Soft porn serves no useful purpose.

People who like porn don't like soft porn and people who don't like porn don't like soft porn. So what's the point of it? It's not as though parents can watch it with the kids, is it? I mean they don't even show full frontal nudity on some of them. As far as I know, there are no religions that have doctrines like "Thou shallt not look upon moving images depicting the private parts of a woman, nor shall thee view any "think of the money" shots, however, thou art permitted to view topless women, that's alright".

I know a bloke who went into the newsagent and bought a DVD entitled Asian Babes in the Wood which had "Red-hot XXX girl-on-girl action featuring the most stunning girls in the Eastern hemisphere. This film will blow your socks off" written on the back. Anyway, when he got it home it turned out to be a load of old rubbish, all the interesting bits were out of shot. Apparently. I mean, you can see more nudity on a Mediterranean beach. What a flipping rip-off!

So, is there a place in society for soft porn? I think not.

First let's clear up the definition of softcore porn. Will you accept that it's porn without clear views of the genitals, boobs permitted?

"People who like porn don't like soft porn"

First of all I'd like to see some statistics, or something to back that up.
I prefer softcore porn over hardcore, therefor I am an anomaly according to your statement. I shouldn't exist.

There a obviously others that share my opinion, because a simple Google search for "softcore porn" provides nearly 2 million results (http://www.google.com...), and that's searching for the term in quotes! Clearly there's a demand for it. Whereas if I search for "wild frog porn", no results are given, meaning little or no demand.

Since my opponent gave some anecdotal evidence of him and softcore porn, I will do the same.

I prefer softcore porn because the models tend to appear more innocent, where most hardcore models look like they've been around the block more than a few times. There's also the teasing aspect, which in my opinion is more arousing than full frontal hardcore sex. You can picture people you know in those situations, while for most people it'd be kind of hard to see a girl they like being pounded by some huge guy that dominates her.

On softcore porn serving no purpose, it certainly serves a purpose for those that enjoy it. The purpose of porn is to arouse, and soft core porn arouses me, thus giving it purpose.

Many thanks to my opponent for joining this debate.

I took the opportunity to examine his profile and discovered that his profession stated "student" rather than "escaped convict" or "prisoner on the run". From this, we must conclude that he is a decent, law-abiding citizen. I also noted that he was only 17 years old, which means, as a law-abiding citizen, he will not have previously viewed pornography, as minors are prohibited to do this by law. Therefore, dear voters, any comments my opponent makes on the subject in hand must be considered as no more than conjecture, speculation and hearsay.

My opponent googled "softcore porn" which resulted in 2 million results. I would suggest that most of these sites were dedicated to campaigns against softcore porn and I defy my opponent to provide a link to a genuine soft porn site without getting this debate cancelled by support!

In the course of his research, my opponent also googled "wild frogs porn", which resulted in no results. I expect my opponent was getting confused with "wild frog spawn", which just underlines his lack of understanding of adult entertainment!

I do agree, however, that the more weathered porn actresses lack the sexual appeal of the more fresh-looking girls but consider this: say the teen lovely that lives next door to you came round and offered to do a striptease for you and got to the point where she was completely naked except for her knickers, would you tell her to stop there and go home? I suspect not.

It's the same with porn, though I can't prove it by providing a link for obvious reasons, but there are some nice young porn actresses that go the Full Monty, when my opponent reaches the age of 18 he will be able to discover this for himself!

My opponent has made a fatal flaw. I will address it, and extend my other arguments from round 1 to this round since they were not disputed.

You surely know that in the United States we have a criminal procedure. Not all criminals are arrested upon committing a crime, and many go un-arrested for the rest of their life because they were not caught.

Jaywalking is illegal in certain places, but those that do it are not arrested moments later unless they are caught. If everyone that commits a crime is instantly arrested and convicted that assumes a hypercompetent, all knowing government, that we do not have.

So I may or may not have ever viewed porn in my 17 years, but do not assume that just because it's illegal that means there's no way I couldn't have.

Also, yes I am a student, but Juvenile Detention centers have school for the inmates to attend. I could very well be a convict spending my time in juvy and still be a student.

In conclusion:

-It is still possible to be a student and a criminal.

-Not all criminals are arrested upon committing a crime.

-I can say I am 119 years old on Debate.com, so do not trust the information on my profile to be accurate in the fist place.

-One can read the Google results for "Softcore Porn" without visiting the sites and come to the conclusion that the vast majority of them are not anti softcore porn sites like my opponent claims.

-I am aroused by softcore porn, and even if no one else is, it still serves a small purpose to me. Small but still a purpose nonetheless.

I do not wish to make any new arguments, as that would be unfair to my opponent.

If you think I debated the topic well, please vote CON.