lead to a much shorter life span, as well as many different types of addictions. However with legal prostitution, many of these interactions can be in places such as brothels, where there can be security, as well as safe sex, and a lack of illegal drugs.Even if what you're saying is true, that there are cases where some women are beaten even in places with safety precautions, I can guarantee there are less women beaten in areas with legalized prostitution than illegal prostitution, so even though bad stuff happens everywhere (even look at the police force, really nothing can be 100% perfect), it's still a major improvement.If a woman chooses to start prostituting, she has the ability to make this choice knowing the consequences, and she still makes the choice. Much like a stuntman or construction worker or fisherman, there is higher pay for higher risk, in any job, and that applies to prostitution. If she chooses this, it's her choice.(2) - You brought this up already halfway through your first point, legalizing something will not erase all crime involved. There is still an illegal alcohol market, even though alcohol is now legal. If prostitution was legal in North America, it may very well be different than other places. Sure, there could be some instances where violence is involved, but it is a lot different than prostitution on the street, where there is no organization, security, etc. And please keep in mind, it's the woman's choice to get into this. If she is choosing to get into this lifestyle, then, well it's her choice. Just because legalizing it probably won't eliminate all crime doesn't mean it won't eliminate a lot of crime.(3) - Legalized prostitution gives women the choice to get into what they want. Human trafficking is the distribution of sexual acts by humans. If prostitution was legal, more willing people would get into this, instead of people taken against their will. It would most likely no longer be forced on innocent people.(4) - Prostitution is absolutely not that, and can be argued to be women's control over men. Men want sex? Well, women can give it, but they want something in return. This is how free trade works. Men want something, women want something, they both get what they want in the end. This has nothing to do with gender inequality, but simple trading of a service for money. I'm physically fit, and Linda wants me to build a brick wall for her. Is this exploiting males as nothing but slaves because of our strength? No, it's asking someone to do something because they have the ability to, and in exchange for their service, you give them something they want, which in a lot of cases is money.In no way do men control women in general, and more specifically, in this sense. If they did, they wouldn't have to pay for sex.Now for my arguments[1] Prostitution allows men to have sex who are really unable to find a sexual partner. Sex is a big part of life. Not only is it important to keep our species alive, but it's an amazing stress reliever, it keeps your immune system up, increases oxygen intake and healthy blood flow, as well as relieving pain {2}. Sex is an important part of life, and has dozens of benefits. Not being able to have sex for whatever reason, can easily be thrown out the window if you can pay for it. After all, if I pay for an aspirin, why can't I pay for sex? It feels a lot better than aspirin.[2] Studies have shown that legalized prostitution decreases the rate of rapes {1}. It's kind of hard to elaborate on this point, but wouldn't you want to live in a world where a quarter more of the female population was safer? If someone has access to legal sex, even paying $20 for cheap... prostitutes... it would deter them from doing something illegal.[3] Porn is prostitution. People are paid to have sex, but they record it, and therefore it's legal. Rumours have gone around saying there are STDs riddled in porn, but in reality porn is probably safer than having sex with a girl you met and got to know for a month. There are extensive screenings and tests to ensure the safety of the actors' health. Of course STDs are in some areas of porn, HIV/AIDS is not {3}, and that's the main thing that needs to be taken seriously. STDs can be considered harmless, and can really be taken care of quickly. If prostitution is legalized, it will most likely be a lot like porn - the women are tested, the men having sex with the women may be tested, and in the end, nobody gets any type of infection, and on the off chance someone does, it can be taken care of easily.[4] Sex is natural. Paying for services is how society runs. Paying for massages is completely normal. So why is it that paying for sex is not? Entering into a sexual relationship with someone obviously has risks. Why is sex legal, but paying someone for it illegal? This is a direct violation of our human rights. The government has passed a law that doesn't allow us to have sex if we give someone money for it. Sure, it's a health concern, but like I've said several times, it's a known health concern - there is a possibility something bad could happen, and both people know this, just like when someone has sex with their girlfriend or boyfriend.If two people wish to have consenting sex, while knowing the health risks, they are taking a chance, sure, just like having sex in general, but it's suddenly illegal if someone pays the other?To sum up:Prostitution is a woman's choice. They choose to accept money in return for sex.It's nearly impossibly to eliminate 100% of violence, however the violence can decrease.Human trafficking would not be forced on innocent people, and more willing people would participate, as it's now legal.Prostitution is a simple trade system, and does not have anything to do with one gender being superior to the otherProstitution enables men who are incapable of finding a sexual partner to actually have sex.Upwards of 25% less rapes Health precautions will be taken into effect, and less serious diseases will spreadThe government can't control our bodiesProstitution should be legalized for many reasons. Thanks again! {1} http://www.independent.org... {2} http://www.herballove.com... {3} http://articles.latimes.com...

positive: No to legalizing prostitution Although legalising prostitution itself is perceived as a negative thing, it is very easy to see the positive side of this decision. First and fore-mostly, prostitution is going to exist no matter if it is legal or not. Making prostitution illegal does not stop people from taking this path, or going to a prostitute, similar to making drugs such as heroine illegal will not stop people from buying them, dealing them, or using them. Thus, all of your points will still stand no matter if prostitution is legal or not. Given this case, acknowledging and making prostitution legal at least give prostitutes basic rights to protect themselves from abuse, being under-paid, or being raped. If prostitution would forever remain illegal, it will not die down, and the prostitutes, often young and vulnerable, will have no rights protecting them from various harms on the streets. Although making prostitution legal will not terminate anything, it will still decrease the chances of ' finding themselves at a place, where they do not want to be. ' as they will be under the protection of the law. Making prostitution into a lawful job also means that laws could be implanted so that STDs and such diseases could be checked frequently, and an age limit put on. Thus making prostitution legal will be beneficial to the health and safety of both prostitutes and their customers. Of course, most of the people entering prostitution are young and should be getting an education instead of selling their own bodies. This is largely due to poverty, domestic abuse and human trafficking. This phenomena is not going to improve whether prostitution is legal or not. It is structured deep within society and unless there are ways for domestic abuse and human trafficking to stop, there will be forever children and teens entering the industry. This also brings me back to my previous point. If prostitution is to remain illegal, 'in the dark', and as a social taboo, the children and teenagers will find themselves in a situation in which they would never make enough money to get out of, and being constantly abused at the same time. If prostitution was legal however, their situation will improve drastically, as they will be under the protection of the law, perhaps even providing them with a minimum wage and various welfares. Lastly, forced prostitution and human trafficking aside, if someone is willing to exchange sex with money and enjoy the process of it, why should it be illegal? The pornography industry is perfectly legal, so why isn't the prostitution industry legal? In conclusion, it is undeniable that forced prostitution should not be supported, but it is also clear that if prostitution remain illegal, prostitution will not stop and the conditions will be relatively worse. On the other hand, if it was legalised, laws could be implanted to protect the prostitutes from harm and abuse and help them get on the right track, and it will also give people who enjoy this profession a lawful job. However please keep in mind that most problems with prostitution is not caused by 'prostitution' but factors like poverty and domestic abused, as well as human trafficking. Source: http://www.policeprostitutionandpolitics.com...

positive: Bad for Business Although prostitution, as an act, is not legalised. The girls who are forced to, and those who are not would lose money. Prostitution is illegal due to its sometime violent outbursts and the danger that it can put people in. However, legalising prostitution would mean that it is no longer a taboo and would somewhat decrease the desire to hire a prostitute. Amsterdam has its legalised prostitution and it works fine, yet it is mainly a tourist attraction and the men that do use prostitutes in Amsterdam do it as it is a form of souvenir, something to cross off the list. Because of the way that the girls are advertised and portrayed they can charge large amounts of money. This would not be the case in the UK. The UK would not embrace ideas of sexuality like Holland and this advertising and promotion of the girls would not be the same if legalised in the UK. With this in mind prostitutes would not have the same ability to charge as they do. Also, would leglising prostitution mean that people could manage prostitutes in a harsher sense than pimps or madames? Charging as they wish and possibly giving a wage rather than commission based pay? These would all need to be taken into account and if so the reason that people go into prostitution is usually because they are forced into due to lack of money. If it was a wage based system there is nothing then stopping people from getting another job that puts them at less risk. Legalising prostitution should not happen, not due the fact that it would make prostitution seem morally acceptable but that it would not help the people involved in the industry as well.

positive: In the United States, prostitution should be legal. In the United States Prostitution should be legal. There are three main reasons I have for making this claim: 1) Our government should not be allowed to dictate a persons motivations for engaging in intercourse. 2) People in American society should have the right to do anything they wish to do, so long as no other person is harmed. Excepting harms caused solely by the existence of the laws prohibiting prostitution, no person is being harmed by the practice of prostitution. 3) Laws regarding prostitution have no basis other than religion. Our Supreme Court has ruled, and our Constitution states, that religion and government should never mix. Therefore laws regarding prostitution, should not exist.

positive: Legalize Prostitution sex is the most basic of human needs. Prostitution is good n.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

positive: Making Prostitution Legal Everywhere "Exactly, that is why we should make it legal in every state in this country or at least make it possible for whores to get licenses which they shouldn't have to have a license because it's their own body but I guess its better than nothing. " I myself am for prostitution to be legalized but just not "everywhere" because if such a thing does happen there will be no licensing and "anyone" can choose to sell their bodies, like little kids. I am for making prostitution legal "almost" everywhere by states being able to legalize brothels, which could control who is allowed to sell their body and who is NOT allowed to sell their body such as children. It is better to have a license so it would be easier to tell if a brothel is running illegal prostitution with abducted woman and perhaps children. And if the legal brothels are forced to have regular health checkups, unlike the Netherlands, AIDs will be maintain and controlled from prostitution. "Actually, if prostitution was legal without having to have a license for it then they would not have to have a pimp or manager. " I am guessing you did not comprehend what I wrote before, or I did not make it clearer. Prostitution in the Netherlands is legal "everywhere", but there still happens to be human trafficking going on and woman are still being abused and abducted to be forced in prostitution. It would be much better if they work in legal brothels that do not force them in prostitution and do not abuse them, because legal brothels are state owned. There can only be brothels in a county with a population of 400,000 or less. I would say they should increase this so it can apply to more areas and states should decide to allow brothels to be ran in their counties, as this will "generate revenue" for the state To make my view clear in where I stand in prostitution I will say this. .. . I do think prostitution should be made legal in more states other than Nevada. Prostitution should be made legal but only in specific areas such as legal brothels.

positive: legalized prostitution Prostitution should not be legal because it is very immoral and it is not safe for the well being of the woman in the first place. Now a days we know all the of the effects that having sex can do to ones body. They can send different diseases and should not be legalized.

positive: Prostitution should be illegal. Human TraffickingTo be honest, I don't want to read several books to continue a debate on this site, so I'll take your word for it that in some of the countries where prostitution is legal (including several third-world countries) human trafficking rates go up. Now you have to ask yourself why this happens. It's still illegal to forcibly take someone and use them for sex and labour, so how does prostitution enable this more often? I skimmed through your sources and couldn't find the countries in subject, but I can say it wouldn't make sense to say what could happen in a developed country (like America or Canada) due to what happens in an undeveloped country, run by an extremely corrupt government and rebels and huge gangs (like Mexico or Ethiopia).ConsentConsent turns the crime legal in some cases. Having sex with someone against their will is rape, and a horrible crime. Having sex with someone who consents is just mutual sex. Although this isn't the best example, it shows that consent does alter "crime" in some cases. However - you say "there is no amount of consent that makes a crime acceptable." That's incorrect. If you were to replace acceptable with legal, I'd agree with you. Acceptable falls on the people involved, even indirectly, as long as they are involved. Is bondage acceptable? Well, it's legal, and recorded, and shared all over the Internet. Tying someone up and having sex with them (sometimes while they cry) is legal. But if a guy pays a woman to have sex (not even bondage) it's suddenly unacceptable and illegal? Of course consent makes a crime acceptable. It doesn't make it legal, but it makes it acceptable.Using your murder example - You're right, it is illegal to kill someone or yourself, but something being illegal doesn't make it unacceptable. If Joe is suffering and he hates his life and has nobody and nothing to live for, and some guy offered to end it all for him, it would still be murder, still be illegal, but between those two people, it would be acceptable, as Joe accepted his fate and accepted his death.My "choice" argument is basically that if a woman chooses to do something that doesn't hurt a single person (sex), why is it considered illegal? She is choosing to have sex with someone, and she is putting a price on it. There's a reason they are called sex trade workers, because much like a massage therapist, they offer their services for money.There is always going to be bad stuff in the world. Not every prostitute is homeless, but that's irrelevant. What's the difference between some guy asking for change and some woman saying she'll work for you? Well the woman is using her skills to earn money. She could chose to get a job at the recycling depot getting $8/hr, but she chooses to have sex with men for $100/hr. Makes sense to me. The deportation thing is obviously horrible, but your whole argument is "these people have nothing so they resort to selling their services for money." ...So they resort to a job, yes. A job that some people frown upon.(1) Consent is a defense to a crime. It does not make the crime any less illegal, but in many cases it makes the crime acceptable/reasonable. (2) By "realistic alternatives," are you referring to getting a minimum wage job at the age of 30? Earning five times that much makes a lot more sense to me.Violence against womenI don't really know why I said that I can guarantee that - I can't. Taking into account the unreported rates... well we just can't do that, can we? If nobody says they were raped, we can't use that group as part of the statistic, as we would literally be making up a number. Keep in mind the United States is not the same as any other country, and to say "x happens in Istanbul" is a lot different than saying it would happen in America.SexismNo. It's called biology. Women have the ability to attract almost any male to have sex with, while men have to work incredibly hard to find a female. My statement has absolutely nothing to do with "men being entitled to sex," and that is ridiculous. Last time I checked, a man and a woman having sex is normal. So why is it that a man and a woman having sex, then the guy gives her money for it after, turns into sexism? Well, it doesn't turn into sexism. This whole "sex object" thing is ridiculous. It's in our nature to have sex, it's in our nature to be sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Because women chose to offer sex to men for money does not mean men view women as sex objects, or are entitled to sex. A woman offering her services is the same as a man offering his. If a guy offers to fix a woman's roof, and she pays him, is he a "strength object"? No. Is the woman entitled to his services? No.Sex is important for most people. If someone cannot have sex, and a woman is offering to have sex with him for money, it is not entitlement, it is not sexism, it is not inferiority/superiority, and it isn't degrading a woman to the level of an object. Last time I checked, people don't have sex with objects, they have sex with humans.ConclusionProstitution pays more because it's a risky business. Like changing the light bulb on a radio tower. Legalizing changing light bulbs on radio towers has caused more deaths, as more people are doing it. We don't need radio towers, we can live in the dark ages. So why is legalizing sex for money a harder thing to do? I chose not to bring up many sources considering prostitution is legal in places outside the US, which, well you guessed it, are not the US. I consider these sources irrelevant, as they are not related to the US. However your topic does not say "Prostitution should be illegal in the US," we do have to take into consideration other countries, especially if it is worldwide. More prostitutes = more violence, that makes sense. Just like more Whites commit crimes than Asians, there's more of them, so that's how it works. However is the percentage more? I dropped the side effects of prostitution because when women chose (that's right, I said chose) to enter this field of work, they are paid for the risk, and they have the ability to leave, but they don't. They know the consequences, they know the risk and danger, but they stay to make great money.Legalizing prostitution in other countries (most not nearly as developed as the US) may have caused a slight increase (however percentage wise I'm not too sure) in violence against prostitutes, which makes sense. This is the only valid point Pro has brought up. If there's more prostitutes, more are going to be abused. It's unfortunate, yes, but keeping it illegal would continue women to seek it out in extremely shady ways, underground prostitution rings, where no safety precautions are at hand at all, and nobody knows where they are.When the government legalized alcohol, more people died from alcohol poisoning, however this is still legal. Sex trade workers would not die from sex, they would die from the people committing crimes (if prostitution was legalized) that would still be illegal. References:Nope.Thanks for a good debate.

positive: Prostitution should be legalized in Nevada Even though I disagree with Prostitution, and find it very immoral. It should be legalized. Our state government shouldn't have a say on how people treat their bodies. Furthermore, legalizing prostitution would be a benefit to our state. If anyone disagrees feel free to debate, I have debated this issue over and over again (Law Class) and won each time. I need more challenges.

