Prostitution Should Be Legalized

I also want to note that my opponent hasn't said anything to contend with the definitions and rule of this debate, so it must be taken for granted that my opponent has accepted these terms - whether known on his behalf or not. Seeing as how my opponent has completely ignored my argument relating to the morality of prostitution, it must again be assumed that he concedes this aspect of the issue, and instead intends to focus on the pragmatic effects prostitution will have economically. Since these are his only arguments, I will go on and refute them in the same breath. ==================== CON Claims: Legalizing prostitution will cause economic harm ==================== {quote}Legalizing prostitution on a large scale would probably make it harder for these states to sustain their economy. I mean, where would all the tourist revenue go? {endquote} ----> Simple, the organized prostitution rings (OPR) can be taxed. So when a customer comes to buy sex, he will obviously pay up and it will subsequently get taxed - just like any other store. Imagine a grocery store. And instead of vegetables and watermelons, you have boobs and butts. How will the tourist revenue do anything but soar? {quote}They go for the gambling and the prostitution. If you make prostitution widely available elsewhere, then both gambling and prostitution would no longer be the exclusive trademark of Nevada, as gambling has already begun to creep away from Vegas. {endquote} ----> Ah, so I see where my opponent's argument is going to - clever. This argument obviously ties in with the previous quote, so you can treat this rebuttal as a big summary. Simply put, while Nevada is known for it's prostitution and gambling "treats", it won't crash simply because prostitution will be legalized everywhere as well. I will list several reasons why: 1. Legalizing something and making it industry does NOT necessarily mean Vegas will suddenly lose their prostitution industry. In fact, I suspect it will do the opposite and RISE. Why you ask? It's simple, the concept of competition. Now that prostitution is a legal business, there will be, no doubt, competing places or even businesses to go to. To have an edge, different businesses will have different ways of appealing to their customers such as glamorous interior scenery, good prices, and/or temporary places to stay for the night. Another key aspect in this profession would be getting good girls, and the places with the best names will attract the best girls. Does the word Vegas not do anything but strike images of glamor in ones thoughts? In fact, Vegas' economy will BOOM with the legalization of prostitution since they will undoubtedly have a very good start in such a new industry if it were to be legalized. 2. However, let's even ASSUME that legalizing prostitution will be an economic kick-in-the-balls for Vegas. Gambling is the foremost reason for why people go to Vegas - just look at the Las Vegas Strip[1][2]. That, along with conventions such as the for gamers, brings in the majority of Las Vegas tourists. So even if we were to assume that legalizing prostitution would cause a dramatic blow to that part of Vegas' economy - it wouldn't matter that much. 3. However, coinciding in with the previous point is the question why it should even matter if Vegas were to be hit economically. Should an entire industry, and an entire potential for jobs, be discarded simply because Vegas won't be the king of prostitution rings in America? Rubbish! Unless argued otherwise, prostitution will bring in a plethora of jobs and money, something that would be GLADLY accepted in an economic situation such as this. ==================== Something to do with Nevada and Rhode Island ==================== I'm pretty sure that this snippet of my opponent's round in no way relates to my argument. Whatever the intentions of the original founders of Nevada were in legalizing prostitution are of no importance in this debate - it's just these arguments found right here. Secondly, it doesn't matter if the people of Nevada/Rhode Island are pushing for legalization against prostitution. To say otherwise would be the textbook definition of ad populum[3]. ==================== Prostitution is not a legitimate business in the U. S. ==================== So what? Whether or not something is legalized does not matter when concerning whether it should be. Hell, just look at this debate. On a large scale, prostitution isn't legalized but I'm still arguing against it. Gay marriage isn't legalized, but there's legitimate arguments for legalizing it. The legality of something has nothing to do with whether or not it's justified. ==================== Conclusion ==================== My opponent's main economic argument has been refuted, and I await his response. ---References--- 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://www.visitlasvegas.com... 3. . http://www.nizkor.org...