Legal Prostitution in India

I thank my adversary for a spirited response. I'll jump right into it."I am not in favor of activities that "PROMOTE" prostitution in any form but , to amend our laws...which ultimately will ease out the sexual frustration in the society leading to reduction in rapes and other incidents that I have talked about." This seems to be pure conjecture, Pro does not have any sources to show that legalizing prostitution will reduce rape, molestation, etc. This being the case, his argument is disproved by the study conducted by the CATW, that I cited in the previous round."Drug trafficking , Child labor , Regionalism , Casteism and other such practices - all these are wide spread and existing laws have failed in preventing them, still I none of us is an advocate of legalising them...this is something that has been ongoing since ages and never stopped , considering which makes me think that the only reason that it has survived so long is that it is somehow silently accepted by all societies and is a necessity" This is a very strange argument. As my adversary points out, drug trafficking, child labour etc. also have a long history. What makes prostitution different? It is as "unaccepted" as the others are. To bolster my point, his claim that the existence of prostitution through the ages implies its acceptance is disproved by the social stigma associated with it. For ease, my source can be found here: http://www.ruhama.ie...."First of all 200 women across 5 countries averages to 40 women per country.Number is quiet low to come to a conclusion."My adversary has no statistics or sources to disprove the findings of the previous source, and this statement should be ignored. Pro cannot tell statisticians how to come to conclusions. If he can find another source, I would be open to discussion on it."Second , presenting the argument that most of these women were never favoured by law even if it existed , is not convincing enough to not give better legal recognition to the practice...We often see poor and helpless being exploited and crushed under feet by the powerful, but does that mean we should not have laws to protect them."My argument literally is that legalizing prostitution will not protect them from exploitation. I don't see why that isn't convincing, given that it appears to be one of the primary aims of decriminalising prostitution."We have seen cases where determined people have shown their guts and fought against exploitation and come out victorious."This is either rhetoric or a personal example, neither of which are productive in a debate."So merely giving the stats from a XYZ survey and saying that sex workers should be deprived of their rights since anyway they are going to be suppressed and exploited even after laws are framed , is not justified.I believe that the contender is too much obsessed with surveys and figures."I am affronted that my adversary would coolly refer to my source (a study conducted by an international non-governmental organization) as an "XYZ survey." He makes the ignoble remark that I am "too much obsessed with surveys and figures". My sources are methodical studies that support my contentions. Pro seems to labour under the delusion that conjecture and rhetoric is a fitting rebuttal to these."I believe that the legalisation will give rights to a prostitute to legal help in such cases and situations and prevent herself from harassment"Prostitution is not illegal; organized prostitution is. A prostitute has the right to legal help even under current circumstances.Counter Argument 1: Legalization does not improve India's social attitude towards women, it worsens itMy adversary has side-stepped my argument without really addressing it. I maintain that legalization would worsen India's social attitude towards women in general.Pro provides a very poor justification to discredit my source, which uses case studies of prostitution in Australia and the Netherlands. It compares various situations of the sex industry before and after prostitution was legalized. Pro claims that the sex culture in these countries is advanced, and the "Indian male is yet to fulfil his basic sexual desire leave aside all those stuff that your source talks about". Given that Pro has pooh-poohed my sources for using a sample size of 200, and thereby not giving an accurate picture of India's 1.25 billion population, it is rather funny that he now claims to represent all of over 500 million Indian men. "I would like to say that if that really is the case then why do we let Red Light Areas prevail"I really cannot understand this. If crime exists, it is simply because of a lack of effective enforcement. Unless Pro can show otherwise, he cannot imply that it is a conscious decision that stems from acceptance of the crime.Counter Argument 2: "I am not a speaker or supporter of brothels , Pimps and other such organisations neither Do I say these should be made legal.But do you think that any person would feel safe and fearless in a room when even with a prostitute who is not part of a group or network?I would disagree and most of us would.The whole point is to remove the fear from the participants" minds of being caught and charged for God knows what all things.From the wiki article:"My adversary has moved on from caring for women's rights to caring for the rights of their clients. My takeaway from his argument is that he wants the law abolished so that men may solicit women freely without fear "of being caught and charged for God knows what all things". This is a very weak argument that can be simplified to this: "I want to steal a car, but I am so afraid of being caught. Let's make it legal to steal cars so that the fear is removed."My opponent has not provided justifications for his original points beyond conjecture and rhetoric and his rebuttals to my arguments are weak as well. I maintain that prostitution should not be legalized in India.Sources:1. http://www.lse.ac.uk...A note to my opponent: Wikipedia is not a very credible source to cite in a debate.