positive: Prostitution should be legalized in the US Thanks for the debate, Mikal. I'll start with my case and finish with rebuttals. NOTE: "johns" are "guys who pay for sex."== Trafficking == (1) Experience shows that when prostitution is legalized, sex trafficking increases. [A, B, C, D, E, F] Even in Nevada. [G, H, O] This happens because legalization increases demand. Not enough women want to prostitute, so the only way to meet that demand is through trafficking.(2) Most "legal prostitutes" are trafficking victims. [E, O] Unfortunately, police can't do anything about that, because police can't distinguish legal prostitutes from trafficking victims, or legal pimps from traffickers. Police also can't arrest trafficking victims, which is a huge problem, because most trafficking victims don't seek help. Pimps manipulate victims to think they're not victims, or to think they'll be killed if they seek help. [I, J, O] So, the only effective way to rescue trafficking victims is arresting them for prostitution.== Violence ==(1) Prostitutes are lucky to get out with their lives. More prostitutes are murdered than any other group. The few that aren't still experience an extensive catalog of violence, including assault and rape. Their hair is pulled, faces ejaculated on; they are slapped, pinched, verbally abused, threatened, beaten, cut with knives, burned with cigarettes, and gang raped. Victims of torture describe similar acts. And like victims of torture, prostitutes report mouth and teeth injuries, vaginal bleeding, internal injuries, head injuries, and broken bones. The average life span for prostitutes is four years. [E, K, L](2) The psychological harm is just as bad. Prostitutes measure higher levels of PTSD than combat veterans and victims of torture. PTSD results from going through atrocities you cannot mentally sustain. And PTSD isn't the only concern. Studies show prostitutes are at heightened risk of depression, mania, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, dissociative disorders, and drug abuse. This psychological damage stems from the act itself. Prostituted women simply cannot avoid the trauma associated with constant sexual degradation, and with having one's body sold as a commodity. In fact, studies find no difference in PTSD levels between street prostitution and brothel prostitution, which shows that the trauma is intrinsic to the act itself. [E, K, L] (3) These results are not limited to illegal prostitution. Even prostitutes working where prostitution is legal, in brothels with so-called “safety policies,” experience this extensive catalog of physical and psychological violence. The psychological harms are inherent, so no amount of improvement helps. And the physical harms also persist, because that's what the johns want, and they're willing to pay more for it. And prostitutes don't feel like they have a choice. And panic buttons usually fail. [E, K, L, M, O]== Rebuttal ==(1) RegulationRegulation doesn't reduce illegal prostitution. Over 90% of prostitution in Nevada is illegal. [B, G, H, M, O] Also, see my trafficking evidence from earlier. As Mikal notes, 73% of men will pay more for sex without a condom, and those men create a market for illegal prostitution. Regulating prostitution isn't going to change that.(2) SafetyFirst, since regulations don't reduce illegal prostitution, Mikal's "minimization" arguments regarding "safety" and "STDs" have no impact. Most prostitutes are still subject to all the harms. Second, "safety policies" don't work, because prostitution is inherently dangerous, degrading, and psychologically traumatic. [E, K, L, M, O](3) RapeIf legalization actually decreased rape, we'd see evidence of that in Germany, Australia, the Netherlands, and Nevada. But there isn't any such evidence. I'd argue that rape actually increases with legalization, because more prostitution means more prostitutes are raped. The reason we don't hear about it is because prostitutes almost never report rapes.Mikal's sources don't say otherwise. The study in [5, 6] used a regression model to analyze potential correlations between availability of prostitution and rape. The study made no claims about legalization actually reducing rape. Even worse, the study relied on the wrong definitions of rape (this fact was admitted in the study), and the study didn't consider unreported rapes (this fact completely skews the data). Taking those limitations into account, the correct interpretation of the data is that rapists target prostitutes over other women; other independent evidence supports that interpretation, including Mikal's [2] and [3]. When there's more prostitution available, more prostitutes get raped instead. Rape doesn't decrease, but reporting does, because prostitutes almost never report rapes.Mikal's [8] doesn't apply because it dealt with inadvertent decriminalization; Mikal's arguing for regulated legalization, which is completely different. Finally, Mikal's only other study -- the Queensland study -- is from 1959. It's completely outdated and therefore inapplicable to prostitution today.(4) CostsFirst, designating something as a crime shouldn't turn on enforcement costs and potential tax revenue. No one argues that trafficking, murder, or rape should be legal, even though legalizing them would generate massive savings. So too with prostitution. Money simply shouldn't factor into policy decisions about what to criminalize.Second, enforcement costs don't go down when prostitution is legal because legalization doesn't reduce illegal prostitution. If anything, enforcement costs go up, because trafficking increases.Third, Mikal's numbers are wrong. Mikal's [12] says the prostitution industry generates $14 billion a year. [12] There's no way to generate $20, $30, or $40 billion in taxes from an industry that only generates $14 billion. That's literally impossible. Mikal gets his numbers from [11], but [11] is wrong because (a) it assumes all illegal prostitution will be regulated, and (b) it assumes all prostitutes will earn at least $100,000 a year (i.e. earn just as much as the high-class prostitutes in Nevada). Both assumptions are wrong. Most prostitution would still be illegal, competition among brothels would bring prices down, and competition among states would bring tax rates down. So the actual tax revenue isn't even close to $20 billion. Of course, that's not surprising, since [11] isn't a credible source; it's just what some guy on the Internet said.(5) ConsentFirst, no amount of consent makes a crime acceptable, because the whole point of criminal laws is to determine which *choices* are acceptable to society. Murder, rape, and trafficking are crimes even if victims consent. So too with prostitution.Second, prostitutes don't actually consent because they have no real alternatives (or at least they feel like they have no real alternatives). Poverty, homelessness, and past sexual abuse are the top reasons women are prostituted. Pimps often recruit illegal immigrants -- especially Central American women -- into prostitution by stealing their money and threatening deportation. And many women are simply beaten until they "consent" to prostitution. The so-called "choice" is thus only a choice between two evils: homelessness or prostitution, starving family or prostitution, deportation or prostitution, violent beatings or prostitution. Of course, that's not a real "choice." Most prostitutes want to leave prostitution but they feel they can't or don't know how. [E, K, L, M, N, O]This is not just like every other job. Prostitutes don't decide to be prostitutes instead of doctors, engineers, lawyers, pilots. Those options don't exist for prostituted women. When intereviewed, prostitutes say prostitution chose them. And they say they'd prefer doing anything else if they could. In Nevada, there are countless stories of legal prostitutes who speak to the public "glowingly of how much fun prostitution was, how rich they were getting, how glamorous their life was." And then -- when the pimps aren't looking -- they ask for "help," "saying she was there under captivity, that he had a gun, had threatened her life," and so on. [O] I urge everyone to read, or at least skim, [O]. It shows that prostitutes don't consent; they're tricked, coerced, and brainwashed by pimps.In many ways, prostituted women are like battered women. Like battered women, prostituted women depend on pimps economically, fear for their lives, and don't know how to get out. So they stay in prostitution just as battered women stay in their relationships. Think about it this way: Would we say that a concentration camp survivor who collaborated with the guards to get food and stay alive had consented to his abuse? Would we say an enslaved African in the Americas who became a house servant had done so voluntarily? No. To say there was choice there is absurd. And prostitution is no different. == Conclusion ==Prostitution is inherently degrading. "It is the mouth, the vagina, the rectum, penetrated by a penis, sometimes hands, sometimes objects, by one man and then another and then another and then another and then another." Prostitutes don't want to have sex with those men. They do it solely because they're forced (literally or from financial necessity). And as a result, the entirety of their life is reduced to a few sexual orifices. The attendant harms -- harms on par with torture -- cannot be disputed. And legalization only increases those harms, because it makes enforcement harder while increasing trafficking. Only the pimps and johns benefit.[A] http://tinyurl.com...[B] Mary Jones, Making Sex Work[C] http://tinyurl.com...[D] http://tinyurl.com...[E] http://tinyurl.com...[F] http://tinyurl.com...[G] http://tinyurl.com...[H] Melissa Farley, Prostitution and Trafficking in Nevada[I] http://tinyurl.com...[J] http://tinyurl.com...[K] http://tinyurl.com...[L] http://tinyurl.com...[M] http://tinyurl.com...[N] http://tinyurl.com...[O] http://tinyurl.com...

positive: Prostitution should be legal in the United States Prostitution So many ways it is performed, and so many ways it is perceived. Both by those who have nothing to do with the industry and by those actively involved. We need to place a paramount perspective that in all business that business is PEOPLE. As American citizens, there are rights we are given solely by "being alive." The stigma and negative connotation of anything that involves the "profane" has always existed. We may never see true equality among men and women, but this [prostitution] is something that extends beyond American borders. We may have varying opinion on what "prostitution" is/isn"t " with this segue I want to introduce a United Nations 2000 "Protocol to Prevent, Supress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime" to explain that prostitution can NOT be "human trafficking" if this industry is legalized, regulated, taxed and incorporated into our economic structure. The UN convened that, "'Trafficking in persons' shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs." None of these can exist in a legitimate/legal business enterprise. It is for the overall benefit for the PEOPLE in this industry that I take this stance that "America should legalize prostitution." My arguments are going to revolved around the only information available (in America) to discuss the projected changes by applying the "Nevada brothel model" to this industry (as it is already LEGAL in these United States " similar to any "legalize marijuana" argument.) I believe this comparison allows for a clearer understanding on the contrast within this country when it comes to handling prostitution as a business, and when it is a "street crime." The 5 points for my case in the affirmative for "America should legalize prostitution" are: A1-Increase health, safety, and labor rights/regulations for those working in this industry A2-Economic benefits A3-Reallocates law enforcement persons and resources towards actual threats against citizens A4-Reduction of violence against women And my final point: A5-It is the oldest profession that will NEVER go away A1 - Illegal street prostitutes might face pressure from pimps and Johns to forgo condoms. But states that legalize prostitution can require sex workers to use condoms and get tested for sexually transmitted diseases. Sex workers in Nevada must get monthly tests for syphilis and HIV and weekly tests for gonorrhea and chlamydia. Nevada also requires condoms for all sex in brothels. This law is posted on the outside of the state's brothels, according to the paper by Barbara Brents and Kathryn Hausbeck of the University of Nevada. "All of the women we interviewed were passionate about expressing their support for these law. For example, they insisted that they always use condoms, whether the client prefers to or not," the report stated. Making sex work a crime can drive prostitutes underground and make them less likely to practice safe sex and get tested for sexually transmitted disease. An April 2012 study by the Urban Justice Center found that New York City cops were using condoms found on women as evidence in criminal prostitution cases against them. It's easy to imagine how this practice might deter sex workers from carrying protection. The United Nations Development Programme published a report last year on illegal sex work in Asia and the Pacific that highlighted just how damaging the criminalization of sex work can be to women's health. Here's what it said: Criminalization increases vulnerability to HIV by fueling stigma and discrimination, limiting access to HIV and sexual health services, condoms and harm reduction services, and adversely affecting the self-esteem of sex workers and their ability to make informed choices about their health. Legally employed people in America get rights like a minimum wage, freedom from discrimination, and a safe work environment. Since prostitutes don't work legally, they don't get any of those rights. The United Nations Development Programme's report on sex work in Asia and the Pacific highlighted why it's problematic when sex workers don't have legal rights. "Sex workers in all countries of the region except New Zealand and the state of New South Wales (Australia) lack the labour rights afforded to other workers, including the legal right to a safe and healthy workplace and to reasonable terms and conditions of employment ... Labour laws and social security laws that do not recognize sex work as legitimate work contribute to stigma and marginalization of sex workers." A2 - While brothels in Nevada pay no state taxes, they pay "significant amounts of tax" to the rural counties where they do business, according to The New York Times. (Nevada Republicans blocked a plan a couple of years ago to subject brothels to state taxes, as they didn't want schools and other state services funded by sex work.) Illegal prostitution businesses in America, of course, pay no taxes. If those brothels were legalized, then state and county governments could gain significant revenue. "Let government share in the revenue, but otherwise stay out of the affairs of consenting adults," MSNBC political analyst Michael Smerconish has written. A3 - The investigation into notorious John, and former New York governor, Eliot Spitzer is a perfect example of how costly it can be to probe sophisticated prostitution rings. "In this case, they wiretapped 5,000 phone conversations, intercepted 6,000 emails, used surveillance and undercover tactics that are more appropriate for trapping terrorists than entrapping Johns," famed Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote in the Wall Street Journal. Dershowitz has also told MSNBC's Michael Smerconish, "Every hour spent going after prostitution is an hour that could have been spent going after terrorists and going after people who victimize." A4 - Prostitutes in America (mostly women) are vulnerable to violence from customers and pimps. A study of San Francisco prostitutes found that 82% had been assaulted and 68% had been raped while working as prostitutes. Another study of prostitutes in Colorado Springs found they were 18 times more likely to be murdered than non-prostitutes their age and race. Prostitutes who experience violence may be reluctant to call the cops since what they're doing is illegal. Sex workers in licensed brothels, on the other hand, can have somebody to back them up, according to a paper by Barbara Brents and Kathryn Hausbeck of the University of Nevada. Brents and Hausbeck interviewed brothel owners and made these observations: Brothel owners have a clear interest in maintaining their image as law-abiding, trouble-free businesses to keep their licenses and maintain good relations within their communities. The owners we interviewed ensure this by making it policy to call the police at the slightest hint of trouble to send a message that they don"t tolerate bad behavior. "The whole name of the game is control. But that control also makes us get along pretty well with the sheriff"s office," one owner told the researchers. "There are two reasons for doing it, one, the sheriff"s office, but also the girls" personal safety." The study concluded that "brothels offer the safest environment available for women to sell consensual sex acts for money." A5 - There will always be lonely or kinky men in America who will pay for sex, and there will always be women willing to rent out their bodies. As the anthropologist Patty Kelly has written in the Los Angeles Times, prostitution has become a "part of our culture" in the United States. We legalize and regulate a ton of commerce that's morally controversial " like gambling, alcohol, tobacco, lap-dancing, and pornography. Yes, women can be coerced into prostituting themselves. But we're not helping them by making consenting sex work a crime. Closing Observation " Again, it is already legal in a specified territory in this country and it is an industry that has been around since the beginning, and will last for as long as "we crave sex" and continue to live in a "depressed social state." The merits of "morality" are not concreted to keep this industry illegal as the true "moral compass" of America is freedom/civil liberties/representation/at will employment (which only happens once people are not deemed "criminals" and are able to live the life of their choosing. By legalizing prostitution, we are supporting the free market capital principles of American economics. We do not need anymore people incarcerated in our over populated prisons that have not committed any acts of violence. As mentioned, the ones who are at the highest threat of violence are the workers themselves. As Americans we owe it to the other American citizens to have their rights (as PEOPLE) protected as equally as any other person. And by all this - this is why America should legalize prostitution.

positive: Pornography should be illegal and prostitution should be legal. You're very confused my adversary. There is a clear difference between drug trafficking and human trafficking. There is a reason why human trafficking is illegal and its ironic on how you are in support of this. It seems like you don't know the victims of human trafficking who will be later used as sex slaves. They are minor girl, who need education. They are trafficked, by making this legal, you are spoiling the lives of thousands of children and helpless women. That statement is disgracing. 2) There is a reason why porn stars choose porn and not prostitution. Its because porn is easier to perform and its just acting, both the male and female know their duty and its in a safe environment. For prostitution, the women has to go where the customer demands which is a threat to her. DO YOU WANT SOMEONE'S LIFE THREATENED just because you think prostitution is better? I hence stand justified. Prostitution should remain illegal. There's a good reason why its illegal in over a bunch of places. Making porn illegal will cause an outrage in the society, by the general public and the porn stars. We don't need that. Everything is fine and it should stay that way.

positive: Resolved: Prostitution should be legalised Premise 1-Definition of Prostitution Con has yet to provide a clear definition to what prostitution is. Prostitution is the act of offering one’s self for hire to engage in sexual relations. (1) This means that there is consent between all parties involved, to exchange a service (sex). 1-http://bit.ly... Premise 2-Purpose of Laws For prostitution to be illegal there needs to be laws against it. So that ultimately leads to the question, why do laws exist? Laws are in place to protect citizen’s general safety and their rights from external forces. (2) This means that as long as one is not harming another person’s rights or safety, they are not acting outside the law, and are free to make any decisions they wish. This overall allows people to have individual autonomy and free will, as long as they are not affecting another. 2-http://bit.ly... Premise 3-Regulations Countries which have legal prostitution tend to regulate it (such as Germany and the Netherlands). Two of the main problems which face prostitutes and/or johns (people who buy prostitutes), which threaten their safety, are rape/assault and STDs. There are already laws against rape/assault (which I’ll get more into later), but STDs cannot be prevented the same way. However, many areas where prostitution is legal have put laws in place which make STDs among prostitutes a lot less likely. For example, in counties where prostitution is legal in Nevada, condom use and weekly tests for STDs are required by law. (3) There are also similar laws in Germany. (4, 5) In fact, even without laws requiring things such as condoms, most prostitutes won’t work without one, which is how it is in the Netherlands. (6) As a result of these policies, areas which have legal prostitution see less STDs. This can be observed in Nevada, Germany, Australia, and Rhode Island (where prostitution was temporarily legal). (3, 4, 7, 8) Regulation has worked so well in Nevada, to the point where STDs are less likely among Nevada prostitutes than among California porn stars. (3) 3-http://huff.to...4-http://bit.ly...5-http://bit.ly...6-http://bit.ly...7-http://bit.ly...8-http://bit.ly... Premise 4-Dangers of Illegal Prostitution Con mentions a stat that says about 80% of prostitutes have been raped, which I agree with. In fact, most prostitutes are too scared to even report violence from customers to the police, because they don’t want to be prosecuted. (9) So, one would expect rape of prostitutes to go down in areas where prostitution is legal, because they don’t have to worry about being arrested or otherwise punished. The stats support this. For example, despite other crimes happening at about the same rate, rape decreased dramatically when rape was legal in Rhode Island. (8) The opposite ended up happening when Queensland banned brothels, with a 149% increase in women being raped, compared to a 49% increase in other offenses against women. (10) Overall, studies have shown that if rape was legalized throughout the US the rape rate would decrease by about 25%. (10) Another major problem, that doesn’t exist nearly as much when rape is legal are abusive pimps. Studies have shown that 89% of women in prostitution want to escape. (11) In fact, pimps often manipulate, threaten, and abuse women in order to make sure they remain prostitutes. (12) However, if women were protected under the law they would no longer have to serve pimps and could work for a brothel, which could not abuse their employees or force them to leave. 9- http://bit.ly...10-http://bit.ly...11-http://1.usa.gov...12- http://bit.ly... Argument 1-Regulated Prostitution Should be Legal As already shown prostitution in its pure form is done with consent, so no one’s rights are harmed. Also, as shown regulations can make it safer. Plus, having it be illegal makes it more dangerous than it has to be. For that reason prostitution should be legal. Premise 5-Profit from Legal Prostitution Legalizing prostitution would also provide a huge profit. Prostitution is a huge industry, which costs a lot to enforce laws against. For example, in the US $200,000,000 is spent annually on enforcing laws regarding prostitution. (13) However, potentially billions of dollars could be made from taxing prostitution, in the US alone. (14) 13-http://bit.ly...14-http://bit.ly... Argument 2-Financial Benefits As already shown prostitution would bring a lot of money into the government. This could be great for many reasons. This money could be spent on things such as police, social services, or even awareness of why people shouldn’t hire prostitutes. Argument 3-Justice Benefits If the police have to focus less time on prostitution they can focus more on more serious crimes such as murder, rape, and assault. Plus, it would lead to less people being arrested for a crime which harms no one. Rebuttal 1-Encoragement of Prostitution P1: I disagree with Con’s reasoning for the necessity of laws to maximize people’s welfare. As mentioned in my 2nd premise, laws are better off to protect others from external forces, but otherwise they should have completely free autonomy. This way the government treats all people equal, assuming they don't harm others. P2: Sex Tourism: A culture of promiscuity is not inherently bad. One may subjectively see it as a bad, but it’s not objectively bad. Con does say it hurts the city’s reputation, along with its tourism industry. However, having legal prostitution may improve the city’s reputation, to some people, specifically libertarians. Plus, Amsterdam is still one of the world’s most popular tourist destinations, having more tourists than cities such as Tokyo and Los Angeles. (15) Plus, even though Con’s argument came from tourism workers in Amsterdam, it’s still essentially a subjective opinion with no evidence. Divorce: Con suggests that divorce would increase if prostitution is legal. However, no evidence is provided to support this. In fact, divorce rates in Germany and the Netherlands have increased at roughly the same rate as other Western countries and are in many cases lower: Germany (16): Netherlands (17): France (18): Belgium (19): Italy (20): Drug Use: Con provides no insight on the cause of this correlation. It could simply be because they feel like they can’t leave, which is must less of a problem in legal prostitution as mentioned above. However, the cause could easily be something else as well. For example, most prostitutes are poor, and drug abuse tends to be higher among poor people. (21, 22) Also, drug use is not notably higher in Germany or the Netherlands compared to their European neighbours. In fact, both countries have among the lowest amount of people injecting drugs per capita. (23) As for the prostitutes almost everything I addressed responds to Con’s concerns. Essentially, keeping it illegal just causes things such as rape and murder to occur a lot more in prostitution. C1: I disproved both premises to build this conclusion (although I only had to disprove one). P3: I accept that prostitution would increase. C2: C1 has been disproved, so C2 therefore has been as well. 15- http://read.bi...16- http://bit.ly...17- http://bit.ly...18- http://bit.ly...19- http://bit.ly...20- http://bit.ly...21- http://bit.ly...22- http://bit.ly...23- http://bit.ly... Rebuttal 2-Human Trafficking P1: I accept this premise. P2: I accept this premise. P3: If you follow the view of personal autonomy you know the prostitutes are responsible for their own actions to enter human trafficking, an illegal activity, even with legal prostitution. However, even if you follow Con’s view, legal prostitution would still provide a net benefit. Currently in the US there are estimated to be 14,500-17,500 people in human trafficking. (24) Let’s say the 17,500 numbers grows 100% if prostitution is legal, meaning 17,500 more people are negatively affected. However, let’s examine the decline in rape. There was a 31% decrease in rape rate after rape was legalized in Rhode Island. (8) We’ll be conservative and say the decline would only be 25% nationally. Con uses the stat that 80% of prostitutes have been raped. We’ll use that stat as well. It is also estimated that there are 1,000,000 prostitutes in the US (we’ll just account for them in the calculations, not any new prostitutes who most likely haven’t been raped). (25): Decline rate*(Number of Prostitutes*Rape Rate)=Drop in Rapes -0.25*(1,000,000*0.8)=-200,000 So it appears that at least 200,000 less women will be raped. So: 17,500-200,000=-182,500 net loss in people being harmed under legal prostitution. Not to mention, this is a very conservative estimate. I said human trafficking would increase 100%, which is likely larger than it would be. Plus, I took the largest estimate of people currently in human trafficking in the US. Also, I dropped Rhode Island’s rape decline rate 6% and didn’t even account for the fact that stat was for overall rapes, not just prostitutes (suggesting it’d be larger drop among prostitutes). This also doesn’t account for the fact less people would have STDs, less people assaulted/murdered, and less people feeling trapped as prostitutes. Finally, it doesn’t account for the potential benefit from greater revenue for the government and more time for police to focus on serious crimes (such as human trafficking). C: Disproved premise 3. 24-http://bit.ly... 25-http://read.bi...Conclusion:As can be seen. There is no reason laws should exist against regulated prostitution. Plus, if legalized, many of the harms associated with prostitution would become much more minor. Finally, the benefits outweigh the costs regarding legalizing prostitution.

