Prostitution should be legalized

I am appreciative of the forfeit.Prostitution's History1. Unless Pro can provide proper evidence that where ever there were goods or money to be bartered, prostitution has been prominent. Essentially this is absolutely everywhere at any point in time, so unless Pro has some nifty article that says “prostitution has occurred absolutely everywhere in history” this point will be thrown out.2. Pro’s claim that “as long as there are people in need of and willing to pay/ barter for the services provided by prostitutes, they will always exist to supply that demand.” will be thrown out for topicality reasons. Unless Pro can prove that there is a “need” of services provided by prostitutes, this point will also be thrown out. This goes back to my first point as well that says that Pro needs to prove that prostitution occurs absolutely everywhere in the world.Though this will probably not end as a voting issue, it Pro plans to refer back to this “History” point, she must prove the points I have laid out.Why it should be legalizedIf Pro can prove that legalizing prostitution will allow the government to gain money and make it safer, the point will still stand that this will not happen everywhere. Essentially, though some governments may take control and give benefits to the programs, we must first look at the fact that other governments will not have the ability to do so. Weak governments will not be able to regulate the sex industry because simply enough, there is too much of it. When you think about it, you can imagine a country where the police are out to find the prostitutes to bring them in to be sold by the government. Unless Pro can prove that being owned by the government is a good thing, this entire contention will be thrown out.Taxation1. Pro claims that “it is a fact that thousands of women, for whatever reasons have turn to prostitution at some point in their lives.” Pro claims here that she does not understand why the women turn to prostitution. If she does not understand what the point of prostitution is, we can assume she does not think it is a good business. If it is not a good business why on Earth would it be okay to legalize? 2. Pro claims that the practice flourishes, but provides no evidence to her claim that it “is a thriving estimated billion dollars a year business.” She claims that a large percent of the money goes to an underground economy, but again fails to provide any evidence to this claim. She claims that if “legalized government” were to tax prostitution, they could create programs and develop countries. My only question is: how?a. Pro does not provide evidence or evidence as to what this “underground economy” is. b. There is also no evidence on how much money would be going into the governments to develop countries and create these programs. How much money is needed, and how much will come out of the prostitution ring?Regulations1. I am sorry I could not argue this point effectively, as there is, again, no evidence to support the claim that prostitution will be legalized. 2. Age of consent - See Contention 1 below.3. What guidelines could make prostitution safer? Prostitution is still one person having sex with many people for money; the chances that diseases could be spread are just as likely if it is legalized. If these people truly do “need” to be prostitutes to make any money and they have an STD, how then, if they are cut off from the prostitution ring, would they make their money? How would they live? Pro must prove that medical support would be given to these situations, and that it is possible to give them the money needed to get back in the job.4. Goodbye to pimps: not really. – See contention 1 below.Legalized Prostitution at work1. Pro states that “in the city of Amsterdam in the Netherlands where it is legal , the prostitutes are taxpaying citizens and the government ensures that all prostitutes are able to access medical care and work in better conditions by regulating and monitoring working practices and standards.” Unless Pro can prove that our government is able to ensure all prostitutes the ability to access medical care and better conditions, this will be thrown out. Essentially, our government is not able to provide this care for the reasons that we are already in too much debt, making this legal and having to ensure medical care for thousands who most likely carry STDs anyway is not a good use of the government’s money. If it was, this would have happened already.2. Governments are always looking to increase revenue, if this was truly good for our government, we would have seen more talk about it. Only certain counties in Nevada have legal prostitution. Clearly, if it was working as well as we need it to, it would spread beyond just these counties.My Case: Legalization of prostitution expands the sex industry. It does not regulate it.1. The sex industry now accounts for 5 percent of the Netherlands economy [1]. Over the last decade, as pimping and brothels were legalized in the Netherlands in 2000, the sex industry expanded 25% [1]. At any hour of the day, women of “all ages” and races, barely dressed, are put on display in windows of Dutch brothels and sex clubs and offered for sale -- for male consumption. Most of them are women from other countries [1] having been trafficked in.In this point we can see that simply enough, the legalization of prostitution does not regulate enough, and does not stop pimping. It makes it legal for the pimps to sell their clients. (This will be explained further in contention 2).2. Faced with a dearth of women who want to work in the legal sex sector, the Dutch National Rapporteur on Trafficking states that in the future, a proposed solution may be to offer [to the market] prostitutes from non EU/EEA countries, who voluntarily choose to work in prostitution. They could be given legal and controlled access to the Dutch market [2]. As prostitution has been transformed into sex work, and pimps into entrepreneurs, so too this potential solution transforms trafficking into voluntary migration for sex work. The Netherlands is looking to the future, targeting poor women of color for the international sex trade to remedy the inadequacies of the free market of sexual services. In the process, it goes further in legitimizing prostitution as an option for the poor.Though Pro would have you believe that this is such a good thing, and it gives options to the poor, we can see in this point that because there is a lack of women who want to work in prostitution in the EU/EEA countries they are looking towards trafficking in foreign women who have no other option. Sex trafficking leads to many diseases because of the poor condition of both the travel and the conditions in which they were kept before being moved. The poor do not go to prostitution because they want to, they go to it because it is the last option, it is the worst of the worst. Essentially, what we can infer is that if prostitution is legalized, those that have no other option would turn to it before they realize what the conditions are really like, and leave (like the Dutch women). The fact is, without the prostitutes, the sex industry would fail. If the sex industry fails, money has been far wasted by the governments that have legalized this practice. It would not bring in the revenue needed to support itself.Other Voting Issues: 1. Spelling and Grammar is a voting issue – Vote to Con for proper spelling and grammar.2. Sources and conduct are voting issues – Vote to Con for citing where the sources are used.NOTE: I would have made more points if not for the character count. I will add as the rounds progress, thank you. [1] Daley, Suzanne. (2001, August 12). "New Rights for Dutch Prostitutes, but No Gain. New York Times, pp. A1 and 4.[2] Bureau NRM. (2002, November). Trafficking in Human Beings: First Report of the Dutch National Rapporteur. The Hague. 155 pp.