Sure!

I suppose, being "for", I should go first? But I do expect you to reply.

Let it be resolved that: loli hentai should be banned.

Definitions: Loli: A fictional entity with no basis in fact, that is presented as the form of a pre-pubescent female humanoid. Whether or not the presented form is indeed what they are to present on a meta level is irrelevent, that is to say, we will include ancient androids, aliens, 30-year-old elves, 900-year-old vampires, et cetera in this category, we are dealing with the physical presentation only, for simplicity's sake. .

Hentai: Drawn, written, or animated fiction content with the primary purpose of tittilation of the viewer.

Three positions to be against loli hentai:

1. Hentai in general is endemic in cultures with low birth rates of native populations, requiring imported populations to keep their population pyramid stable. Not only do imported populations throw off the national culture regardless of countries of origin and destination, but they require large sums of money to manage governmentally. If your goal is a stable pyramid-shaped population, which it appears to be the goal in basically every nation in the world, the banning of all fictional sex acts and endorsement of real sex acts makes clear and logical sense. People want sexual pleasure, if they cannot get it from fictional sources, they will go for real sources. Loli, being a subcategory of hentai, being a subcategory of fictional sex, should be restricted or banned based on this measure and goal. It will result in a few children being raped, sure, studies have overtly shown this over and over again, but a small price to pay for a proper population curve, which economically will make far more money than the costs of psychological and physical healthcare for the victims.

2. Loli presents unrealistic standards of behavior of youth. Face it, youth access sexual materials. They do, there's no stopping this, many have tried and failed. Despite this, most loli content is, obviously and for clear and blatant legal reasons, targetted at adult consumers (otherwise it would be distributing sexual content TO a minor, which is illegal and the creator/distributor should be arrested). Still, people generally seek out pornography of a similar age range to themselves for the most part, so youth would be accessing that content, and that means that loli is irresponsibly mis-educating the youth on proper sex education. Until it can be regulated and overseen to portray useful morals and educational life lessons, it should not be generally accessible, as that general access would lead to youth accessing it in turn.

3. Loli hentai provides an outlet for pedophiles aside from abusing real children. As we know, pedos are bad. I don't think I need to argue that point within this one, despite it technically being a different debate, I will beg the question: Let us assume pedos are bad, and that most people agree that pedos are bad. Not only does loli make it harder to track down pedos, since there's no victims to make a trail, it also is content heavily associated with them. That makes this a very easy "in" to initiate a societal control to shape society in a better way. Once you create precedent for controlling others, it gets progressively easier to do it more and more. If your goal is a thoughtcrime division, to have the government in every home, because you as ruler know better than your subjects (else why would you be ruler and not them?), then banning it makes for a great first step. No sane person would object to Protecting The Fictional Children, nor would they seek to be in the image of protecting Pedos in any way, therefore there would be minimal opposition to this first step, which can be referenced later when, going back to point 1 in example, you attempt to ban fictional pornography in general perhaps, or ban pornography made by [Ethnicity] peoples, which can later lead into a general ban on their works. Slippery slope is not a fallacy in this case, as I am proposing it explicitly as a plan to follow in order to reshape society in its entirety, using human nature's love of precedents and prior decisions as a cudgel to accomplish this task.

Your counter-arguments to my points? I feel they make a great deal of logical sense.