positive: Resolved: Prostitution should be legalised Premise 1I accept this definition. But it doesn't necessarily mean that there is consent involved from all parties - this is because people can be coerced, threatened or forced into prostitutional sex.Premise 2In round 2, I presented a cogent philosophical proof that the purpose of a democratic government is to serve the common good. I agree that laws exists to protect 'citizens' general safety and rights from external forces', but this is only an indirect method of ultimately serving the common good. Pro seems to imply that there shouldn't be a law against prostitution under this criterion, but I dispute this. A law against prostitution will 'protect citizen's general safety' for the exact reasons I elucidated in my first argument in Round 2. And whilst a single solicitation of a prostitute will have a negligible effect on other peoples' rights and safety, the widespread occurrence of prostitution contributes to an overall harmful effect on society and those within it.To use an analogy, shoplifting a chocolate bar will have a negligible effect on peoples' safety or rights, but if it happened frequently and went unpunished, then it would contribute to an overall negative effect. This is why shoplifting is illegal.Premise 3Whilst regulations exist in countries which have legalised prostitution, they have proved startlingly ineffectual and can even prove counterproductive:- Legalising prostitution changes rape, assault, violence and STIs from serious criminal and health problems to 'workplace occupational hazards'. (1) Which disguises serious crimes as health and safety concerns.- Legalisation in Nevada has seen 'rapes and assaults by customers [being covered up] by the management.' (2)- 'Legalisation actually makes it more difficult to prosecute rapists, perpetrators, and traffickers. Because the sex industries are more legitimised under legalisation, there is no basic presumption that buying or selling someone else"s body is a crime.' (3)Pro writes that the legalising prostitution would prevent STDs, but the evidence proves otherwise:- When Victoria, Australia, legalised brothels, STDs and AIDs actually increased, this is because testing only one of the two sexual partners is self-defeating as well as the factor that it creates a false sense of security to brothel owners as well as clients. Also, prostitutes often went to great lengths to avoid testing, even using false IDs and moving areas. (4)- An article within the World Journal of AIDs wrote that:'It is apparent that mandatory testing of HIV and STIs among sex workers in Australia has proven to be a barrier to otherwise successful HIV and STI peer education, prevention and free and anonymous testing and treatment. The outcomes of mandatory testing are counterproductive to reducing HIV and STI rates, do not reach the intended target group, are costly and inefficient' (5)- Pro writes that STD tests are required by law in Nevada, but this is no longer true (6).Therefore, as well as there being evidence that legalisation is correlated to an increase in STDs and AIDs (which stands to reason, since legal prostitution = more people having sex with prostitutes), the preventative measures have proved to be virtually useless. Condom use is good, but it cannot be realistically enforced; 73% of prostitutes reported that men offer to pay extra for sex without a condom and 45% of them said that men became abusive when asked to use a condom. (7) So even if mandatory condom use was introduced, it would probably do more harm than good by increasing the chances that a customer abuses the prostitute.Moreover, mandatory STD checks don't actually prevent prostitutes from getting STDs (just like checking for cancer doesn't stop someone getting cancer), all it does is protect the Johns by removing the infected prostitutes - it doesn't protect the prostitutes themselves.Pro states that:'Regulation has worked so well in Nevada, to the point where STDs are less likely among Nevada prostitutes than among California porn stars.'Which is a laughable statement; porn stars are already a high-risk group for STDs (they too have sex countless times every year with multiple people), so one cannot justifiably say that regulation has 'worked so well' by comparing prostitutes to yet another high-risk group. Regulation can only be called good enough if it reduces STD levels to around the national average.Premise 4Pro's first statement is that some prostitutes are too scared to inform the police of abuse, for fear of prosecution. But this is only an argument to decriminalise prostitutes (such as is the case in Sweden), it doesn't justify full-on legalisation. Hence this comment doesn't pertain to the resolution of the debate.Next, Pro writes:'rape decreased dramatically when rape was legal in Rhode Island.'Yet rape was never legal in Rhode Island.All-in-all, Pro is making the argument that if prostitution is legalised, rape would decrease. His Queensland study can simply be countered by the fact that Germany is the country with the most prostitution in Europe but also has a relatively high rape rate for an European country (8). All these contradicting correlations demonstrate is that there is no conclusive correlation between rape rates and prostitution. Pro's second study (this one --> [8]) is dubious; the correlation is a very weak one and is hardly conclusive. In fact, the scatter graph within the study showed that the majority of countries with low prostitution-availability also have low rape rates - the weak correlation is only hinted at by the extremes.Even if legalising prostitution would reduce rape convictions, it wouldn't reduce overall occurrences of rape because, technically, most prostitution is itself rape. In legalised places, this won't come under the statistics of 'rape' because prostitution is approved of by the government.So why is most prostitution actually rape? Well, any non-consensual sex is rape (9), and sex is only consensual if it is free from threats or coercion (10). However, 80% of Nevadan prostitutes want to leave prostitution (11) but many are prevented from leaving (ibid.) and it is made very difficult to refuse clients (12). It stands to reason that if 80% of prostitutes want to leave, but remain in the industry, they are remaining because of some form of threat or coercion. Since this does not constitute legal consent, prostitution is non-consensual and therefore rape. This is Nevada, where prostitution is legal - so Pro is incorrect in thinking that legalising prostitution will ensure that most prostitution is consensual. He states that a brothel 'could not abuse their employees', but Nevada has shown this to be false (13).Conclusion to Rebuttal of argument 1I have provided evidence that legal prostitution does not help mitigate STDs, nor improve the livelihoods of most prostitutes. Therefore, legalising prostitution will not help prostitutes.Premise 5 & Argument 2This argument contradicts Pro's earlier point about the purpose of laws; 'to protect citizen’s general safety and their rights'. As I have demonstrated that legalising prostitution would be harmful, the government cannot justifiably legalise it for monetary gain. The Government isn't serving the people if it harms the common good in order to make money. Pro's logic would also imply that the Government ought to legalise cocaine and heroine as well, since they would then be able to tax it and make money.Argument 3This argument is built upon the presupposition that prostitution is 'a crime which harms no one', which I have thoroughly refuted. Furthermore, this argument uses reasoning that would entail that we should legalise all non-serious crimes in order to focus on the serious ones - an absurd conclusion that would lead to a chaotic society.Defence of my argument #1P1I have no problem with accepting Pro's second premise, but as I have demonstrated, banning prostitution protects the safety and rights of people by protecting them from human trafficking as well as protecting the prostitutes themselves. Johns pump money into this harmful industry and hence, overall, are actually contributing to the harm. Ergo, the law against prostitution is justified.P2Sex tourism puts an intense demand on the country's sex industry, which prompts pimps to seek out new prostitutes, often having to resort to trafficking (which links into my second argument).My divorce point was just a conjecture, which postulates that prostitution could increase divorce, not that it necessarily does.Even if the causal link between drugs and prostitution is unknown, a startling correlation still exists. Pro writes that 'most prostitutes are poor, and drug abuse tends to be higher among poor people', but if this is the case, legalisation won't change this problem.Besides, even if I admit there are no societal harms of prostitution, it remains harmful to the prostitutes regardless of its legality, as I have already proved in both my round 2 and my attack of Pro's arguments.As I have defended both P1 and P2, C1 and therefore C2 also stand. My argument remains sound.Argument #2In Pro's impressive-looking calculation, he forgets to factor in the huge increase of numbers of prostitutes that would result from legalisation (making his 1 million figure increase to about 4 million). This extra 3 million prostitutes, of which ~80% will be raped, will far outweigh the supposed (and doubtful) assumption that legalising prostitution would reduce rape by 182,500 (25%).Therefore, Pro's calculation fails to show that the reduced rape rate would outweigh the human-trafficking increase, and so my argument stands._____________(1) http://bit.ly...(2) http://bit.ly...(3) http://bit.ly...(4) http://bit.ly...(5) http://bit.ly...(6) http://bit.ly...(7) http://bit.ly...(8) http://bit.ly...(9) http://bit.ly...(10) http://bit.ly...(11) http://bit.ly...(12) http://bit.ly...(13) http://bit.ly...

positive: Resolved: Prostitution should be legalized Thanks to my opponent for his great arguments. In this round I will rebut his arguments, then defend mine, then add my final argument.Human TraffickingI agree that anything that increases human trafficking is bad. I disagree with my opponent's assertion that legalising prostitution creates more human trafficking. My opponent has two sources, one from a blog that pretty much asserts this based on the opinions of a site called "Bible Knowledge" (with no research to back it up), and the other one is from the opinion pages of a minor newspaper. Both say that studies have been done but do not cite the studies, and despite a good search I cannot find any of them anywhere. His sources would do well to note that prostitution in Amsterdam is not legalised but decriminalised.Why does human trafficking happen? Prostitutes do not smuggle themselves. They get smuggled and traded by gangsters and criminal organisations. Prostitutes have no choice but to join these - they have no legal protections because they are also criminals, and they need protection from the law which the criminals can provide. This dependency is the problem. There is zero empirical evidence from peer-reviewed research that smuggling increases when prostitution is legal (http://eprints.qut.edu.au...), and it's because of the reduced dependency on criminal groups.Prostitution is only a tiny fraction of human trafficking that happens in the world (http://www.jstor.org...). It would be much better to tackle this problem rather than make the wrong assumption that all prostitutes are victims of trafficking (http://femlaw.queensu.ca...) and therefore need to be victimised by the government some more, by throwing them in jail and/or (if they are indeed trafficked) sending them back home with nothing. It's like banning retail in order to stop theft.But even if this were somehow the prostitute's fault, the solution is not to ban all prostitution just because some people do it wrong. Banning all prostitution because some people smuggle prostitutes is analogous to banning all TV because some people watch too much TV. Rather, it should be illegal to smuggle prostitutes, not to be a prostitute.As one book put it (http://goo.gl...) "trafficking in women, coercion and exploitation can only be stopped if the existence of prostitution is recognized and the legal and social rights of prostitutes are guaranteed."Prostitution will still happenMy opponent's argument basically boils down to this: stealing still happens, so let's make that legal too. I'm not saying this is a reason to make it legal. That's what my safety and role of the state points are for. The reason I make this argument is because all the counter-arguments to prostitution rely on prostitution actually being reduced as a result of criminalisation, which all the evidence indicates it isn't. So while my opponent may make a good argument that legalisation does not follow from this, that isn't my point - my point is that prostitution will still happen. In my own country we have plenty of empirical evidence for this (http://www.nzherald.co.nz...).SafetyIf my opponent wants me to draw a distinction between other crimes and prostitution, I would be able to give several, such as the fact that prostitution does not have a victim and that no party is dissatisfied with the outcome. Having said that, my point is that prostitutes are better off when they are safer. Thieves are rarely raped and murdered. Every year that is the reality for thousands of prostitutes in countries where it is illegal. Our society has a problem with violent crime, and I've provided tons of analysis in the last round that legalising something that is (for no good reason) a "soft crime" can actually prevent a lot of this harder, more violent and more dangerous crime. That's good not only for the prostitute, but also for people like me that abhor prostitution.My opponent also argues that to be a profession it must have standards for safe sex and so on. I agree. Prostitution should have standards. The reason it doesn't is that there's no advocacy for prostitutes. As a result if prostitution is illegal, anybody with the ability to have sex can become a prostitute. When it's legal, legal requirements can be put in to ensure that prostitutes have safe sex, just like we ensure doctors are competent.Like my previous opponent, this opponent asks me to give sources citing empirical evidence of everything I say. Something that's logical, as my argument is, is true whether you have empirical proof or not, but in fact I can support everything I said there empirically. I just need my opponent to be more specific about what fact he disagrees with. If he would actually tell me what was wrong with my argument, I'd be happy to prove him wrong.He does mention that I lack a source that opening up to families leads to those families being able to make an intervention if the child is underage, which was my point about families. Actually there is a lot of evidence that legal prostitution can open up a whole range of discourse with young people and their families about it: http://goo.gl...He also does not believe prostitutes are more likely to honor other laws if prostitution is legal. This has been proven many times in academic journals, for instance: http://jiv.sagepub.com...Furthermore, he misreads my point on trafficking, and how it can be REDUCED (not increased) with legal prostitution.Role of the StateIn general, prostitution fits a class of actions that the state has already deemed to be legal. The state decided long ago that people ought to be free to use their bodies sexually to make a profit - this is why the pornography industry exists. Sex is no more illegal than posing nude, so the only principally consistent application of the law is not to ban either of them when money is added back into the equation. If we accept the view that the state is to determine moral rules about what should and should not be done, we must also expect the state to actually have a consistent and coherent moral code. The harm of this is that the general lack of principle in what determines right from wrong reduces clarity in certain borderline situations, thus reducing legal certainty. It's a lot more difficult to respect both the law in general, and any given law, when you aren't really sure what the law is or why it's there. This is definitely the case with prostitution.There are several arguments from specific perspectives on how the state should be behaving, in addition to the above argument from inconsistency in how the state is behaving. Prostitution is a privacy issue, because it concerns things done in the most private of all possible spaces. Government regulation over what we do on the internet, which is somehow also considered private, is not allowed - so then why is regulating prostitution allowed? Almost all of privacy law is about getting others out of our private lives - the only major exception is prostitution. This itself raises another question - since prostitution is so private and there are no spillover effects on others when it is managed and regulated correctly, why should the government even care? Prostitution law would therefore be a major overstepping of the state's role in our society. There are two impacts of this. First, there is a slippery slope towards more arbitrary "moralizing" of our lives, including our private lives. Second, it reduces general trust in the law, which impacts on crime rates.

