We should Legalize prostitution

Firstly, I will rebut my points. 1. Id cards: You say the police wouldn't be stupid enough not to put in security measures like Holograms, Fingerprints, etc. on. But the truth is this will require a lot of money for equipment to be established to read holograms, check fingerprints, fingerprints and DNA. It this current economic climate, it is nearly impossible for a government to subsidize new high-tech equipment for brothels. As I mentioned, this can be forged. Simply placing in fingerprints, holograms and signatures doesn't mean it won't be cracked. Look at your average Money note. It has a signature, and numerous holograms as well as secret photo's hidden in it. Is it forged and used? Yes. 2. Minors: You say that professionals will have to supervise and protect minors from getting in. you're example is that the 3rd molar hasn't grown if you're a minor. These are referred to as wisdom teeth. I don't know what you're definition of 'Minor' is, as this grow between the ages of 16-21. This means that if you set the age to 18, a 16 year old can get in because he has developed faster. As well, some people have these molars removed if it causes them too much pain when it crowns. So, I have disproved that simple 'genetics' cannot prove if someone is old enough to use a brothel because people develop at different rates and it's injustice to someone who is 21 that can't get in because he isn't 'developed'. 3. Weekly check-ups: I apologize for poor grammar in my last argument regarding this point. My point is this: A weekly check up can be costly. I'm unsure of the cost of a gynaecologist in the Philippines, but I'm sure that the weekly rate x 52 x No. of prostitutes will equal alot of money, and with the cost of the high-tech. equipment you mentioned, would it actually make money when ii comes down to it? ? 4. Contraceptives: My opponent has Miss-interpreted my argument. I argued that Pills have low success rates if women are uneducated of their use. I never mentioned that they weren't a contraceptive, if anything mentioning them in such an argument would mean I'm saying they are a contraceptive. You mention injectable contraceptives, but you must remember that they last 3 months before they must be re-injected. Although this has it's benefit, it also has it's downsides. If the prostitute were to decide to have a child, they would have to wait 10 months until her menstrual cycle returned to normal. As well, a possible side-effect is weight gain, which can possibly make the prostitute un-attractive, and therefore make her lose business. You mention lastly that prostitutes are safer in brothels than out on the streets. This is true. What you're forgetting is that this Increases sex-tourism among the country. Soon enough, sex tourists will flock to the Philippines as prostitution is Legal and law abiding. However, with the high costs I mentioned earlier, it will be too expensive for a sex tourist and he'll decide to use the black market, as it is cheaper and he can't be punished, prostitution's legal! This can lead to experimentation and pedophiles coming over to experience legal prostitution when no-one will intervene, it is a law abiding service. You also have to remember because this is in the context of the Philippines, I will use facts of the Philippines to support my case. Currently, 95% of Philippines citizens believe in a religion that prohibits prostitution. It would be an outrage to ignore them in this equation, and to offend them by allowing what they believe to be wrong happening in their own country. As I quote my opponent, who lives in the Philippines 'what the church says is what the people do'. This is proof that religion has a strong place in the Philippines, and that this cannot be introduced before having some sort of referendum. As my opponent mentioned, the core of this debate is 'Does it protect Prostitutes? '. I even quote my opponent 'Yeah, I'm conceding in the fact that 9 out of 10 women doesn't want to sell their bodies'. This means that if the Philippines were to legalize prostitution, 9 out of 10 women who don't want to do it are now used legally. Alot of women will see it as an alternative to college and join, and are then sent in a system which will be corrupted, as you must remember ladies & gentlemen, it would be a former crime business, with most of its owners involved in other activities such as drugs. This will merely fuel other gangland activity, as criminals now have a legal arm of trading to get profit off, and it would require them to set up very little. In summation, my opponent has merely said that a legal brothel will give more protection to prostitutes, but with so many religious objections that would occur, the flaws in it's regulation and the fact it will fuel the gangland empires, it's Con's far outweigh the the Pros. Prostitutes are criminals by law, so why shouldn't they be punished for their Illegal activity instead of being given a safe haven like my opponent suggests,. His comeback to this would be that they're humans, but so are , drug dealers, burglars and hitmen who are classified as criminals because they have broken the law. If my opponents principal were to be applied elsewhere, it would be the same as saying Burglars are allowed to rob 'x' amount of money from peoples homes a year. Fair, no? I urge you to vote Con. Thank you.