Government in India should set up brothels and amend anti-prostitution laws.

Rebuttals: 1. On the contrary, people are still dying of aids. These are statistics of aids and death in 2012. (1) "Number of deaths: 6,955" Obviously, if people are still dying of aids, it is rare to be cureable. They maybe dying because a complete cure is still not discovered. Even if Timothy was fully cured, right now the cure maybe available only for the elite class. It takes time for the cure to become accessible for a common man. Judges, you may have noted that it should be ‘AIDS’ in capitals and not ‘aids’ as Con stated. 2. As for condoms, refer to argument 3. Prostitutes don't want the health check. They don't want to be exploited. What has medical examination got to do with exploitation in the first place? By the way, whether they like it or not but in a government brothel they have to go through medical tests. Even customers will prefer those call girls and sex workers who have gone through medical tests for HIV/AIDS. They may ask for health certificate before availing their services. Judges, another grammatical mistake has been committed by Con as he/she stated, “Prostitutes don't want the health check”, which I am sure that you are smart enough to verify that it is a broken English. 3. Citations, please? I have shown through my citation that women may not want to wear condoms for a potential boost in profit. Your word is not law. Are you blind or ignorant? I already mentioned a site as a citation which is http://www.catie.ca... where it is mentioned to detect HIV sooner maybe possible in future. I already stated that I am talking about government owned and managed brothels where it is mandatory for sex workers to have safe sex. The cost of a condom is very nominal as compared to cost of sexual services provided by call girls. It costs around only Rs 100-500 (USD $2-7,8). It can become a law if you have the dedication to enforce it as a law. Every law is a word initially and becomes law through proper execution and enforcement. It is necessary for it be a word initially so that it can be debated that whether it is good for the society and practically applicable or not. 4. Your data is skewed since it doesn't account for the medical care and awareness in the country. It also doesn't adjust for population size. It simply just states how much of the population have aids. This is not realiable data. Alright, then I guess you need the percentage. Even then, percentagewise also African countries top the list where generally prostitution is illegal. Pls go through this site which mentions percentage and not just number. http://www.aneki.com... Here, African nations of Swaziland, Lesotho, Botswana and South Africa top the list where prostitution is illegal. Judges, AGAIN you may have noted that it should be ‘AIDS’ in capitals and not ‘aids’ as Con stated. Also, he/she committed another spelling mistake as it is ‘reliable’ and not ‘realiable’. You did not address the other STDs; so I extend that argument. When I already addressed HIV/AIDS and told you that a cure will be available for them soon, your mentioning of other STDs is a weak argument. That is why I need not address it. Btw, you also did not address my other points and argument like, it maybe a source of earning for the unemployed, it will reduce r**e and crime against women etc. Rebuttals V2: 1. Citation needed Why are citations needed when I mentioned the reasons? Can you explain it to me? I may not have a practical example. However, I did give a deductive reason. Citations are needed for all of this. I have citations for my argument. Again, your word is not law. Why do you need citations? The citations which you stated don’t seem to have even a remote connection with this debate. AGAIN, every law is a word initially and becomes law through proper execution and enforcement. It is necessary for it be a word initially so that it can be debated that whether it is good for the society and practically applicable or not. During the start of the debate itself, I stated that it should be a law and therefore I agreed indirectly that it is not a law but it should be for which I gave reasons for it. My point stands firmly in place. Do not be overconfident, it does not stand firmly and it is limping as I have broken the bones in its legs by my arguments. Rebuttals V3. Citation needed. Your word is not law. My case still stands. Why do you need citations? The citations which you stated don’t seem to have even a remote connection with this debate. AGAIN, every law is a word initially and becomes law through proper execution and enforcement. It is necessary for it be a word initially so that it can be debated that whether it is good for the society and practically applicable or not. During the start of the debate itself, I stated that it should be a law and therefore I agreed indirectly that it is not a law but it should be for which I gave reasons for it. You are again overconfident that your case still stands as I have broken the bones of your case by my arguments and it is limping. This is relevant to the debate. Good thing that you agreed to it finally. It shows that even when offered a legal alternative, prostitutes will still conduct illegal business. Whether it's private or government maintained, it shows they will seek other alternatves. Why would prostitutes conduct illegal business in the first place and even if they would, they will not get customers as if not the prostitute but their Johns or customers would prefer a safe environment. Honourable Judges, another spelling mistake has been committed by Con as it is ‘alternatives’ and not ‘alternatves’. Rebuttals V4. Citations needed. Your word is not God. Why do you need citations? The citations which you stated don’t seem to have even a remote connection with this debate. AGAIN, every law is a word initially and becomes law through proper execution and enforcement. It is necessary for it be a word initially so that it can be debated that whether it is good for the society and practically applicable or not. During the start of the debate itself, I stated that it should be a law and therefore I agreed indirectly that it is not a law but it should be for which I gave reasons for it. I am an atheist for your information so do not mention about God for matters relating to me. You should have verified that whether I believe in God or not if you were going to mention the word God in this debate. I had backed my words with reasons and if you cannot identify those reasons then it is not my fault. I also, never mentioned directly or indirectly that my word is God so stop making baseless allegations. Overall, my opponent lacks in his citations and has formulated a sloppy rebuttal. Citations are needed. I can state citations only if there are enough reasons to do so. His round one and two arguments lack in citations; thus aren't relevant. Round one was the initial debate and therefore there was no reason for mentioning citations. However, it does not mean that it is irrelevant as there were enough reasons to back my claim and evidence is required only when there are reasons for doing so. As regards Round two, I mentioned many websites as citations but Con seems to be blind and ignorant to not to notice them. I had mentioned sites which had information about cure for AIDS, kits which detect HIV sooner than usual, statistics of the countries with most AIDS cases etc. but Con has ignored all of them and baselessly stated that I did not give any citations. Honourable Judges, I need to correct my spelling of a word in my previous round… ** Correction needed. I need to correct he spelling of ‘disease’ in my previous round. **It is unlikely that the sex worker is engaging in intercourse without using condoms everytime so it is not that the disease may become viral. It is ‘disease’ and not ‘desease’. I have corrected it before anyone can point it out. Therefore, pls do not count it as a spelling mistake. Thank you.