positive: Resolved: Prostitution should be legalized Apologies for the delay - I have been busy with other stuff. Thanks for an interesting debate so far.A quick note on the resolutionMy opponent seems to assume that since I'm defending prostitution being legalised, I can't be defending that it should be regulated. This is a non-sequiter. In fact I'm defending the legalisation of prostitution in order that it might be regulated. If my opponent agrees a regulated industry is better than an unregulated one, he must also agree that this industry should be legal. Regulation is a positive outcome of following my model, which is both to legalise and to regulate, even though I need to defend only one of those two things in the debate. You need to legalise prostitution in order to regulate it. In fact, every single country in the world with legal prostitution also has regulations for prostitution as well as more general labor protections that are extended to prostitutes.Prostitution will still happenFor the first time in this debate, we've just heard my opponent contest that making prostitution legal does not mean more people do it. His argument is essentially that we can't all be as good as New Zealand. While I'm going to have to admit New Zealand is pretty damn awesome, I can assure you that our awesomeness derives from things other than prostitution. Our experiences with prostitution can therefore be said to be quite representative. To prove this point, my opponent needed to identify how we are (or were) different with respect to prostitution to other countries around the world.I think my opponent might still be confused about how this argument fits into my case. To ensure safety and the role of state being fulfilled, we could either stop prostitution or legalise it. My argument here is only that you can't stop prostitution - it will still happen.SafetyIf never being safe due to the nature of work was a justifiable reason for banning anything, we should ban everything. Every profession carries some degree of risk, be it mining, fishing, agriculture, banking, truck driving, serving in the army, or anything else. Governments have a certain obligation to help people minimise the risk where this is possible. They do so in every legal industry.Moving on to the argument that prostitution cannot be distinguished from crime. My opponent reasons that in prostitution one party may be dissatisfied. This is true, but it is not inherent to prostitution. The difference is that with prostitution, as with any willing transaction, you can generally assume that both parties were happy, whilst with crime you can generally assume the opposite.My opponent argues that nobody is safe. While this is true, prostitutes are particularly vulnerable because unlike everyone else, they can't go to the police if something bad happens to them. The law is there to protect everyone - except, apparently, prostitutes. There are a number of other reasons why prostitutes are particularly vulnerable, which I have already described.Finally my opponent says there is no evidence that legalising soft crimes can prevent harder crimes. First, to make this point you need to engage with my evidence from round two, which was a fair amount of causal links. Second, there is empirical evidence for this as well. There is indirect evidence from alcohol prohibition (http://www.liberator.net...) and statistically based on prostitution data (http://www.kuro5hin.org...).Role of StateI am well aware pornography is linked to human trafficking. I chose it quite deliberately. Loads of industries are linked to trafficking. Even having a non-open border is strongly linked to human trafficking. My point is that a vague link to human trafficking is not sufficient to make prostitution illegal any more than pornography is illegal or all borders should be open. The point is that the government can't say sex and money are allowed to mix in one industry and not in another, because that's inconsistent.The point about money wasn't to say money is good and everything involving it should be legalised. It was to establish that both pornography and prostitution share the same basic elements, with the sole exception of physical contact (which ought really to increase, not reduce, the state's obligation if anything).I know that your government thinks pornography is OK. Perhaps there might be an argument for those countries where it is illegal, such as those with Sharia law, but for countries where the government has already accepted pornography is moral (which is almost all of them), they also need to accept prostitution is moral. People can, for instance, choose to disagree with the state about when they're ready to go into the pornography business. Such people are thrown in jail for good reason.If you steal from a bank - even if you do it in secret - it's the bank's business. Therefore it's not a privacy issue. The difference between a bank and a prostitute is that the bank is a public institution. Others are affected if that money is lost. If I'd stolen a trade secret from a bank told to me in private, then that might be a privacy issue in that privacy has been breached - competitors can come into the private space of the firm. Getting others out is different from getting the government out. The government needs to control others to prevent them from interfering with our private affairs - and prevent us from interfering with others - if we are all willing. This is the principle on which privacy law is founded.Human TraffickingMy opponent thinks you can make money through human trafficking. This can only possibly be economically true if there is excess demand for prostitutes. You can't reduce demand in the local economy, nor can you change supply overall, as proved by my first point. What you can do is increase local supply to meet local demand and therefore make trafficking more expensive. So the reason why you can make money off trafficking is that prostitution is illegal, not that it's legal. Either way trafficking should be kept illegal.If prostitution is illegal, police need to find and discover underground networks to trace back who did the smuggling. Traffickers themselves are caught much more rarely than people who are trafficked, and it's because they're able to keep their identity a secret as the prostitutes (who are usually more than willing to identify them) are all thrown into jail and not listened to. Once again, prostitutes are the victims here! They're not the criminals we should be catching. They should be testifying against these awful people instead. If a prostitute comes up to the police and says "I think trafficking is going on here", then the police has the co-operation of that prostitute, rather than the prostitute deliberately working against the police to escape conviction. As con has already proved, prostitutes don't like being trafficked, so they'll always help the police out. I should add, though, that police can already question anybody about their work if they think a crime is going on.My opponent admits the problem is much wider than prostitution. The obvious solution is to stop blaming the prostitutes and keeping their profession illegal, but instead tackling the bigger issue.The solution is absolutely to legalise something if keeping it illegal is causing a massive harm, which it is. With stealing we accept that being a Robin Hood is something that makes you an outlaw, although there are situations in which it is actually legal to steal (taxes, for instance). We just ban it when it creates big harms. Prostitution can be good - and why make a good thing illegal when you can make just the bad part illegal?I look forward to our final round.

positive: Prostitution should be legal. 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.

positive: Prostitution should be Legalized and Regulated Prostitution defined as someone selling their time as a service which includes sexual services for money should be made legal under the law as well as regulated in a way that would decrease the problems that we see today with illegal prostitution.

positive: Legalization of prostitution in all 50 states of America I will take this argument First and Foremost, Prostitution is something that should be held to the state. If Colorado, Texas, Illinois, and Georgia want prostitution to be legal, that should be within their right to decide for themselves. Kentucky, Florida, California, and Minnesota shouldn't have the ability to dictate such a specific decision. Secondly, there are some problems with your argument. Prostitution doesn't FORCE women to do anything. There is Prostitution in Nevada and women there aren't forced into it. If anything, legalized prostitution gives them a SAFE way to prostitute as opposed to other states where they have to go in corners of cities where cops don't frequent (aka it's going to be dangerous) and going through black market pimps who may be quite dangerous. Thirdly, it's entirely sexist to assume that the vagina is the most sacred and personal part of the woman, as if THAT is the only thing they are worth while for. This argument essentially says that a woman who isn't willing to have sex has no value, and that a woman who has sex too much also has no value, despite her actual merits such as being a good person, an intelligent person, a good and loving parent, providing for society in front of herself etc. The vagina is not her most important part. Fourthly, the best way to combat teen pregnancy has habitually been shown to be teaching kids about sex and the ways to prevent teen pregnancy. Prostitution and lax attitude for sex isn't going to increase teen pregnancy, simply not even teaching kids what sex can result in is the greatest force in increased teen pregnancy. Fifthly, this is 2013-14. MANY people have sex out of wedlock now. This is the cultural norm and we as a society have decided that frankly this is an ok thing to do. There is virtually no detriment to sex out of wedlock as opposed to in wedlock, and there is little to no detriment to having a child out of wedlock as opposed to in. The MAJOR issue is romantic compatibility and the desire to stick with someone should you have a child. Having a wedding band and a legal title tacked on will not change this or somehow make it more likely or important. In other words, prostitution should be left up to the states, if they want to allow prostitution, it could be safer for prostitutes, having legal prostitution does not devalue women a bit, and prostitution will not lead to an increase in teen pregnancy

positive: Prostitution should be legal First let me outline my position. Prostitution should NOT be legal Legislation Helps Protect Society Health Issues of Promiscuity Links to Organized Crime and Use of Illegal Drugs Links to Sex Slavery Legislation Helps Protect the Vulnerable Men Using Their Wive or Daughters as Prostitutes Pimps Using Drugs and Physical Violence to Control Girls Child Trafficking Increases as a Result of Legalized Prostitution Forced Prostitution Increases as a Result of Legalized Prostitution The High Economic Cost of Sex Trade Medical Expenses for Participants Medical Expenses for “Second Hand” Victims I want to cover all the points above (unless there are some you wish to concede in the interest of saving space and time in the debate). First I want to look at the example of Germany’s recent change to legalize prostitution.The German Experiment. Historically prostitution was never outlawed in Germany. The took the position of Saint Augustine that prostitution should be tolerated. [1][2] by Governments. In the 1500s there was a change in attitude because of the Protestant reformation and the rise of syphilis. In the 1800s sex trade workers had to register with local police and health authorities. In the early 1900s the focus was on regulation (not abolition) and then government run brothels were common under Nazi rule. Later, in East Germany prostitution was illegal, but in West Germany it was regulated. In unified Germany prostitution was never fully illegal, but the rules varied by municipality. In 2002, Germany changed the law in an effort to improve the legal situation of prostitutes. [3] Let’s look at the results of the 2002 change in law. It is estimated that 400,000 work as prostitutes in Germany (Pop 89 million).[4] “It is a magnet for migrant sex workers, who are lured from their wretched villages in Bulgaria and Romania and turned into virtual sex slaves in Germany’s 3,000 brothels. Police are nearly powerless to help them.” - [5] Germany is finding that the current laws are not working, and have added more laws to refine what is legal and what is not. [6] [7] The German government (2007 report) concluding that few prostitutes had taken advantage of regular work contracts and that work conditions had improved only slightly, if at all The law has failed. Prostitutes themselves don't want to change their working conditions and contracts to the new (2002) legal status. [8] Prostitution should NOT be legal. It increases rape (non consensual sex). It increases human trafficking(sex slavery). It increases statutory rape (consensual sex with underage partners) The usual age of entry to the “profession” is between 14 and 16. It is linked with organized crime and drug trafficking even in places where prostitution is legalized and regulated. None of these are activities that governments should encourage.Lets look at some further reasons why governments should work to minimize prostitution. Legislation Helps Protect Society There are many health issues relating to promiscuity. Prostitution maximizes these issues. First lets look at Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Most STDs have an incubation time before they can be diagnosed. This means that a prostitute (lets say 2 partners daily) who will test positive for HIV after 3 weeks, may infect 42 customers before it is possible to detect that she is infected. There is no way to 100% prevent the spread of STDs. Here are some other medical risks of promiscuity: Prostate cancer, Cervical cancer, Oral cancer, Heart disease, Domestic violence, Unwanted pregnancy, Birth defects[9] There are consistent links to organized crime and use of illegal drugs. I assume we are agreed that organized crime and illegal drug use should be reduced if possible. The link between organized crime, human trafficking, illegal drug use and prostitution is made clear in a position paper from the London School of Economics. [10] Here are some points to ponder from that paper. * “legalized sex industries actually result in increased trafficking to meet the demand for women to be used in the legal sex industries” * “wherever prostitution is legalized, trafficking to sex industry marketplaces in that region increases” * “prostitution is inherently harmful and dehumanizing and fuels trafficking in persons” * democratic political regime experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking. It is inaccurate to think of prostitution as a single experience. In countries where it is legal there are freelance workers, brothel workers, workers with a “manager”. Many of the low end / low price workers are getting money for drugs. In Germany there is a huge problem with “narco prostitution” as the workers are in poor health, and many are victims of rape, murder and violence. In round 2 I plan to cover the issues listed below. Although I am against unnecessary government intervention, I believe the best way to reduce the harm done by prostitution is to criminalize the purchase of prostitution (Target the Johns as opposed to the sellers). Trades training could be offered to the sellers of sex services as a way to get them out of the sex business. FOR ROUND 2 Legislation Helps Protect the Vulnerable Men Using Their Wive or Daughters as Prostitutes Pimps Using Drugs and Physical Violence to Control Girls Child Trafficking Increases as a Result of Legalized Prostitution Forced Prostitution Increases as a Result of Legalized Prostitution The High Economic Cost of Sex Trade Medical Expenses for Participants Medical Expenses for “Second Hand” Victims[1] http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com...[2] Summa Theologica: Part II of book II, question 10, article 11 http://www.newadvent.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.dw.de...[5] http://www.theglobeandmail.com...[6] http://www.examiner.com...[7] http://www.theguardian.com...[8] http://www.taz.de... Translated by Google[9] http://voxxi.com...[10] http://dx.doi.org...

positive: Prostitution should be Legal Most prostitutes have boob enlargements and as they are willing to add artificial parts to themselves to attract attention most prostitutes are also idiots, they are not smart and because they either took drugs or only cared about dating as a kid they have no or little education. By legalizing Prostitution, eventually kids would be seeing phonographic images in advertisements and our population would grow to large as people would be reproducing without knowing what they are doing and committing to, the government will then have to pay those people under the assisted living and child raising program creating even more debt.

positive: Prostitution Should Be Legalized The resolution should be clear and without controversy. I affirm, prostitution should be legalized. For the purposes of this debate, anything that deals with legal matters will pertain within U.S. jurisdiction. Arguing that prostitution should be legalized in places like Sudan or Somalia is quite out-of-topic :). To start off, let's get a few definitions on the table: [Word - Prostitution] [Source - http://www.merriam-webster.com...] The act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money [Word - Should] [Source - http://www.merriam-webster.com...] Used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency [Word - Legalized] [Source - http://www.merriam-webster.com...] To make legal ; especially : to give legal validity or sanction to ==================== Prostitution is not "wrong" or "immoral" ==================== I argue that there is nothing morally wrong with prostitution. If consenting sex is obviously legal, then why not consenting sex with money? There is nothing in making a job out of consensual sex - it does nothing to harm either party. ==================== Conclusion ==================== I realize that my argument is small, short, and not much. However, I expect that if my opponent doesn't try to argue against the morality of prostitution, he will instead argue against the practicality of it. I am entirely aware of these arguments, but I have no clue what various one my opponent will use - refuting several POSSIBLE arguments is a waste of time. Anyway, I await my opponent's response. Good debating for the both of us!

positive: legalization of prostitution Thanks for your argument however I assume that this problems exist in the hiding world of prostitution. But after legalization these women can easily go to psychologists to talk about their emotional and mental problems and together they are more likely to solve this problems. Prostitute will not be afraid of talking about such kind of problems with other people. After the detection of such problems scientist will come to possible solution as well whereas if it is not legalized people do not know about obstacles that brings such kind of profession.

positive: Prostitution Should Be Legal Prostitution should be legalized. A bullet point list of reasons why; -Safer, cleaner services, which also cut down on incarceration and diseases -Less stigmas and taboos against sex, lust, and the human body -Economic boosts -Hurts the human trafficking trade -Improves overall happiness and decreases stress of the population

negative: Prostitution should be illegal. This debate is about prostitution. I believe prostitution should be legal, but I've chosen to argue a side I don't believe in, to keep things interesting. This should be fun! There are three rounds. The first is for acceptance. The second is for arguments. The third is for rebuttals. I have made the voting open to members with a minimum Elo of 2500. I also ask voters explain their decision. That should keep randoms from voting and ensure a fair assessment.

