Legalize Prostitution

Let's begin shall we? :)First off, I agree that the hous is the United States. Onto his points.His first point continuously talks of objectifying women and moral decay, yet never gave evidence (either logical or statistical) as to how this is so. Several reasons why this is false are:1)The woman would be agreeing to work, not forced against her will. 2)The rating point was not to rate how well they sell their body, it is to rate how free of STDs they are. It would be based on their history of STDs. This would provide a safer service in which a person has some clue of what he is buying into.3)He gave no logical evidence as to why prostitution is moral bankruptcy.The lack of moral backing and logical description makes this claim highly opinionative, allowing me to drop this point.His second point can also be dropped since:1) The woman(legal prostitute) can take birth control as an alternative.2) The use of unreliable, ilegal prostitution would decrease as the use of a reliable, governmental service increases.3) A weak point about not being controlled since their other alternative is to be controlled by a pimp. His third point can be dropped as well three reasons:1)The registration of prostitutes would eliminate this.2)Governmental insections can be carried out to ensure this is not hapening. 3)The prostitute is required to have a license.His fourth point talks of how CATW conducted 2 studies statin that the prostitutes were not well protected. Yet I clearly outline protection by a gaurd. Another thing is that because the studies say this happened, this does not mean it will automatically happen. Thats the point of change, to achieve something better (as I intend to do). Finally, 200 people is a very limited amount, nor did my opponent state this was random selection allowing the evidence he provides to be planned and inaccurate.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------His attack on my third point is dropped because:1)I focus on male prostitute, unless women can somehow get vasectamies.2)The use of a condom would be mandatory.3)Free health checks would persuade the women to stay.His attack on my second point can be dropped since:1)An individual would be geared towards a safe, reliable bussiness rather than an illegal one.2)I never said it would eliminate illegal prostitution, I stated it would minimize it and possibly elimiate it.3)My opponent continues to focus on women. Is my opponent hinting that agrees with me on male prostitution?4)Other countires worked with Holland, i don't see why this would be a problem with the United States. 5)He lists countries, yet gives no evidence as to where he recieved this information from.6)Militarypoint is again, unwaranted.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------WeighingClearly I am winning this debate. First the logic. My logic provides that regulated prostitution, job creation, a stimulated economy, and minimization of unsafe, illegal acts provide that prostitution is moral. My opponents arguments for why it is immoral: .He provides no logically based argument, giving the PRo a clear vote. Furthermore, my first, fourth, and fifth contentions were not attacked within this refutation so I extend them all. My second and third contentions stand since i provide argumentation as to why his refutations are false. Thus you uphold the unrefuted Pro and give the win.