Prostitution should be legal in the United States

Many thanks to my opponent for all of his compliments, and for posting his round in a timely manner. I apologize for being busy (not really... because I've been having a lot of fun!) this holiday weekend and posting my round so late. If it's any consolation to my opponent, I have just a little bit of time to respond to his rebuttal. I will bullet point Con's main contentions numerically, and respond underneath. 1. We don't have the right to do whatever we want with our bodies (i.e., roam the streets naked, smoke pot, etc.). While it's true that we don't have the right (or rather, legal authority) to smoke pot, it is up for debate whether or not we should have that right. Likewise whether or not women should have the right to terminate a pregnancy is up for debate. And similarly, whether or not we have the right to do whatever we want with our own body in general (including prostitution) is a principle that many believe we do have the natural right to do, even if we are legally prohibited from doing so. In this debate, I contend that we do in fact have (and should have the legal recognition) the right to do whatever we want with our own bodies, so long as it does not physically inhibit or impose upon the rights of another - usually their physical person. Therefore Con cannot simply point out the obvious fact that we don't have the legal right to do whatever we want with our own bodies. Instead, he must explain why we should maintain the status quo; why we shouldn't have the legal right to do whatever we please with our own bodies, so long as it does not infringe upon another non-consenting individual. In other words, he must explain why two consenting adults shouldn't have the right to make the agreement to have sex with one another in exchange for money or material goods. Of course, this will be extremely hard for him considering adults choose to have sex with one another every single day all over the world, and have since the dawn of man. In fact, sex in exchange for material goods or resources is frequently how society describes or utilizes their relationships. 2. Society will have to foot the bill (medical expenses) if STD rates rise, which is inevitable. First, in the last round I pointed out that legal prostitutes are regularly tested for STDs, and as such are overwhelmingly clean in comparison to their illegal counterparts. As such, legalizing prostitution would actually help rather than hurt the goal of decreasing the spread of STDs. Second, brothels could easily require clients to also be STD-free, just as patrons who want to buy certain products must meet particular criteria (eg. you must be 21 to purchase alcohol). Third, the government could legislate against not covering the cost of STDs, the same way politicians have petitioned the government not to have to cover the cost of abortions in many states. 3. Legalizing prostitution would create bureaucratic measures in itself. This contention is at best irrelevant and at worst self-defeating. First of all, by acknowledging how many prostitutes there are, Con has conceded to how much the criminalization of prostitution has failed both as a deterrent and how much of a problem it has been in terms of financing - including lost tax revenue, and the cost of maintaining the criminal justice system. Second of all, swapping bureaucratic jobs is not equivalent here. By keeping prostitution illegal, you are forcing all of these employees into having criminal records which basically secures prostitution as the only job they can ever have thereafter. You are also putting these people in jail (more about that later) for performing a consensual act, which is arguably immoral. Third, the government doesn't have to fund the regulation. Oversight can be provided by private business, similar to how insurance companies provide a service in response to a government mandate. This will create jobs - jobs the government doesn't have to fund. 4. Children might be brainwashed into becoming prostitutes, rather than something honorable or useful. Considering the high demand for sex workers, prostitution it is certainly a "useful" job insofar as it provides supply for people's demands. Further, what authority does Con have to declare this profession as dishonorable? He dropped every contention of mine noting that some people really enjoy sex, and that every culture's view of sex and promiscuity/polygamy is different. Further, keep in mind that people can practice sex safely. Just because he might want to limit himself to one people or five people doesn't mean his approach to sexuality is any more "honorable" than someone who chooses to sleep with a lot of people. Con cannot self-righteously impose his subjective morals onto society. 5. Not all prostitutes will go through the process of being certified, or rather subjecting themselves to regulation. This contention can be applied to every single profession in the world. Not everyone is honest. For example: tax evasion. Some employers don't pay their employees "on the books." Some doctors aren't properly certified. Some contractors don't acknowledge building codes. Some people lose or don't renew their licenses, and continue to practice anyway. Some stores falsely report theft or commit insurance fraud. In short, of course some sex workers might not abide by all of the rules. That's completely irrelevant, as it applies to every profession. All you can do is attempt to put the best safeguards possible in place, just like with every other job. 6. Legalizing prostitution will increase promiscuity. I've already pointed out in the last round why this is irrelevant. People are already having casual sex, and being paid for it wouldn't affect the morality of the act itself. Additionally, people should choose for themselves whether or not having promiscuous sex is right for them. It is not the role of government to legislate personal morality. Moreover, criminalizing sex workers hurts them and their families. In addition to making them feel guilty about their profession (when there is nothing inherently wrong with sex), it makes them criminals. This takes sex workers away from their families, friends and children. Having parents in jail increases the likelihood that inmates' kids will go to jail. It is also dishonorable to punish consenting adults and by extension their children for choosing to have sex. It is also an incredibly expensive burden on those arrested to pay for attorneys fees, fines and other costs. [ Conclusion ] I've more than adequately negated all of my opponent's contentions. While I understand (and appreciate) Con's concession of many of my points for the sake of brevity, he cannot undermine the significance of my arguments. The audience must keep in mind how much legalization can benefit both individuals and society as a whole, as well as how much criminalization has many harmful effects on both as well. And without further adieu, just as I have to submit my round...