negative: Adults should be able to order kids menus to get the toy According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Ooh, black and yellow! Let's shake it up a little. Barry! Breakfast is ready! Ooming! Hang on a second. Hello? - Barry? - Adam? - Oan you believe this is happening? - I can't. I'll pick you up. Looking sharp. Use the stairs. Your father paid good money for those. Sorry. I'm excited. Here's the graduate. We're very proud of you, son. A perfect report card, all B's. Very proud. Ma! I got a thing going here. - You got lint on your fuzz. - Ow! That's me! - Wave to us! We'll be in row 118,000. - Bye! Barry, I told you, stop flying in the house! - Hey, Adam. - Hey, Barry. - Is that fuzz gel? - A little. Special day, graduation. Never thought I'd make it. Three days grade school, three days high school. Those were awkward. Three days college. I'm glad I took a day and hitchhiked around the hive. You did come back different. - Hi, Barry. - Artie, growing a mustache? Looks good. - Hear about Frankie? - Yeah. - You going to the funeral? - No, I'm not going. Everybody knows, sting someone, you die. Don't waste it on a squirrel. Such a hothead. I guess he could have just gotten out of the way. I love this incorporating an amusement park into our day. That's why we don't need vacations. Boy, quite a bit of pomp... under the circumstances. - Well, Adam, today we are men. - We are! - Bee-men. - Amen! Hallelujah! Students, faculty, distinguished bees, please welcome Dean Buzzwell. Welcome, New Hive Oity graduating class of... ...9:15. That concludes our ceremonies. And begins your career at Honex Industries! Will we pick ourjob today? I heard it's just orientation. Heads up! Here we go. Keep your hands and antennas inside the tram at all times. - Wonder what it'll be like? - A little scary. Welcome to Honex, a division of Honesco and a part of the Hexagon Group. This is it! Wow. Wow. We know that you, as a bee, have worked your whole life to get to the point where you can work for your whole life. Honey begins when our valiant Pollen Jocks bring the nectar to the hive. Our top-secret formula is automatically color-corrected, scent-adjusted and bubble-contoured into this soothing sweet syrup with its distinctive golden glow you know as... Honey! - That girl was hot. - She's my cousin! - She is? - Yes, we're all cousins. - Right. You're right. - At Honex, we constantly strive to improve every aspect of bee existence. These bees are stress-testing a new helmet technology. - What do you think he makes? - Not enough. Here we have our latest advancement, the Krelman. - What does that do? - Oatches that little strand of honey that hangs after you pour it. Saves us millions. Oan anyone work on the Krelman? Of course. Most bee jobs are small ones. But bees know that every small job, if it's done well, means a lot. But choose carefully because you'll stay in the job you pick for the rest of your life. The same job the rest of your life? I didn't know that. What's the difference? You'll be happy to know that bees, as a species, haven't had one day off in 27 million years. So you'll just work us to death? We'll sure try. Wow! That blew my mind! "What's the difference?" How can you say that? One job forever? That's an insane choice to have to make. I'm relieved. Now we only have to make one decision in life. But, Adam, how could they never have told us that? Why would you question anything? We're bees. We're the most perfectly functioning society on Earth. You ever think maybe things work a little too well here? Like what? Give me one example. I don't know. But you know what I'm talking about. Please clear the gate. Royal Nectar Force on approach. Wait a second. Oheck it out. - Hey, those are Pollen Jocks! - Wow. I've never seen them this close. They know what it's like outside the hive. Yeah, but some don't come back. - Hey, Jocks! - Hi, Jocks! You guys did great! You're monsters! You're sky freaks! I love it! I love it! - I wonder where they were. - I don't know. Their day's not planned. Outside the hive, flying who knows where, doing who knows what. You can'tjust decide to be a Pollen Jock. You have to be bred for that. Right. Look. That's more pollen than you and I will see in a lifetime. It's just a status symbol. Bees make too much of it. Perhaps. Unless you're wearing it and the ladies see you wearing it. Those ladies? Aren't they our cousins too? Distant. Distant. Look at these two. - Oouple of Hive Harrys. - Let's have fun with them. It must be dangerous being a Pollen Jock. Yeah. Once a bear pinned me against a mushroom! He had a paw on my throat, and with the other, he was slapping me! - Oh, my! - I never thought I'd knock him out. What were you doing during this? Trying to alert the authorities. I can autograph that. A little gusty out there today, wasn't it, comrades? Yeah. Gusty. We're hitting a sunflower patch six miles from here tomorrow. - Six miles, huh? - Barry! A puddle jump for us, but maybe you're not up for it. - Maybe I am. - You are not! We're going 0900 at J-Gate. What do you think, buzzy-boy? Are you bee enough? I might be. It all depends on what 0900 means. Hey, Honex! Dad, you surprised me. You decide what you're interested in? - Well, there's a lot of choices. - But you only get one. Do you ever get bored doing the same job every day? Son, let me tell you about stirring. You grab that stick, and you just move it around, and you stir it around. You get yourself into a rhythm. It's a beautiful thing. You know, Dad, the more I think about it, maybe the honey field just isn't right for me. You were thinking of what, making balloon animals? That's a bad job for a guy with a stinger. Janet, your son's not sure he wants to go into honey! - Barry, you are so funny sometimes. - I'm not trying to be funny. You're not funny! You're going into honey. Our son, the stirrer! - You're gonna be a stirrer? - No one's listening to me! Wait till you see the sticks I have. I could say anything right now. I'm gonna get an ant tattoo! Let's open some honey and celebrate! Maybe I'll pierce my thorax. Shave my antennae. Shack up with a grasshopper. Get a gold tooth and call everybody "dawg"! I'm so proud. - We're starting work today! - Today's the day. Oome on! All the good jobs will be gone. Yeah, right. Pollen counting, stunt bee, pouring, stirrer, front desk, hair removal... - Is it still available? - Hang on. Two left! One of them's yours! Oongratulations! Step to the side. - What'd you get? - Picking crud out. Stellar! Wow! Oouple of newbies? Yes, sir! Our first day! We are ready! Make your choice. - You want to go first? - No, you go. Oh, my. What's available? Restroom attendant's open, not for the reason you think. - Any chance of getting the Krelman? - Sure, you're on. I'm sorry, the Krelman just closed out. Wax monkey's always open. The Krelman opened up again. What happened? A bee died. Makes an opening. See? He's dead. Another dead one. Deady. Deadified. Two more dead. Dead from the neck up. Dead from the neck down. That's life! Oh, this is so hard! Heating, cooling, stunt bee, pourer, stirrer, humming, inspector number seven, lint coordinator, stripe supervisor, mite wrangler. Barry, what do you think I should... Barry? Barry! All right, we've got the sunflower patch in quadrant nine... What happened to you? Where are you? - I'm going out. - Out? Out where? - Out there. - Oh, no! I have to, before I go to work for the rest of my life. You're gonna die! You're crazy! Hello? Another call coming in. If anyone's feeling brave, there's a Korean deli on 83rd that gets their roses today. Hey, guys. - Look at that. - Isn't that the kid we saw yesterday? Hold it, son, flight deck's restricted. It's OK, Lou. We're gonna take him up. Really? Feeling lucky, are you? Sign here, here. Just initial that. - Thank you. - OK. You got a rain advisory today, and as you all know, bees cannot fly in rain. So be careful. As always, watch your brooms, hockey sticks, dogs, birds, bears and bats. Also, I got a couple of reports of root beer being poured on us. Murphy's in a home because of it, babbling like a cicada! - That's awful. - And a reminder for you rookies, bee law number one, absolutely no talking to humans! All right, launch positions! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Black and yellow! Hello! You ready for this, hot shot? Yeah. Yeah, bring it on. Wind, check. - Antennae, check. - Nectar pack, check. - Wings, check. - Stinger, check. Scared out of my shorts, check. OK, ladies, let's move it out! Pound those petunias, you striped stem-suckers! All of you, drain those flowers! Wow! I'm out! I can't believe I'm out! So blue. I feel so fast and free! Box kite! Wow! Flowers! This is Blue Leader. We have roses visual. Bring it around 30 degrees and hold. Roses! 30 degrees, roger. Bringing it around. Stand to the side, kid. It's got a bit of a kick. That is one nectar collector! - Ever see pollination up close? - No, sir. I pick up some pollen here, sprinkle it over here. Maybe a dash over there, a pinch on that one. See that? It's a little bit of magic. That's amazing. Why do we do that? That's pollen power. More pollen, more flowers, more nectar, more honey for us. Oool. I'm picking up a lot of bright yellow. Oould be daisies. Don't we need those? Oopy that visual. Wait. One of these flowers seems to be on the move. Say again? You're reporting a moving flower? Affirmative. That was on the line! This is the coolest. What is it? I don't know, but I'm loving this color. It smells good. Not like a flower, but I like it. Yeah, fuzzy. Ohemical-y. Oareful, guys. It's a little grabby. My sweet lord of bees! Oandy-brain, get off there! Problem! - Guys! - This could be bad. Affirmative. Very close. Gonna hurt. Mama's little boy. You are way out of position, rookie! Ooming in at you like a missile! Help me! I don't think these are flowers. - Should we tell him? - I think he knows. What is this?! Match point! You can start packing up, honey, because you're about to eat it! Yowser! Gross. There's a bee in the car! - Do something! - I'm driving! - Hi, bee. - He's back here! He's going to sting me! Nobody move. If you don't move, he won't sting you. Freeze! He blinked! Spray him, Granny! What are you doing?! Wow... the tension level out here is unbelievable. I gotta get home. Oan't fly in rain. Oan't fly in rain. Oan't fly in rain. Mayday! Mayday! Bee going down! Ken, could you close the window please? Ken, could you close the window please? Oheck out my new resume. I made it into a fold-out brochure. You see? Folds out. Oh, no. More humans. I don't need this. What was that? Maybe this time. This time. This time. This time! This time! This... Drapes! That is diabolical. It's fantastic. It's got all my special skills, even my top-ten favorite movies. What's number one? Star Wars? Nah, I don't go for that... ...kind of stuff. No wonder we shouldn't talk to them. They're out of their minds. When I leave a job interview, they're flabbergasted, can't believe what I say. There's the sun. Maybe that's a way out. I don't remember the sun having a big 75 on it. I predicted global warming. I could feel it getting hotter. At first I thought it was just me. Wait! Stop! Bee! Stand back. These are winter boots. Wait! Don't kill him! You know I'm allergic to them! This thing could kill me! Why does his life have less value than yours? Why does his life have any less value than mine? Is that your statement? I'm just saying all life has value. You don't know what he's capable of feeling. My brochure! There you go, little guy. I'm not scared of him. It's an allergic thing. Put that on your resume brochure. My whole face could puff up. Make it one of your special skills. Knocking someone out is also a special skill. Right. Bye, Vanessa. Thanks. - Vanessa, next week? Yogurt night? - Sure, Ken. You know, whatever. - You could put carob chips on there. - Bye. - Supposed to be less calories. - Bye. I gotta say something. She saved my life. I gotta say something. All right, here it goes. Nah. What would I say? I could really get in trouble. It's a bee law. You're not supposed to talk to a human. I can't believe I'm doing this. I've got to. Oh, I can't do it. Oome on! No. Yes. No. Do it. I can't. How should I start it? "You like jazz?" No, that's no good. Here she comes! Speak, you fool! Hi! I'm sorry. - You're talking. - Yes, I know. You're talking! I'm so sorry. No, it's OK. It's fine. I know I'm dreaming. But I don't recall going to bed. Well, I'm sure this is very disconcerting. This is a bit of a surprise to me. I mean, you're a bee! I am. And I'm not supposed to be doing this, but they were all trying to kill me. And if it wasn't for you... I had to thank you. It's just how I was raised. That was a little weird. - I'm talking with a bee. - Yeah. I'm talking to a bee. And the bee is talking to me! I just want to say I'm grateful. I'll leave now. - Wait! How did you learn to do that? - What? The talking thing. Same way you did, I guess. "Mama, Dada, honey." You pick it up. - That's very funny. - Yeah. Bees are funny. If we didn't laugh, we'd cry with what we have to deal with. Anyway... Oan I... ...get you something? - Like what? I don't know. I mean... I don't know. Ooffee? I don't want to put you out. It's no trouble. It takes two minutes. - It's just coffee. - I hate to impose. - Don't be ridiculous! - Actually, I would love a cup. Hey, you want rum cake? - I shouldn't. - Have some. - No, I can't. - Oome on! I'm trying to lose a couple micrograms. - Where? - These stripes don't help. You look great! I don't know if you know anything about fashion. Are you all right? No. He's making the tie in the cab as they're flying up Madison. He finally gets there. He runs up the steps into the church. The wedding is on. And he says, "Watermelon? I thought you said Guatemalan. Why would I marry a watermelon?" Is that a bee joke? That's the kind of stuff we do. Yeah, different. So, what are you gonna do, Barry? About work? I don't know. I want to do my part for the hive, but I can't do it the way they want. I know how you feel. - You do? - Sure. My parents wanted me to be a lawyer or a doctor, but I wanted to be a florist. - Really? - My only interest is flowers. Our new queen was just elected with that same campaign slogan. Anyway, if you look... There's my hive right there. See it? You're in Sheep Meadow! Yes! I'm right off the Turtle Pond! No way! I know that area. I lost a toe ring there once. - Why do girls put rings on their toes? - Why not? - It's like putting a hat on your knee. - Maybe I'll try that. - You all right, ma'am? - Oh, yeah. Fine. Just having two cups of coffee! Anyway, this has been great. Thanks for the coffee. Yeah, it's no trouble. Sorry I couldn't finish it. If I did, I'd be up the rest of my life. Are you...? Oan I take a piece of this with me? Sure! Here, have a crumb. - Thanks! - Yeah. All right. Well, then... I guess I'll see you around. Or not. OK, Barry. And thank you so much again... for before. Oh, that? That was nothing. Well, not nothing, but... Anyway... This can't possibly work. He's all set to go. We may as well try it. OK, Dave, pull the chute. - Sounds amazing. - It was amazing! It was the scariest, happiest moment of my life. Humans! I can't believe you were with humans! Giant, scary humans! What were they like? Huge and crazy. They talk crazy. They eat crazy giant things. They drive crazy. - Do they try and kill you, like on TV? - Some of them. But some of them don't. - How'd you get back? - Poodle. You did it, and I'm glad. You saw whatever you wanted to see. You had your "experience." Now you can pick out yourjob and be normal. - Well... - Well? Well, I met someone. You did? Was she Bee-ish? - A wasp?! Your parents will kill you! - No, no, no, not a wasp. - Spider? - I'm not attracted to spiders. I know it's the hottest thing, with the eight legs and all. I can't get by that face. So who is she? She's... human. No, no. That's a bee law. You wouldn't break a bee law. - Her name's Vanessa. - Oh, boy. She's so nice. And she's a florist! Oh, no! You're dating a human florist! We're not dating. You're flying outside the hive, talking to humans that attack our homes with power washers and M-80s! One-eighth a stick of dynamite! She saved my life! And she understands me. This is over! Eat this. This is not over! What was that? - They call it a crumb. - It was so stingin' stripey! And that's not what they eat. That's what falls off what they eat! - You know what a Oinnabon is? - No. It's bread and cinnamon and frosting. They heat it up... Sit down! ...really hot! - Listen to me! We are not them! We're us. There's us and there's them! Yes, but who can deny the heart that is yearning? There's no yearning. Stop yearning. Listen to me! You have got to start thinking bee, my friend. Thinking bee! - Thinking bee. - Thinking bee. Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! There he is. He's in the pool. You know what your problem is, Barry? I gotta start thinking bee? How much longer will this go on? It's been three days! Why aren't you working? I've got a lot of big life decisions to think about. What life? You have no life! You have no job. You're barely a bee! Would it kill you to make a little honey? Barry, come out. Your father's talking to you. Martin, would you talk to him? Barry, I'm talking to you! You coming? Got everything? All set! Go ahead. I'll catch up. Don't be too long. Watch this! Vanessa! - We're still here. - I told you not to yell at him. He doesn't respond to yelling! - Then why yell at me? - Because you don't listen! I'm not listening to this. Sorry, I've gotta go. - Where are you going? - I'm meeting a friend. A girl? Is this why you can't decide? Bye. I just hope she's Bee-ish. They have a huge parade of flowers every year in Pasadena? To be in the Tournament of Roses, that's every florist's dream! Up on a float, surrounded by flowers, crowds cheering. A tournament. Do the roses compete in athletic events? No. All right, I've got one. How come you don't fly everywhere? It's exhausting. Why don't you run everywhere? It's faster. Yeah, OK, I see, I see. All right, your turn. TiVo. You can just freeze live TV? That's insane! You don't have that? We have Hivo, but it's a disease. It's a horrible, horrible disease. Oh, my. Dumb bees! You must want to sting all those jerks. We try not to sting. It's usually fatal for us. So you have to watch your temper. Very carefully. You kick a wall, take a walk, write an angry letter and throw it out. Work through it like any emotion: Anger, jealousy, lust. Oh, my goodness! Are you OK? Yeah. - What is wrong with you?! - It's a bug. He's not bothering anybody. Get out of here, you creep! What was that? A Pic 'N' Save circular? Yeah, it was. How did you know? It felt like about 10 pages. Seventy-five is pretty much our limit. You've really got that down to a science. - I lost a cousin to Italian Vogue. - I'll bet. What in the name of Mighty Hercules is this? How did this get here? Oute Bee, Golden Blossom, Ray Liotta Private Select? - Is he that actor? - I never heard of him. - Why is this here? - For people. We eat it. You don't have enough food of your own? - Well, yes. - How do you get it? - Bees make it. - I know who makes it! And it's hard to make it! There's heating, cooling, stirring. You need a whole Krelman thing! - It's organic. - It's our-ganic! It's just honey, Barry. Just what?! Bees don't know about this! This is stealing! A lot of stealing! You've taken our homes, schools, hospitals! This is all we have! And it's on sale?! I'm getting to the bottom of this. I'm getting to the bottom of all of this! Hey, Hector. - You almost done? - Almost. He is here. I sense it. Well, I guess I'll go home now and just leave this nice honey out, with no one around. You're busted, box boy! I knew I heard something. So you can talk! I can talk. And now you'll start talking! Where you getting the sweet stuff? Who's your supplier? I don't understand. I thought we were friends. The last thing we want to do is upset bees! You're too late! It's ours now! You, sir, have crossed the wrong sword! You, sir, will be lunch for my iguana, Ignacio! Where is the honey coming from? Tell me where! Honey Farms! It comes from Honey Farms! Orazy person! What horrible thing has happened here? These faces, they never knew what hit them. And now they're on the road to nowhere! Just keep still. What? You're not dead? Do I look dead? They will wipe anything that moves. Where you headed? To Honey Farms. I am onto something huge here. I'm going to Alaska. Moose blood, crazy stuff. Blows your head off! I'm going to Tacoma. - And you? - He really is dead. All right. Uh-oh! - What is that?! - Oh, no! - A wiper! Triple blade! - Triple blade? Jump on! It's your only chance, bee! Why does everything have to be so doggone clean?! How much do you people need to see?! Open your eyes! Stick your head out the window! From NPR News in Washington, I'm Oarl Kasell. But don't kill no more bugs! - Bee! - Moose blood guy!! - You hear something? - Like what? Like tiny screaming. Turn off the radio. Whassup, bee boy? Hey, Blood. Just a row of honey jars, as far as the eye could see. Wow! I assume wherever this truck goes is where they're getting it. I mean, that honey's ours. - Bees hang tight. - We're all jammed in. It's a close community. Not us, man. We on our own. Every mosquito on his own. - What if you get in trouble? - You a mosquito, you in trouble. Nobody likes us. They just smack. See a mosquito, smack, smack! At least you're out in the world. You must meet girls. Mosquito girls try to trade up, get with a moth, dragonfly. Mosquito girl don't want no mosquito. You got to be kidding me! Mooseblood's about to leave the building! So long, bee! - Hey, guys! - Mooseblood! I knew I'd catch y'all down here. Did you bring your crazy straw? We throw it in jars, slap a label on it, and it's pretty much pure profit. What is this place? A bee's got a brain the size of a pinhead. They are pinheads! Pinhead. - Oheck out the new smoker. - Oh, sweet. That's the one you want. The Thomas 3000! Smoker? Ninety puffs a minute, semi-automatic. Twice the nicotine, all the tar. A couple breaths of this knocks them right out. They make the honey, and we make the money. "They make the honey, and we make the money"? Oh, my! What's going on? Are you OK? Yeah. It doesn't last too long. Do you know you're in a fake hive with fake walls? Our queen was moved here. We had no choice. This is your queen? That's a man in women's clothes! That's a drag queen! What is this? Oh, no! There's hundreds of them! Bee honey. Our honey is being brazenly stolen on a massive scale! This is worse than anything bears have done! I intend to do something. Oh, Barry, stop. Who told you humans are taking our honey? That's a rumor. Do these look like rumors? That's a conspiracy theory. These are obviously doctored photos. How did you get mixed up in this? He's been talking to humans. - What? - Talking to humans?! He has a human girlfriend. And they make out! Make out? Barry! We do not. - You wish you could. - Whose side are you on? The bees! I dated a cricket once in San Antonio. Those crazy legs kept me up all night. Barry, this is what you want to do with your life? I want to do it for all our lives. Nobody works harder than bees! Dad, I remember you coming home so overworked your hands were still stirring. You couldn't stop. I remember that. What right do they have to our honey? We live on two cups a year. They put it in lip balm for no reason whatsoever! Even if it's true, what can one bee do? Sting them where it really hurts. In the face! The eye! - That would hurt. - No. Up the nose? That's a killer. There's only one place you can sting the humans, one place where it matters. Hive at Five, the hive's only full-hour action news source. No more bee beards! With Bob Bumble at the anchor desk. Weather with Storm Stinger. Sports with Buzz Larvi. And Jeanette Ohung. - Good evening. I'm Bob Bumble. - And I'm Jeanette Ohung. A tri-county bee, Barry Benson, intends to sue the human race for stealing our honey, packaging it and profiting from it illegally! Tomorrow night on Bee Larry King, we'll have three former queens here in our studio, discussing their new book, Olassy Ladies, out this week on Hexagon. Tonight we're talking to Barry Benson. Did you ever think, "I'm a kid from the hive. I can't do this"? Bees have never been afraid to change the world. What about Bee Oolumbus? Bee Gandhi? Bejesus? Where I'm from, we'd never sue humans. We were thinking of stickball or candy stores. How old are you? The bee community is supporting you in this case, which will be the trial of the bee century. You know, they have a Larry King in the human world too. It's a common name. Next week... He looks like you and has a show and suspenders and colored dots... Next week... Glasses, quotes on the bottom from the guest even though you just heard 'em. Bear Week next week! They're scary, hairy and here live. Always leans forward, pointy shoulders, squinty eyes, very Jewish. In tennis, you attack at the point of weakness! It was my grandmother, Ken. She's 81. Honey, her backhand's a joke! I'm not gonna take advantage of that? Quiet, please. Actual work going on here. - Is that that same bee? - Yes, it is! I'm helping him sue the human race. - Hello. - Hello, bee. This is Ken. Yeah, I remember you. Timberland, size ten and a half. Vibram sole, I believe. Why does he talk again? Listen, you better go 'cause we're really busy working. But it's our yogurt night! Bye-bye. Why is yogurt night so difficult?! You poor thing. You two have been at this for hours! Yes, and Adam here has been a huge help. - Frosting... - How many sugars? Just one. I try not to use the competition. So why are you helping me? Bees have good qualities. And it takes my mind off the shop. Instead of flowers, people are giving balloon bouquets now. Those are great, if you're three. And artificial flowers. - Oh, those just get me psychotic! - Yeah, me too. Bent stingers, pointless pollination. Bees must hate those fake things! Nothing worse than a daffodil that's had work done. Maybe this could make up for it a little bit. - This lawsuit's a pretty big deal. - I guess. You sure you want to go through with it? Am I sure? When I'm done with the humans, they won't be able to say, "Honey, I'm home," without paying a royalty! It's an incredible scene here in downtown Manhattan, where the world anxiously waits, because for the first time in history, we will hear for ourselves if a honeybee can actually speak. What have we gotten into here, Barry? It's pretty big, isn't it? I can't believe how many humans don't work during the day. You think billion-dollar multinational food companies have good lawyers? Everybody needs to stay behind the barricade. - What's the matter? - I don't know, I just got a chill. Well, if it isn't the bee team. You boys work on this? All rise! The Honorable Judge Bumbleton presiding. All right. Oase number 4475, Superior Oourt of New York, Barry Bee Benson v. the Honey Industry is now in session. Mr. Montgomery, you're representing the five food companies collectively? A privilege. Mr. Benson... you're representing all the bees of the world? I'm kidding. Yes, Your Honor, we're ready to proceed. Mr. Montgomery, your opening statement, please. