pornography ought to be illegal

BOP- My opponent has it as she advocates a chance in the status quo, is an instigator, and is PRO. As she has not specified otherwise I say he has the BOP. --Refutations--My opponents C1:The basis of my opponents argument is it hurts family, and mainly kids through addiction. The argument on who watches the type of video is irrelevant, as if I refute the premise below, then the argument is defeated. The majority of my opponents argument after showing kids watch this stuff (irrelevant), she shows things like it is detrimental to the marriage institution. My opponents only links the cons on a marriage, but does not show the pros and the intermediates. Many people who are really holy holy marriage people may, you know, become curious. But they may think look at this slu*, she does not enjoy her husband. Some people say pornography is good for the sexual imagination, and moderate usage may enhance sex life. Some less committed woman may actually approve of the watching of pornography, as she may be the type that respects the husbands views. Also, porn only hurts the wife if she has a poor self image. If she thinks she has a good one, it should not really effect her. [1]My opponent then contends it is addictive, causes rape, and they may become desensitized. I will first refute the addiction part of it. There is actually a controversy on whether it is addictive or not, whether it is the porn or some other aspect in life. Many contend it is outside arguments, and things that make it hard to even have a sex life that lead the to this hole. So the problem may not be the porn, rather a non sexual spouse. Others say if you treat them like addicts it may be detrimental to the viewer. [2] The basis of my opponents argument is flawed as there is a high controversy on the issue. He then claims they become desensitized. My question is so what? They get bored they can not watch it, or watch worse why does it effect you or the country? Why is it the governments job to intervene? Also, a reason people watch porn is because they may be bored in the first place, not why it exists. So the best way to control it may be handing out free books :P. My opponent then claims it causes rape. I refer you to my arguments in C1.My opponents final argument is it changes the concept of the human brain, yet forgets any porn watching is not sex watching or a sex addiction. Sex requires two individuals procreating, or two individuals just doing their thing. Porn would unlikely effect sex life with education programs showing porn =/= sex. Education, not banning, may be a better way to control the vile insidious substance.---> Sex lifesee above.---> masturbation addiction kinda gross, but this does not hold up unless you show its bad. ---> shamecool. So making it illegal and if they watch it (hard to censor the internet) and throwing them in jail is better for the problem? No, legal porn and throwing them in education programs is better.---> Loner^^My opponents C2: The basis of my opponents full argument is the filters are not good enough. Well my opponent may have just conceded the argument right there. He said the filters, not the porn is the problem. Instead of taking away some creepy dudes fun away, mandate a filter, make current filters stronger. This here would fix all of the problems you listed, without abashment. Abloishment is not needed as you added in the words filter. He then says it makes kids rapist. See my C1.My opponents C3:My opponents argument is faulty even if it is correct, as porn stars CHOOSE to get into the job they are in. He also has to prove it is bad, as when you legalize prostitution it gets safer for them. [3] So making it legal not only helps the people, but makes it safer. And again, they CHOOSE to be there, not the governments business. --Case--C1: Porn reduces crime This argument is logically sound either way, as they spend more times watching this crap then grabbing people into alleys. "The bottom line on these experiments is, "More Net access [Porn], less rape." A 10 percent increase in Net access yields about a 7.3 percent decrease in reported rapes." [4]"Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. In addition, the study found that the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible -- a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan."[5] Didn't my opponent say it rose rape and moles rapes, yet I just proved it doesn't without using bsse sources? (my opponent used frc). As I am low on space I must continue. C2: Economy "The statistics are truly staggering. According to compiled numbers from respected news and research organizations, every second $3,075.64 is being spent on pornography." [6]Imagine it though! Banning it would likely be ineffective, but would still constrict this money supply to our economy. Aboloshment would be detrimental. Porn is worth 14 billion per year, that is huge. [7] Banning it woudl likely shrink our economy by 10 billion dollars, and piss off a lot of people. The economy benefits on porn, and banning it is actually counter productive economically. Also I forgot, we could tax it if it was legal ;).C3: 1st amendment the first amdnment-"protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. "[8]"Despite popular misunderstanding the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the first amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination" [8]Internet counts as dissemination. [9] With this being said, this now makes it IMPOSSIBLE to ban pornogorphy under the constitution. Now, no matter what arguments in this debate happen if this argument stands I get an auto win. Conclusion: You cannot ban porn, it lowers crime, and it is bneficial to the economy. I think I have proven her arguments wrong or have semi-reufted them. Also to add, my opponent has not fufilled the BOP. Vote CON.http://www.debate.org...