Laws Inplace Which Prohibit Sex Among Teens do a Good Job at Reducing the Amount of Teens Having Sex

=== RESPONSES & ARGUMENTS === //That would beg the definition of ‘effective'.// Effective is indeed a relative term but I think the most practical application would be for the laws to have an equal "bang for the buck". It costs time, money and resources to outlaw something and enforce it. If more is going into it than coming out then it really isn't doing a good job at what it's intended to accomplish. //If the laws are effective, we should have laws// Completely irrelevant within the context of this debate. This is not a "what should" debate, it is a "what is" debate. There may be a rational conclusion outside of this debate that if the laws don't work then we should have them, but discussing such a thing in this debate is void of any relevance. //I said that the *studies* are Wrong, and they provide wrong results because - and I quote- "…any change in crime rate induced by concealed handgun laws will depend on demographic, social, and economic specifities of the observation units. So these laws might lead to increases in crime in some jurisdictions and decreases in others. THE RESULTS THAT ASSUME THAT THE EFFECTS ARE IDENTICAL ACROSS ALL COUNTRIES, ARE THEREFORE, INVALID."// Sorry, I forgot, putting something in quotation automatically makes it true. Did you read the studies? Did you even open the links? I did. And I can tell you that they offer concrete evidence which is accepted by the highly acclaimed organizers of these scientific peer-reviewed studies as having a definitive confirmation towards my assertion. //With the tricks you have, clearly. (note: sarcasm)// Come on, now you're just getting desperate. Try to refrain from making debates personnel. //It's funny to see how smug you sound.// I would have really liked you to address that argument. I'm sure the voters would too. Maybe you can do so in this last round. //You know what, I never even thought of providing examples to support my side, possibly because it is so obvious. However: Law of driving on the right side of the road: Success. Law of filing a divorce: Success Domestic Violence Act: Success What does all this prove? Nothing. Same way your marijuana argument proved nothing. And that's why I didn't reply to it.// My argument was put forth in response to your allegation that simply having laws creates a good incentive for people not to break them because they will be labeled as criminal, which is completely false and the marijuana argument proves that. Please reply to it or this debate is just going to have a whole in it. //HOW in the Name of God is this of course?// Please refer yourself to the title of this debate. //I'll tell that to my friend who found himself infected with AIDS, AFTER using a condom.// May I ask how old this friend is? And also, may I suggest, that the condom may not have been used properly. I did after all say that the statistics applies to properly used condoms. The most common way of mis-using a condom is using one that is past it's expiration point--something that would be less likely to occur for someone who is new or relatively new to the experience, since I have shown that they tend to actually be more sexually responsible. //Guess some people do fall into that 3% category.// I believe you mean 0.01% ;) //Actually, I meant prostitution.// Ermm..I know... "Not in Bangladesh, not in Argentina, Bolivia, Columbia, Singapore, Ecuador, Belgium, Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, Indonesia, need I go on?" Oh, goodness, I just realized that we never clarified whether this was the United States or the world. It was actually my intention for this debate to be about American laws. I apologize for my Americanized mind-set which often forgets that America isn't planet Earth. However, it should be pointed out that 60% of the Earth's population live in countries where prostitution is illegal. So, as a generality, prostitution is illegal in the world. [1] //Positive effect of laws in Bexar: http://www.sanantonio.gov......// Since my opponent unfortunately provided no summary for this study as to create any comprehensible argument, I will have to summarize it instead, for the sake of the viewers. This is a study done by the San Antonia government which details the progressing and declining levels of teen pregnancies within Baxar county, Texas. It shows that, overall, teen pregnancies have gone down considerably in the last couple decades. Now for my rebuttal. My opponent makes the assertion that her source shows the positive effects of the laws. Somehow I doubt that my opponent has even read the source, which I did. The study makes absolutely no correlation between increased law implementation(which there's nothing presented to suggest there has been) and the lowering in levels of teen pregnancy. In-fact, the study makes absolutely no assertion at all about how the change in levels occur, it only describes that they do and by what nature. [2] Thus my opponent's assertion falls far short of any credibility. === SOURCES === 1. http://prostitution.procon.org... 2. http://www.sanantonio.gov... === CLOSING STATEMENT === I enjoyed this debate I think it was a good one considering that there isn't much material that either side could go on. I thank my opponent for the experience. Voters, do yo thang, unless that thing includes vote-bombing.