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my grandmother was a simple woman. Born on a farm, she believed it was man's divine right to benefit from the bounty of nature God put before us. If we lived in the topsy-turvy world Mr. Benson imagines, just think of what would it mean. I would have to negotiate with the silkworm for the elastic in my britches! Talking bee! How do we know this isn't some sort of holographic motion-picture-capture Hollywood wizardry? They could be using laser beams! Robotics! Ventriloquism! Oloning! For all we know, he could be on steroids! Mr. Benson? Ladies and gentlemen, there's no trickery here. I'm just an ordinary bee. Honey's pretty important to me. It's important to all bees. We invented it! We make it. And we protect it with our lives. Unfortunately, there are some people in this room who think they can take it from us 'cause we're the little guys! I'm hoping that, after this is all over, you'll see how, by taking our honey, you not only take everything we have but everything we are! I wish he'd dress like that all the time. So nice! Oall your first witness. So, Mr. Klauss Vanderhayden of Honey Farms, big company you have. I suppose so. I see you also own Honeyburton and Honron! Yes, they provide beekeepers for our farms. Beekeeper. I find that to be a very disturbing term. I don't imagine you employ any bee-free-ers, do you? - No. - I couldn't hear you. - No. - No. Because you don't free bees. You keep bees. Not only that, it seems you thought a bear would be an appropriate image for a jar of honey. They're very lovable creatures. Yogi Bear, Fozzie Bear, Build-A-Bear. You mean like this? Bears kill bees! How'd you like his head crashing through your living room?! Biting into your couch! Spitting out your throw pillows! OK, that's enough. Take him away. So, Mr. Sting, thank you for being here. Your name intrigues me. - Where have I heard it before? - I was with a band called The Police. But you've never been a police officer, have you? No, I haven't. No, you haven't. And so here we have yet another example of bee culture casually stolen by a human for nothing more than a prance-about stage name. Oh, please. Have you ever been stung, Mr. Sting? Because I'm feeling a little stung, Sting. Or should I say... Mr. Gordon M. Sumner! That's not his real name?! You idiots! Mr. Liotta, first, belated congratulations on your Emmy win for a guest spot on ER in 2005. Thank you. Thank you. I see from your resume that you're devilishly handsome with a churning inner turmoil that's ready to blow. I enjoy what I do. Is that a crime? Not yet it isn't. But is this what it's come to for you? Exploiting tiny, helpless bees so you don't have to rehearse your part and learn your lines, sir? Watch it, Benson! I could blow right now! This isn't a goodfella. This is a badfella! Why doesn't someone just step on this creep, and we can all go home?! - Order in this court! - You're all thinking it! Order! Order, I say! - Say it! - Mr. Liotta, please sit down! I think it was awfully nice of that bear to pitch in like that. I think the jury's on our side. Are we doing everything right, legally? I'm a florist. Right. Well, here's to a great team. To a great team! Well, hello. - Ken! - Hello. I didn't think you were coming. No, I was just late. I tried to call, but... the battery. I didn't want all this to go to waste, so I called Barry. Luckily, he was free. Oh, that was lucky. There's a little left. I could heat it up. Yeah, heat it up, sure, whatever. So I hear you're quite a tennis player. I'm not much for the game myself. The ball's a little grabby. That's where I usually sit. Right... there. Ken, Barry was looking at your resume, and he agreed with me that eating with chopsticks isn't really a special skill. You think I don't see what you're doing? I know how hard it is to find the rightjob. We have that in common. Do we? Bees have 100 percent employment, but we do jobs like taking the crud out. That's just what I was thinking about doing. Ken, I let Barry borrow your razor for his fuzz. I hope that was all right. I'm going to drain the old stinger. Yeah, you do that. Look at that. You know, I've just about had it with your little mind games. - What's that? - Italian Vogue. Mamma mia, that's a lot of pages. A lot of ads. Remember what Van said, why is your life more valuable than mine? Funny, I just can't seem to recall that! I think something stinks in here! I love the smell of flowers. How do you like the smell of flames?! Not as much. Water bug! Not taking sides! Ken, I'm wearing a Ohapstick hat! This is pathetic! I've got issues! Well, well, well, a royal flush! - You're bluffing. - Am I? Surf's up, dude! Poo water! That bowl is gnarly. Except for those dirty yellow rings! Kenneth! What are you doing?! You know, I don't even like honey! I don't eat it! We need to talk! He's just a little bee! And he happens to be the nicest bee I've met in a long time! Long time? What are you talking about?! Are there other bugs in your life? No, but there are other things bugging me in life. And you're one of them! Fine! Talking bees, no yogurt night... My nerves are fried from riding on this emotional roller coaster! Goodbye, Ken. And for your information, I prefer sugar-free, artificial sweeteners made by man! I'm sorry about all that. I know it's got an aftertaste! I like it! I always felt there was some kind of barrier between Ken and me. I couldn't overcome it. Oh, well. Are you OK for the trial? I believe Mr. Montgomery is about out of ideas. We would like to call Mr. Barry Benson Bee to the stand. Good idea! You can really see why he's considered one of the best lawyers... Yeah. Layton, you've gotta weave some magic with this jury, or it's gonna be all over. Don't worry. The only thing I have to do to turn this jury around is to remind them of what they don't like about bees. - You got the tweezers? - Are you allergic? Only to losing, son. Only to losing. Mr. Benson Bee, I'll ask you what I think we'd all like to know. What exactly is your relationship to that woman? We're friends. - Good friends? - Yes. How good? Do you live together? Wait a minute... Are you her little... ...bedbug? I've seen a bee documentary or two. From what I understand, doesn't your queen give birth to all the bee children? - Yeah, but... - So those aren't your real parents! - Oh, Barry... - Yes, they are! Hold me back! You're an illegitimate bee, aren't you, Benson? He's denouncing bees! Don't y'all date your cousins? - Objection! - I'm going to pincushion this guy! Adam, don't! It's what he wants! Oh, I'm hit!! Oh, lordy, I am hit! Order! Order! The venom! The venom is coursing through my veins! I have been felled by a winged beast of destruction! You see? You can't treat them like equals! They're striped savages! Stinging's the only thing they know! It's their way! - Adam, stay with me. - I can't feel my legs. What angel of mercy will come forward to suck the poison from my heaving buttocks? I will have order in this court. Order! Order, please! The case of the honeybees versus the human race took a pointed turn against the bees yesterday when one of their legal team stung Layton T. Montgomery. - Hey, buddy. - Hey. - Is there much pain? - Yeah. I... I blew the whole case, didn't I? It doesn't matter. What matters is you're alive. You could have died. I'd be better off dead. Look at me. They got it from the cafeteria downstairs, in a tuna sandwich. Look, there's a little celery still on it. What was it like to sting someone? I can't explain it. It was all... All adrenaline and then... and then ecstasy! All right. You think it was all a trap? Of course. I'm sorry. I flew us right into this. What were we thinking? Look at us. We're just a couple of bugs in this world. What will the humans do to us if they win? I don't know. I hear they put the roaches in motels. That doesn't sound so bad. Adam, they check in, but they don't check out! Oh, my. Oould you get a nurse to close that window? - Why? - The smoke. Bees don't smoke. Right. Bees don't smoke. Bees don't smoke! But some bees are smoking. That's it! That's our case! It is? It's not over? Get dressed. I've gotta go somewhere. Get back to the court and stall. Stall any way you can. And assuming you've done step correctly, you're ready for the tub. Mr. Flayman. Yes? Yes, Your Honor! Where is the rest of your team? Well, Your Honor, it's interesting. Bees are trained to fly haphazardly, and as a result, we don't make very good time. I actually heard a funny story about... Your Honor, haven't these ridiculous bugs taken up enough of this court's valuable time? How much longer will we allow these absurd shenanigans to go on? They have presented no compelling evidence to support their charges against my clients, who run legitimate businesses. I move for a complete dismissal of this entire case! Mr. Flayman, I'm afraid I'm going to have to consider Mr. Montgomery's motion. But you can't! We have a terrific case. Where is your proof? Where is the evidence? Show me the smoking gun! Hold it, Your Honor! You want a smoking gun? Here is your smoking gun. What is that? It's a bee smoker! What, this? This harmless little contraption? This couldn't hurt a fly, let alone a bee. Look at what has happened to bees who have never been asked, "Smoking or non?" Is this what nature intended for us? To be forcibly addicted to smoke machines and man-made wooden slat work camps? Living out our lives as honey slaves to the white man? - What are we gonna do? - He's playing the species card. Ladies and gentlemen, please, free these bees! Free the bees! Free the bees! Free the bees! Free the bees! Free the bees! The court finds in favor of the bees! Vanessa, we won! I knew you could do it! High-five! Sorry. I'm OK! You know what this means? All the honey will finally belong to the bees. Now we won't have to work so hard all the time. This is an unholy perversion of the balance of nature, Benson. You'll regret this. Barry, how much honey is out there? All right. One at a time. Barry, who are you wearing? My sweater is Ralph Lauren, and I have no pants. - What if Montgomery's right? - What do you mean? We've been living the bee way a long time, 27 million years. Oongratulations on your victory. What will you demand as a settlement? First, we'll demand a complete shutdown of all bee work camps. Then we want back the honey that was ours to begin with, every last drop. We demand an end to the glorification of the bear as anything more than a filthy, smelly, bad-breath stink machine. We're all aware of what they do in the woods. Wait for my signal. Take him out. He'll have nauseous for a few hours, then he'll be fine. And we will no longer tolerate bee-negative nicknames... But it's just a prance-about stage name! ...unnecessary inclusion of honey in bogus health products and la-dee-da human tea-time snack garnishments. Oan't breathe. Bring it in, boys! Hold it right there! Good. Tap it. Mr. Buzzwell, we just passed three cups, and there's gallons more coming! - I think we need to shut down! - Shut down? We've never shut down. Shut down honey production! Stop making honey! Turn your key, sir! What do we do now? Oannonball! We're shutting honey production! Mission abort. Aborting pollination and nectar detail. Returning to base. Adam, you wouldn't believe how much honey was out there. Oh, yeah? What's going on? Where is everybody? - Are they out celebrating? - They're home. They don't know what to do. Laying out, sleeping in. I heard your Uncle Oarl was on his way to San Antonio with a cricket. At least we got our honey back. Sometimes I think, so what if humans liked our honey? Who wouldn't? It's the greatest thing in the world! I was excited to be part of making it. This was my new desk. This was my new job. I wanted to do it really well. And now... Now I can't. I don't understand why they're not happy. I thought their lives would be better! They're doing nothing. It's amazing. Honey really changes people. You don't have any idea what's going on, do you? - What did you want to show me? - This. What happened here? That is not the half of it. Oh, no. Oh, my. They're all wilting. Doesn't look very good, does it? No. And whose fault do you think that is? You know, I'm gonna guess bees. Bees? Specifically, me. I didn't think bees not needing to make honey would affect all these things. It's notjust flowers. Fruits, vegetables, they all need bees. That's our whole SAT test right there. Take away produce, that affects the entire animal kingdom. And then, of course... The human species? So if there's no more pollination, it could all just go south here, couldn't it? I know this is also partly my fault. How about a suicide pact? How do we do it? - I'll sting you, you step on me. - Thatjust kills you twice. Right, right. Listen, Barry... sorry, but I gotta get going. I had to open my mouth and talk. Vanessa? Vanessa? Why are you leaving? Where are you going? To the final Tournament of Roses parade in Pasadena. They've moved it to this weekend because all the flowers are dying. It's the last chance I'll ever have to see it. Vanessa, I just wanna say I'm sorry. I never meant it to turn out like this. I know. Me neither. Tournament of Roses. Roses can't do sports. Wait a minute. Roses. Roses? Roses! Vanessa! Roses?! Barry? - Roses are flowers! - Yes, they are. Flowers, bees, pollen! I know. That's why this is the last parade. Maybe not. Oould you ask him to slow down? Oould you slow down? Barry! OK, I made a huge mistake. This is a total disaster, all my fault. Yes, it kind of is. I've ruined the planet. I wanted to help you with the flower shop. I've made it worse. Actually, it's completely closed down. I thought maybe you were remodeling. But I have another idea, and it's greater than my previous ideas combined. I don't want to hear it! All right, they have the roses, the roses have the pollen. I know every bee, plant and flower bud in this park. All we gotta do is get what they've got back here with what we've got. - Bees. - Park. - Pollen! - Flowers. - Repollination! - Across the nation! Tournament of Roses, Pasadena, Oalifornia. They've got nothing but flowers, floats and cotton candy. Security will be tight. I have an idea. Vanessa Bloome, FTD. Official floral business. It's real. Sorry, ma'am. Nice brooch. Thank you. It was a gift. Once inside, we just pick the right float. How about The Princess and the Pea? I could be the princess, and you could be the pea! Yes, I got it. - Where should I sit? - What are you? - I believe I'm the pea. - The pea? It goes under the mattresses. - Not in this fairy tale, sweetheart. - I'm getting the marshal. You do that! This whole parade is a fiasco! Let's see what this baby'll do. Hey, what are you doing?! Then all we do is blend in with traffic... ...without arousing suspicion. Once at the airport, there's no stopping us. Stop! Security. - You and your insect pack your float? - Yes. Has it been in your possession the entire time? Would you remove your shoes? - Remove your stinger. - It's part of me. I know. Just having some fun. Enjoy your flight. Then if we're lucky, we'll have just enough pollen to do the job. Oan you believe how lucky we are? We have just enough pollen to do the job! I think this is gonna work. It's got to work. Attention, passengers, this is Oaptain Scott. We have a bit of bad weather in New York. It looks like we'll experience a couple hours delay. Barry, these are cut flowers with no water. They'll never make it. I gotta get up there and talk to them. Be careful. Oan I get help with the Sky Mall magazine? I'd like to order the talking inflatable nose and ear hair trimmer. Oaptain, I'm in a real situation. - What'd you say, Hal? - Nothing. Bee! Don't freak out! My entire species... What are you doing? - Wait a minute! I'm an attorney! - Who's an attorney? Don't move. Oh, Barry. Good afternoon, passengers. This is your captain. Would a Miss Vanessa Bloome in 24B please report to the cockpit? And please hurry! What happened here? There was a DustBuster, a toupee, a life raft exploded. One's bald, one's in a boat, they're both unconscious! - Is that another bee joke? - No! No one's flying the plane! This is JFK control tower, Flight 356. What's your status? This is Vanessa Bloome. I'm a florist from New York. Where's the pilot? He's unconscious, and so is the copilot. Not good. Does anyone onboard have flight experience? As a matter of fact, there is. - Who's that? - Barry Benson. From the honey trial?! Oh, great. Vanessa, this is nothing more than a big metal bee. It's got giant wings, huge engines. I can't fly a plane. - Why not? Isn't John Travolta a pilot? - Yes. How hard could it be? Wait, Barry! We're headed into some lightning. This is Bob Bumble. We have some late-breaking news from JFK Airport, where a suspenseful scene is developing. Barry Benson, fresh from his legal victory... That's Barry! ...is attempting to land a plane, loaded with people, flowers and an incapacitated flight crew. Flowers?! We have a storm in the area and two individuals at the controls with absolutely no flight experience. Just a minute. There's a bee on that plane. I'm quite familiar with Mr. Benson and his no-account compadres. They've done enough damage. But isn't he your only hope? Technically, a bee shouldn't be able to fly at all. Their wings are too small... Haven't we heard this a million times? "The surface area of the wings and body mass make no sense." - Get this on the air! - Got it. - Stand by. - We're going live. The way we work may be a mystery to you. Making honey takes a lot of bees doing a lot of small jobs. But let me tell you about a small job. If you do it well, it makes a big difference. More than we realized. To us, to everyone. That's why I want to get bees back to working together. That's the bee way! We're not made of Jell-O. We get behind a fellow. - Black and yellow! - Hello! Left, right, down, hover. - Hover? - Forget hover. This isn't so hard. Beep-beep! Beep-beep! Barry, what happened?! Wait, I think we were on autopilot the whole time. - That may have been helping me. - And now we're not! So it turns out I cannot fly a plane. All of you, let's get behind this fellow! Move it out! Move out! Our only chance is if I do what I'd do, you copy me with the wings of the plane! Don't have to yell. I'm not yelling! We're in a lot of trouble. It's very hard to concentrate with that panicky tone in your voice! It's not a tone. I'm panicking! I can't do this! Vanessa, pull yourself together. You have to snap out of it! You snap out of it. You snap out of it. - You snap out of it! - You snap out of it! - You snap out of it! - You snap out of it! - You snap out of it! - You snap out of it! - Hold it! - Why? Oome on, it's my turn. How is the plane flying? I don't know. Hello? Benson, got any flowers for a happy occasion in there? The Pollen Jocks! They do get behind a fellow. - Black and yellow. - Hello. All right, let's drop this tin can on the blacktop. Where? I can't see anything. Oan you? No, nothing. It's all cloudy. Oome on. You got to think bee, Barry. - Thinking bee. - Thinking bee. Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Wait a minute. I think I'm feeling something. - What? - I don't know. It's strong, pulling me. Like a 27-million-year-old instinct. Bring the nose down. Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! - What in the world is on the tarmac? - Get some lights on that! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! Thinking bee! - Vanessa, aim for the flower. - OK. Out the engines. We're going in on bee power. Ready, boys? Affirmative! Good. Good. Easy, now. That's it. Land on that flower! Ready? Full reverse! Spin it around! - Not that flower! The other one! - Which one? - That flower. - I'm aiming at the flower! That's a fat guy in a flowered shirt. I mean the giant pulsating flower made of millions of bees! Pull forward. Nose down. Tail up. Rotate around it. - This is insane, Barry! - This's the only way I know how to fly. Am I koo-koo-kachoo, or is this plane flying in an insect-like pattern? Get your nose in there. Don't be afraid. Smell it. Full reverse! Just drop it. Be a part of it. Aim for the center! Now drop it in! Drop it in, woman! Oome on, already. Barry, we did it! You taught me how to fly! - Yes. No high-five! - Right. Barry, it worked! Did you see the giant flower? What giant flower? Where? Of course I saw the flower! That was genius! - Thank you. - But we're not done yet. Listen, everyone! This runway is covered with the last pollen from the last flowers available anywhere on Earth. That means this is our last chance. We're the only ones who make honey, pollinate flowers and dress like this. If we're gonna survive as a species, this is our moment! What do you say? Are we going to be bees, orjust Museum of Natural History keychains? We're bees! Keychain! Then follow me! Except Keychain. Hold on, Barry. Here. You've earned this. Yeah! I'm a Pollen Jock! And it's a perfect fit. All I gotta do are the sleeves. Oh, yeah. That's our Barry. Mom! The bees are back! If anybody needs to make a call, now's the time. I got a feeling we'll be working late tonight! Here's your change. Have a great afternoon! Oan I help who's next? Would you like some honey with that? It is bee-approved. Don't forget these. Milk, cream, cheese, it's all me. And I don't see a nickel! Sometimes I just feel like a piece of meat! I had no idea. Barry, I'm sorry. Have you got a moment? Would you excuse me? My mosquito associate will help you. Sorry I'm late. He's a lawyer too? I was already a blood-sucking parasite. All I needed was a briefcase. Have a great afternoon! Barry, I just got this huge tulip order, and I can't get them anywhere. No problem, Vannie. Just leave it to me. You're a lifesaver, Barry. Oan I help who's next? All right, scramble, jocks! It's time to fly. Thank you, Barry! That bee is living my life! Let it go, Kenny. - When will this nightmare end?! - Let it all go. - Beautiful day to fly. - Sure is. Between you and me, I was dying to get out of that office. You have got to start thinking bee, my friend. - Thinking bee! - Me? Hold it. Let's just stop for a second. Hold it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, everyone. Oan we stop here? I'm not making a major life decision during a production number! All right. Take ten, everybody. Wrap it up, guys. I had virtually no rehearsal for that.

negative: Abortion should be legal in most cases. Abortion should be legal in most cases, And there should be fewer restrictions on abortions.

negative: Allow illegal immigrants amnesty. That means to just type "I accept" and maybe a short sentence on why you accept. That is ok though! I appreciate the enthusiasm and will enjoy debating this topic with you. Just informing you for next time you see a debate that says first round is acceptance. Now. What you said about illegal immigration is what most people think right away when defending illegal immigration. I will give you a list of reasons why making "refugees" as you call them, amnesty is completely wrong if you just think about it. First off, I would LOVE to say to all the poor and oppressed in the world "Come to America and live a better life! " The sad truth is that we cannot. The more illegal inmigrants that come to the Unites States and obtain a residency by the government keeps the cycle going. If foreign nations see that they can cross our border without getting caught and become a residence ten years later, then this creates a magnet effect. More will come. More will see the opportunity. The United States is a great place to live and that is why so many people are trying to come here. Secondly. This magnet effect will keep millions of immigrants crossing the borders which means millions more to care for, feed, and help. We will need to do all of these things because illegal immigrants who come here are most likely not millionaires. They are poor or oppressed victims. Like I said, I would LOVE TO help all the poor and vulnerable in the world! But if all of the world saw that we just let anyone across our borders, then what stops them from doing the same? We have to stop the cycle. Thirdly. We have legal immigration for a reason! So we can keep new hardworking Americans coming from different countries from all race, ethnicity, and religions. The more different the better! According to . http://www.dhs.gov... we had about 500,000 new immigrants come to the United States legally in 2013. This is great. We can keep America diverse and new by letting legal immigrants come. You said "I honestly see nothing wrong with immigration. They arnt't doing it illegally because there are specific instructions Congress has set up for refugees fleeing their homes. " This is incorrect. This is what the laws of the United States say about people fleeing their countries to come to the United States: "Immigrants can be classified as illegal for one of three reasons: entering without authorization or inspection, staying beyond the authorized period after legal entry, or violating the terms of legal entry. [57] Section 1325 in Title 8 of the United States Code, "Improper entry of alien", provides for a fine, imprisonment, or both for any noncitizen who:[58]" This is from wikipedia that cites lines from the United States Constitution and laws. Go to the wiki page to see that they used sources to find this all out. . http://en.m.wikipedia.org... It is in the "Legal Issues" section. To sum everything up I must say you made a good first attempt, but I need more than just emotional feelings for the poor and oppressed. We all wish we could help the world, but there must be a limit. We cannot care for everyone, that is a simple fact. Legal immigration still continues so there is no need to block down our borders from everyone. After all, we are all immigrants to the United States in the first place.

negative: Prostitution Should Be Legal In The US My opponent has stated in round 1 that he does not wish to have forfeiters, yet forfeits anyways. Excellent.

negative: Prostitution should be legal in all countries! you've done well my friend O_o indeed it was regrettable ...now jog along then (: bub-bye !

negative: Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide Should Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide be legalized for the terminally ill that have no chance of recovering? Please answer yes or no.

negative: Gay marriage should be illegal in the US. I want everyone to see how my opponent hasn't rebuttled and twists my words. My opponent just said "the fact is that according to him, procreation is the definition of natural." I said "First off procreation does not make something natural" My opponent twisted my words and just typed an invalid argument. Second my opponent said applying to to civil law is absurd. If it is absurd and it is natural for gay marriage then why do states have laws against it known as Laws against nature and her is one of the statements about it. "Crime against nature" has been defined by North Carolina courts as "sexual intercourse contrary to the order of nature," including all "acts of bestial character whereby degraded and perverted sexual desires are sought to be gratified." While this definition is incredibly broad, enough so that it could conceivably include masturbation or sexual positions once thought "unnatural," the CAN law is now only used in cases involving oral sex (fellatio and cunnilingus) and anal intercourse. Prior to Lawrence, the CAN law was used to prosecute two male sexual partners as well as male and female partners. Apparently no CAN case has ever been brought against two women in North Carolina, although a woman in Tennessee served two years in prison for consensual CAN with another woman before that state's sodomy law was declared unconstitutional. Lawrence made clear that law enforcement officers may no longer arrest hetero- or homosexual people for CAN activity in private, but officers are still making CAN arrests for activity occurring in public as well as for solicitation to perform acts of CAN in public or in an unspecified place. Theoretically, arrest and prosecution under CAN laws are also possible at this point in a few additional situations: where one of the participants is a minor or an incapacitated or disabled adult incapable of consent, where prostitution is involved (that is, money or some other material thing of value is exchanged for the CAN act), or where one of the participants is coerced. The website for this for more info is http://www.ncgala.org... My opponent has stated my main goals for me? I havent said anything was my main goal. What kind of debate is this? Really? these are key things needed to see for voting. My opponent said "He fails to show why natural is a good thing or a necessary thing." My opponent never asked me this as this is not a debate about wether natural is good however unnatural can be bad. My opponent posted his meaning of the verses hear -Don't save money. (Matthew 6:19-20) lets read the verse shall we Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal My opponent supplied false info as this verse is stating not to be materialistic by opponent shows a lack of reading i this. -Don't work to obtain food. (John 6:27) heres the verse, the meanin is not to work and only want to provide things you need but work also to live a christian life so you can have eternal food in eternal life -Again my opponent made another false accusation John 6:27 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval. -Don't have sexual urges. (Matthew 5:28) the verse - Meaning: this does say dont have sexual urges, again another invalid case by my opponent 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart -Not allowed to call anyone "father" (Matthew 23:9) If you read the verses before this verse you would see its talking about preists and some people call their priests father and then say the last name again my opponent with another false display -Women should be quiet and learn their place (1 Corinthians 14:33-35) im not gonna post the verse because again my opponent made an invalid statement and proving him wrong takes up to much space. This verse means women should not preach and they should ask their husbands about things instead of preaching, this is because the preacher was normally a guy and thats how it was. I said that it was based on religious views again my opponent is putting words in my mouth. And our constitution is on some parts. My opponent said i should stick to my pro side and that this topic is about gay marriage and why i think it should be illegal. How is me stating the reasons it should be illegal wrong? Im debating this fine again my opponent with another false accusation. Again my opponent said i jumped off topic well this last round lets see what he said "My argument is that there are many countries in which homosexuality is totally illegal" This is a debate about the US as i stated last round and he is again bringing other countries into it. here it is again in his last few sentences "and more important, you can support the rights and health of people in the country and across the world by supporting legal homosexual marriage." Gay marriage should be illegal because - it is unnatural, only male and female can reproduce also if it is natural why would states have had laws against gay sex called "Laws against nature" this proves my point -unhealthy- again homosexuals are more likely by thousands to contract disease then normal couples. Religion- Marriage definition was seen as woman and man, also its against God and marriage was normally done by a preacher Lets answer my opponents arguments since he ignores mine and twists my words in hopes of a win. Oh wait i answered them earlier. You cant debate this without bringing in religion so its not ranting about religion. My opponent is the one who brought up the laws of new and old testament not me so him jumping off subject was his fault. Straights do have the same rights my opponent did not tell me the rights we have that they dont. If i say i want to marry a guy because i stopped liking girls i cant. If i become attracted to a guy and become bisexual i cant. Heres another mention to the world and not the US like this debate states its about he said "I never said that only gays are beaten. My argument is that there are many countries in which homosexuality is totally illegal. In some places, the penalty is literally death" My opponent says that family rejection is main cause of mental problems. Here are some other things that cause depression as well. Other factors that may contribute to teen suicide include: Divorce of parents. Violence in the home. Inability to find success at school. Feelings of worthlessness. Rejection by friends or peers. Substance abuse. Death of someone close to the teenager. The suicide of a friend or someone he or she "knows" online. You cannot say homosexuality rejection overrides all of these. The reason i didnt respond to the doctor thing because the whole page is a study on Gays and not every cause of rejection, unreliable source. One me fun false fact by my opponent "Religious law in America is a terrible idea and is unconstitutional. A law saying that homosexuality, or anything else the Bible says is bad, is illegal violates the first amendment" First amendment is a right of free speech. Homosexuality i what people do.. You can talk about it all day so i dont see the point. Second Laws in the bible that are current laws - no murder - stealing -adultery those are a few laws that are religious so another invalid thing by my opponent. Reasons to vote pro - My opponent ignores arguments and states the same points after i prove it wrong - My opponent supplied biased sources - My opponent made several invalid arguments - I debated why t is wrong and my opponent went of topic even when i proved him wrong - As shown, i showed my opponent twisted my words Vote pro

negative: Prostitution driven by a non-voluntary patriarchal culture. The "choice" to be a prostitute is anchored in this culture and can never be free of it. Choosing prostitution is not grounded in the simplicity of individual choice, like the choice between a cheeseburger or a chicken burger at a fast food joint. More has to be considered, the ethics are complex. For instance, How do you imagine prostitutes in Mexico City differ from those in LA? At the other end of the scale: Are prostitutes in Mexico City free to travel to Los Angeles and become prostitutes? Who chooses to subject themselves to the sexual whims and desires of ten strangers a night by choice?

negative: Prostitution should be legal. I don't know if my opponent had other matters to attend to. Thanks for the debate!

negative: Prostitution: the U.S. should adopt the Nordic model to reduce harm for sex workers. I have read up about it and I definitely oppose it.I accept.Consensual sex of any nature should be permitted.

negative: Prostitution should be legal in all countries! This is my first debate. It's obvious I made an error in choosing my opponent. How regrettable. I believe this is where I state: Arguments extended to next round.

negative: Soft Drugs and Prostitution should be legalized. This is a very popular topic but I haven't found a debate about it on this website, so I decided to start one. Definitions: Soft Drugs such as marijuana and the like, cocaine, and heroine. Also add any other drugs that don't do permanant brain damage like Shrooms, LSD, Meth, ect. Prostitution: consensual sexual acts in exchange for money or other goods. Value: Fairness Value Criterion 1) That all laws are fair and just, by protecting society and not limiting the freedoms and rights of society at the same time. 2) All crimes should have a victim or potential victim, otherwise it is not a crime 3) Maximize efficency of our law enforcement. 4) To use tax payer dollars wisely and effeciently, especially in law enforcement scenarios. In short, the "crimes" mentioned above should not be considered such because they have no victim and they are consensual. Cigarretes can give you cancer, alcholol can give you liver disease, you can even OD on advil for crying out loud. In this debate my burden of proof consists of the following: 1) Society's safety would not be threatened, and in fact is by the laws in place 2) To uphold society's right to choose their actions so long as it doesn't hurt another person (the person taking the drugs or paying the prostitute doesn't count.) Please forgive the any and many grammatical erros spell check won't work, weird.

negative: Abortion should be OK Abortion should be legal because:1. Some woman have certain circumstances where abortion is needed, for example rape, incest, abuse etc.2. It is not the job of the goverment to decide whether or not a woman can have an abortion. 3. If a woman even wants an abortion, the baby is unwanted. It is better to terminate a small blood cell, then to let it grow up unwanted or in a bad environment.

negative: Marriage should be abolished as a legal institution I will be addressing my opponent's argument on a line-by-line basis for the sake of clarity "So you encourage Civil Unions over legitimate and (ultimately) moral marriage?" How is something that does not discriminate less moral than something that does? Logically, that is the least sound argument I have read on this site. "You state that marriage should be abolished as a legal institution, but yet that civil union are a perfect example of a legal institution? In essence, the two are the same." The two are entirely different. One is a religious ceremony endorsed by a Priest of some sort. One is private contract between two citizens endorsed by the Government. "Marriage is a commitment to another, no matter what the sex." False. Marriage is legally defined as the union of a male and a female. As such, and with respect to it economic benefits, it is discriminatory in nature and in violation of the 14th Amendment. "In fact, a civil Unions is often defined as heterosexuals whom just haven't legally married, yet." Also false. That period of time is commonly called an 'engagement period'. A civil union and a marriage are entirely different forms of contractual obligation. "Furthermore, you advocate the rights of parties of civil unions (gay marriage, for example), but you state that peaceful religious beliefs are intolerable?" No, I said people who discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation are intolerant, such as people of faith - though you are correct in assuming one could make the argument that intolerance is intolerable. "Legally Married couples have rights. The majority of people are legally married - who are you to say that the rights that these people have gained with their moral status should be abolished?" Yes legally married couples have rights - rights that are exclusive to the heterosexual segment of our population. Furthermore, the rights of this heterosexual group of people would in no way be legally abridged, because they can still get married if they choose to participate in that religious ceremony. However, if "married" couples want the socioeconomic benefits they previously enjoyed, they would have to get a civil union - though I doubt very much that would be a hardship considering Civil Unions are non-discriminatory and non-denominational. "Marriage is a practice as old as humanity itself." The length of time a practice has endured does not denote is validity or practicality. "Abolishing its legal status would be an outrage among legally married people." So was abolishing slavery among slave-owners, and yet it was morally and legally the necessary thing to do. "In order to advocate the rights of one group, one Cannot impede upon the rights of another, which is what you are suggesting." I made this very clear in my first post, knowing my opponent would most likely bring it up again. My resolution in no way abridges the rights of religious people to get "married" if they choose to. Instead, my resolution extends those rights previously exclusive to heterosexual couples to all couples. This is a distinction you cannot refute. "Lastly, what about moral and societal implications? A homosexual couple cannot naturally nurture or reproduce children." I would prefer that you provide proof from a reputable source that homosexual couples cannot "nurture" children. This is an outlandish argument to make. "Homosexual marriage is of immorality and breaks all the laws of nature." How exactly is the union of two consenting adults immoral? Furthermore, homosexuality does not break the laws of nature: http://en.wikipedia.org.... I'd like you to note that homosexual behavior is especially prevalent in primates and social bird species. One last point for you - I believe the Bible states that only humans can sin, because only humans have eternal souls. So when God made all the animals on the (4th day?), why did he also choose to make a portion of them homosexual, knowing they don't have souls and cannot in fact "sin"? "To discourage morality would be to encourage the downfall of humanity, step by step." My resolution would not "discourage" morality as it would in fact lessen discrimination. Therefore, the continued survival of marriage as a discriminatory legal system is in fact the "immoral" course of action. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conclusion: I directly refuted my opponents claims, including those for which he has no logical foundation or proof through evidence. In addition, several of my original contentions have gone unanswered in their entirety - including the Constitutionality of marriages themselves and the unequal benefits they provide.

negative: The Legalization of Prostitution I'm going to play devil's advocate here, and will argue against the legalization of prostitution. I wait for his side of the debate.

negative: Prostitution should be Legal Good Luck! You may have the first turn to argue.

negative: Abortion Abortion should be entirely legal, although it should never be paid for by taxpayers. The simple fact that it is the mothers choice to terminate an UNBORN child/fetus, and she can afford to pay for the procedure is good enough reason to keep abortion legal.

negative: Prostitution Should Be Legal My apologies to Con, but as I was away from my computer for a week due to stuff IRL, I will fully concede this debate to them. I apologize to a greater extent to the site and its members for my misconduct. I will endeavour to only join and create debates that I intend to finish in the future. If I do find myself in a position where I will not be able to post arguments in a timely manner, I will postpone the creation of that debate to a more appropriate time. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused.

negative: Prostitution should be legal Thank you for the debate. As the rules say, I'll waive this round for the sake of being fair.

negative: should prostitution be legalised 10 Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution 1. Legalization/decriminalization of prostitution is a gift to pimps, traffickers and the sex industry. 2. Legalization/decriminalization of prostitution and the sex industry promotes sex trafficking. 3. Legalization does not control the sex industry. It expands it. 4. Legalization increases clandestine, hidden, illegal and street prostitution. 5. Legalization of prostitution and decriminalization of the sex industry increases child prostitution 6. Legalization of prostitution does not protect the women in prostitution. 7. Legalization of prostitution increases the demand for prostitution. It boosts the motivation of men to buy women for sex in a much wider and more permissible range of socially acceptable settings. 8. Legalization of prostitution does not promote women"s health. 9. Legalization of prostitution does not enhance women"s choice. 10. Women in systems of prostitution do not want prostitution legalized. In the next round,I will describe each of the points in detail

negative: Prostitution should not be legalized The main reason why prostitution should be legalised is health related. Right now prostitution is the leading cause of STDs, but only because it is illegal and practised on street corners. If prostitution was legal, prostitutes would be checked constantly and clients could be required to prove they are healthy. In Australian brothels all men must be checked before going there. As long as prostitution is illegal, it is impossible to control their health. Legalizing it, however, allows you to check both the prostitutes and their clients constantly in order to significantly reduce infections. Also, legalising prostitution would eliminate most pimps, because prostitutes would be able to work on their own. Sure, some would still work for pimps, but they would clearly act very differently. The reason pimps can abuse prostitutes is because they cannot call the police or complain in any way. Legalizing prostitution would give prostitutes a chance to report the abusive pimps to the police without risking their own freedom. Human trafficking would be just the same if prostitution was legal. Legalizing prostitution doesn't mean legalizing human trafficking. Also, legalizing prostitution wouldn't have any effect of human trafficking, it wouldn't make it easy or encourage more people to do it. Legal prostitution would also mean a very different work space for prostitutes. As long as prostitution is illegal, they must work on the streets. Legalizing it would allow them to work in more decent and safe conditions. This would also solve the problem of safety. Prostitutes are very vulnerable. This is why most serial killer kill prostitutes. When you allow prostitutes to work in decent, clean, safe, legal brothels, you also protect them from murderers or abusive clients. These are the main benefits of legalizing prostitution. I don't have much time so I will post my rebuttals in the next round.

negative: Prostitution Should Be Legal A short debate.Not to be confused with the unrelated debate on the morality of prostitution, the debate here is concerned with whether or not Prostitution should be legal.To briefly state my case:Prostitution, whether it is prohibited by law or not, will always exist in Society. There will always be a Demand for sex, and likewise there will always be a Supply of it. Many of the woes that people claim come with legalized prostitution (pimping, child trafficking, forced prostitution) would actually be solved by legalizing prostitution as that the legal stigma would vanish. Both prostitutes and "johns" would have nothing to fear in approaching the police regarding potential crimes. However, those same crimes listed above are made worse when prostitution is illegal, both because of underworld economics and because prostitutes are less likely to go to police when they fear being arrested (as do their customers).

negative: should prostitution be legalised Some of your points/reason are repeated, basically you are trying to say- Legalization of prostitution gives legal rights to pimps or sex industry to expand the prostitution , and it doesn't promotes women's health , doesn't enhance women's choice and may cause increment in child prostitution. So my point is : Legalization of prostitution doesn't means that anyone who wants to run prostitution can got permission from government, now government's have control on it. After legalization, pimps have to take license from government to run the prostitution. And practicing of unfair means by them can cancel their license, so it creates a fear for them, so they can follow the prescribe rule to run the prostitution. In case of expansion, So it is a choice, if anyone prefer it so she/he can go in it and if pimps try to make force on her/him then she/he can go for complain. Legalization of prostitution, doesn't means that governments give allowance for child prostitution, there would be minimum age which is decided by government, same as government define minimum age for marriage and minimum age for drinking, and if any case are found regarding child prostitution there should be complain of it and should be punished. Legalization of prostitution definitely protect women(prostitutes) because now what they are doing is legal so they can go to cop or state court if any unfair means happens to them and got a help from a state. State would not give licence for street prostitution to pimps, and also after legalization government have information of where prostitution is going on because every sex industry or brothel's which are running now they try to got a legal license. After legalization of prostitution state would conduct protective steps to ensure health and safe environment for prostitutes and provides labour rights and prostitutes have identity in society and if 100% is not followed but still these condition is much better than condition what prostitutes suffer in these day's.

negative: Prostitution Should be Legalized "Prostitution Should be Legalized"Definitions:Prostitution- The work of a prostitute : the act of having sex in exchange for money. . http://www.merriam-webster.com...Legalized- To make (something) legal : to allow (something) by law. . http://www.merriam-webster.com...Rules1.) Pro agrees to support the notion that "Prostitution Should be Legalized" and Con agrees to support the notion that "Prostitution Should not be Legalized".2. ) Con agree's to waive the last round.3. )

negative: It should be legal to murder prostitutes " The resolution of this debate is "It should be legal to murder prostitutes." Murder is by definition illegal and to say that murder should be legal is impossible because of contradicting terms, so I shall be arguing off what I believe that the intent of this debate is, "It should be legal to kill prostitutes." All murder is killing. Some killing is murder. Since my opponent affirms the resolution "it should be legal to murder/kill prostitutes", he affirms this in ALL cases. If he argues all killing of prostitutes should be legal, he therefore argues that murder should be legal because some killing is murder. There is no way around this. "Since their are many types of roles that fit the description of prostitute I believe that if I can affirm at least one instance where killing prostitutes should be legal I have affirmed the resolution." The resolution is "it should be legal to murder prostitutes" not "there is an instance where killing prostitutes should be legal." Also, my opponent mistakenly believes that if he can affirm one instance where killing/murdering prostitutes should be legal that he has upheld the resolution. HE is the one affirming the resolution, not me. It is I who can negate the resolution upon affirming one instance where it should not be legal to murder prostitutes. My opponent argues that "it should be legal to murder prostitutes", and therefore asserts that ALL murdering of prostitutes should be legal. "Prostitution: A person who does, or offers to do, an activity for money, despite personal dislike or dishonour." Although this is a bit of a reach, I do not believe it will affect my argument, and therefore will not challenge the definition. "Contract Killing: a form of assassination, in which one party hires another party to kill a target individual or group of people." Again, my opponent mistakenly believes that if he can affirm one instance where killing/murdering prostitutes should be legal that he has upheld the resolution. HE is the one affirming the resolution, not me. And it follows that my opponents elaborate example involving professional hitmen is irrelevant and does not hold any weight in this argument. To conclude, I realize my opponent still has one more round left, so to be fair, I request that he does not make any new arguments or definitions unless they are in direct rebuttal of my argument. If my opponent makes any new arguments, they should be ignored by the voters. And I also urge the voters to take into consideration that my opponent is most likely a cold-blooded killer, and he probably hurts children for fun as well.

negative: Prostitution should be legalized Legalizing prostitution isn't going to solve anything. More prostitutes is absolutely not a goal which we should pursue, Since it's bad for the economy and bad for women. You say "legalizing prostitution would close the gap between the two a little bit more" like it's a good thing. No, It's not a good thing! There is a huge difference between being naked/having sex with attractive people on camera versus being paid to have sex with people you don't know. And that gap shouldn't be shrunk! We shouldn't try to grow the prostitution industry, We should try to eliminate it completely. Legalizing prostitution would only increase the amount of prostitutes.

negative: Legalize prostitution in the USA. I don't agree that we should not legalize prostitution in the United States. 1. Legalizing prostitution will increase sex trafficking and promote inequality. 2. Legalizing prostitution does not protect the people that are in the sex industry.

negative: The United States Federal Government should legalize prostitution. Thanks Whiteflame. For those who are curious, the sources Whiteflame used can be found in round 2 of this debate. http://www.debate.org...Resolution: "The United States of America should legalize prostitution."I appreciate the opportunity to debate such a controversial topic. "Prostitution must be exposed for what it really is: a particularly lethal form of male violence against women.” (1) Argument 1: States Rights I will address the full resolution which indicates we are talking about a country wide legalization of prostitution. This would be a violation of States rights. “The regulation of prostitution in the United States is not among the enumerated powers of the federal government. Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is therefore exclusively the domain of the states to permit, prohibit, or otherwise regulate commercial sex…” (http://en.wikipedia.org...) Ergo the resolution that “The United States of America should legalize prostitution” is negated in so much as the United States Federal Government does not have the authority to legalize prostitution. Therefore the United States Federal government should not legalize prostitution. Argument 2: Prostitution should be considered a crime as it creates victims. The crux of why I stand opposed to the resolution is simple. Prostitution should be considered a crime as it creates victims. This argument will be in two parts. First showing definitively that prostitution is dangerous and second showing that the legalization of prostitution does not change its danger. In addition to this argument I will address the full resolution which indicates we are talking about a country wide legalization of prostitution. This would be a violation of States rights. I will be referencing this table through-out. (4) Argument 2 Part 1: Prostitution is dangerous A: Prostitution spreads disease As the table above indicates 50% of prostitutes have HIV in the world. In the USA it is estimated that 20% of prostitutes in America have an STD. “In the United States, the rate of HIV infection among prostitutes varies from state to state. In New Jersey, 57 percent of prostitutes are HIV-positive” (1) B: Prostitution is psychologically harmful “Many prostitutes experience post-traumatic stress disorder because of rape and other assaults as well as the trauma of daily sexual contact with dominant strangers.” (1) C: Prostitution has a disturbingly high mortality rate “Mortality in a long-term Open Cohort of Prostitute women” a study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found the “death rate among active prostitutes of 459 per 100,000 person-years, which is 5.9 times that for the (age and race adjusted) general population. This corresponds to an occupational fatality rate more than triple that of fishing workers (the highest fatality profession tracked by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics).” (2) D: Violence against prostitutes. “Eighty-five percent of prostitutes surveyed in Minnesota had been raped, according to a 1994 study of violence and prostitution. In another study, Farley and Kelly found that of 475 women interviewed in South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, the United States and Zambia, nearly 75 percent had been physically assaulted and 62 percent had been raped. A 1994 study by the Council for Prostitution Alternatives in Portland, Ore., found that prostitutes were raped an average of once a week.”(1) Due to the spread of disease, the psychological damage, the high mortality rate, and the direct violence against prostitutes, it is empirically evident that Prostitution is dangerous. Argument 2 Part 2: Legalization of prostitution does not change its danger. As it has been established that prostitution is harmful we can now address if legalizing such a practice impacts the danger. “The U.S. Government adopted a strong position against legalized prostitution in a December 2002 National Security Presidential Directive based on evidence that prostitution is inherently harmful and dehumanizing, and fuels trafficking in persons, a form of modern-day slavery. Prostitution and related activities, including pimping and patronizing or maintain brothels fuel the growth of modern-day slavery by providing a façade behind which traffickers for sexual exploitation operate. Where prostitution is legalized or tolerated, there is a greater demand for human trafficking. Few activities are as brutal and damaging to people as prostitution. Field research in nine countries concluded that 60-75 percent of women in prostitution were raped, 70-95 percent were physically assaulted, and 68 percent met the criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder in the same range as treatment-seeking combat veterans and victims of state-organized torture. Beyond this shocking abuse, the public health implications of prostitution are devastating and include a myriad of serious and fatal diseases, including HIV/AIDS… State Attempts to regulate prostitution by introducing medical check-ups or licenses don’t address the core problem: the routine abuse and violence that form the prostitution experience and brutally victimize those caught in its netherworld. Prostitution leaves women and children physical, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually devastated. Recovery takes years, even decades, often, the damage can never be undone.” (3) Conclusion: The Federal Government does not have the authority to legalize prostitution on a federal level. Such an action is a clear violation of States rights. Aside from this implementation issue, it is empirically evident that prostitution is dangerous. This is due to the spread of disease, the psychological damage, the high mortality rate, and the physical violence that accompanies prostitution. Legalization of prostitution does not change its danger. I conclude as the U.S. Government did in 2002…. Whether legal or not, “prostitution is inherently harmful and dehumanizing.” The United States Federal Government should not legalize prostitution. Back to Whiteflame. Sources(1) http://womensenews.org... (2) http://aje.oxfordjournals.org... (3)http://www.defense.gov... (4)http://sex-crimes.laws.com...

negative: Prostitution should be illegal. Prostitution should be illegal for four reasons: (1) prostitution causes irreparable physical and psychological harms, (2) legalizing prostitution will not eliminate violence in prostitution, (3) prostitution increases human trafficking, and (4) prostitution perpetuates gender inequality.1. Women who prostitute are irreparably harmed both physically and psychologically.The average life span for a woman entering prostitution is four years. No other population of women has a higher death rate. [1] Prostitutes are often murdered. But this high death rate is not just the result of homicide; it's also caused by the incredible violence and brutality that prostitutes face every day.Prostitutes experience an extensive catalog of violence. Their hair is pulled, their faces are ejaculated on, their breasts are squeezed; they are slapped, pinched, verbally abused, threatened, beaten, cut with knives, burned with cigarettes, and gang raped. [1] Victims of torture describe very similar acts. [2] And like victims of torture, prostitutes report injuries such as bruises, mouth and teeth injuries, vaginal bleeding, internal injuries, head injuries, and broken bones. [3] Moreover, these results are not limited to illegal prostitution. These results include prostitutes working in countries where prostitution is legal, in brothels with so-called "safety policies." [4]Prostitution also has psychological consequences. For example, prostitutes are at a heightened risk of depression, mania, suicidal thoughts, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, dissociative disorders and chemical dependence. [1] Prostitutes report a sense of "splitting," of "leaving my body" or going "someplace else mentally." The result is a higher incidence of dissociative disorders. [5] Without surprise, prostitution also leads to a higher incidence of PTSD.The psychological damage stems from the act itself. Even women who choose to prostitute cannot avoid the trauma associated with constant sexual degradation, and with having one's body sold as a commodity. The psychological damage is often unconscious and manifests after-the-fact. Thus, no amount of "improvement" to the conditions of prostitution can eliminate its psychological consequences.2. Legalizing prostitution will not eliminate violence in prostitution.Rates of assault and rape against prostitutes remains extremely high even in countries that have legalized prostitution. [6] Legalization would draw thousands more women into prostitution without any demonstrable decrease in violence. For example, in European countries where prostitution has been legalized -- or had elements of prostitution legalized -- the number of prostitutes has more than doubled after legalization. [7] Yet violence towards these prostitutes has not decreased. In fact, studies have found that women working in brothels and other indoor facilities have less control because the owners control what sex acts they do and with whom. [1] Often, the result has been more violence towards prostitutes than in places where prostitution is legal. Legalization has been tried. It has not eliminated violence in prostitution. Sometimes, it has even led to more violence towards prostitutes. Thus, prostitution should not be legalized.3. Legalizing prostitution would increase human trafficking.We can all agree that human trafficking is bad. It poses serious health issues for women and girls worldwide, weakens the rule of law, and may even compromise international security.Studies have found that legalizing prostitution increases human trafficking. For example, a 2012 study published by World Development found that countries with legalized prostitution have higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. [8] The International Organization of Migration attributed the rise in trafficking to the rise of prostitution in Europe. [9] And the U.S. Department of State recognized that legalized prostitution makes anti-trafficking work more difficult. [9]Everyone agrees that trafficking is a violation of basic human rights. But trafficking would not exist without prostitution. The two go hand-in-hand. Without dispute, all the empirical data we have suggests that legalization of prostitution leads to increased trafficking.4. Legalizing prostitution would perpetuate gender inequality.Prostitution is about men's control over women's sexuality. The prostitution industry exploits the economic, physical, and social weakness of women and children, in order to service men. To put it bluntly, legalized prostitution exists for the benefit of men. Which in turn ends up perpetuating gender inequality.Think about it this way: Prostitution is like female genital mutilation. Female genital mutilation is often represented as something that women choose, either for themselves or for their female children. Indeed, the practice is usually carried out by women alone. But does that make female genital mutilation okay? No. But why shouldn't female genital mutilation be legal if its carried out by women alone? Because like prostitution, female genital mutilation exists solely for the benefit of men. Male ideas of female sexuality are what underlie the practice, and it is those ideas that female genital mutilation attempts to satisfy.Prostitution perpetuates gender inequality in the same way that female genital mutilation perpetuates gender inequality. Degrading, patriarchal ideas of female sexuality underlie both practices. And both practices are thus an expression of men's control over women's sexuality.For all the above reasons, prostitution should be illegal.References:[1] Melissa Farley, "Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder," published in Feminism and Psychology.[2] "Nigerian women tortured by prostitution ring in Greece," Associated Press, August 15, 2005.[3] A Comparative Study of Women Trafficked in the Migration Process: Patterns, Profiles and Health Consequences of Sexual Exploitation in Five Countries, http://action.web.ca...[4] Patricia Hynes and Janice Raymond, "Put in Harms Way: The Neglected Health Consequences of Sex Trafficking in the United States."[5] C.A. Ross, M. Farley, and H.L. Schwartz, "Dissociation Among Women in Prostitution."[6] I. Vanwesenbeeck et al, "Professional HIV risk taking, levels of victimization, and well-being in female prostitutes in the Netherlands."[7] Joan Smith, "Why British men are rapists."[8] http://papers.ssrn.com...[9] J. Raymond, "Ten Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution and a Legal Response to the Demand for Prostitution."

negative: It should be legal to murder prostitutes ~~~~~~~ Rebuttals ~~~~~~~ ///Since my opponent affirms the resolution "it should be legal to murder/kill prostitutes", he affirms this in ALL cases. If he argues all killing of prostitutes should be legal, he therefore argues that murder should be legal because some killing is murder. /// It would be impossible for me to affirm the resolution that murder should be legal, murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a person [2]. Therefore it is logically impossible for murder to be legal. I am advocating that killing should be legal. ~ ///Also, my opponent mistakenly believes that if he can affirm one instance where killing/murdering prostitutes should be legal that he has upheld the resolution. HE is the one affirming the resolution, not me. It is I who can negate the resolution upon affirming one instance where it should not be legal to murder prostitutes. /// The resolution also does not state that "it should be legal to murder ALL prostitutes. " I have shown that as the resolution stands it is logically impossible to affirm and therefore have reasonably, I believe, changed the word 'murder' to 'kill. ' I would also like to bring up the point that my opponent, though Con in the debate, is the instigator and should bear at least some burden of proof. He has provided no justification for his stance that we shouldn't murder prostitutes. I on the other hand have supported the idea that at least in some instances killing prostitutes should be legal, even if my opponent believes these arguments to be unsatisfactory to fulfill the resolution. ~ ///Although this is a bit of a reach, I do not believe it will affect my argument, and therefore will not challenge the definition. /// Since my opponent agrees to my definition of prostitution and does not contest the idea that professional hitmen fall under the definition this argument stands. ~ ///And I also urge the voters to take into consideration that my opponent is most likely a cold-blooded killer, and he probably hurts children for fun as well. /// Ad hominem, this statement should at least give me the conduct point. ~ In conclusion I have shown that there are instances where killing prostitutes should be legal whereas my opponent has only stated that I have to affirm that murdering all prostitutes should be legal, as the instigator I believe that he should bear at least some of the burden of proof and he did not attempt to defend his side. I end my arguments and urge a Pro vote. [2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...