Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
If prostitution is indeed the world's oldest profession, then it might also be one of the world's oldest controversies. Prostitution combines sex and money, two subjects guaranteed to create conflict. While some advocates insist that legalizing prostitution would reduce crime, they're met head on by another group decrying the idea of bringing the sex trade into the open. Should prostitution be legal?
Prostitution is allowed in Neveda in rural counties, counties of where the populaiton is less then a certain number, I belief either 200,000 or 100,000. These Brothels are not at all close to schools, churches and or parks, (thus not exposed to children or families spending an afternoon),The girls that work there are all adults, they have choosen to performed that kind of work, they have not been forced and/or coerced into being sex workers. By Law they received monthly medical check-ups, to detect S.T.D.'s. The girls live on the premises where there is more then enough supervision and security to assured a smooth business transaction between two consenting adults, the brothels in Neveda consitute a "Controled Environment". I have never heard of and or read any reports of Criminal Activity in and arround the Neveda Brothels, criminal activity and other problems usually associated with "sreet level prostitution" in the inner cities, criminal activity such as (1) the use and abuse of drugs (2) "Forced Prostitution" by pimps and other human trafficers, (3) S.T.D's. (4) Furthermore in large cities such as Los Angeles, Street Gangs sometimes charge the girls a weekly "tax" for working the streets, streets which those gangs claimed as their own.
- beenthere777
June 22, 2009 6:32PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
I find it interesting that you say they are all adults and yet you refer to them as girls. I thought the same thing when traveling through Las Vegas and noticed all the ads are for "Girls direct to your room."
What does it say about the objectification of women and the victimization of women that we call even adult prostitutes girls?
- KCallahanH June 23, 2009 1:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
I'm sure men are not objectified by the use of the word "boy."
- userk June 25, 2009 1:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
most of the women go to pimps so they can have protuction from the police . they when they want out they can't get out.so if we made prostitution legal they no need for pimps
- cnhasty21 July 17, 2009 12:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Who am I to say that it should not be. As long as it stays in its place and children are not involved, makes no difference to me what someone does to their own body.
- rkm June 22, 2009 9:01PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
and prostitiution is a viable income source, well, society can start to change. forget waiting tables, just blow. who cares, mommy did it, so did the neigbors, and my kinder garden teacher quit her job.
imagine a world where 90% of our female students turn to prostituion to suppliment their income. What not legalize everything. Let the rich have no restraints.
- jxzac June 24, 2009 7:02PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
"imagine a world where 90% of our female students turn to prostituion to suppliment their income."
Why would 90% of women turn to prostitution? Do you really think that such a massive number of women would want to be prostitutes if it was legal ? All those women who become doctors , lawyers, teachers, and such were just taking their second choice?
- MrBook June 24, 2009 7:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Certainly, not all exchanges of sex for some other value besides the act itself, be it money or other "compensation", are called " prostitution ", but they are nevertheless prostitution in nature.
I might also add , not all acts of presently illegal prostitution are without desireable emotional content between the parties involved. If one has sex with an individual labeled a "prostitute" for nothing more in return than sex and emotional fulfillment, has one committed an illegal act? If one not necessarily labeled a "prostitute" has sex with one or more other persons as compensation for something other than pure cash, has one committed a legal act?
Why single out those who receive pure cash from those who receive some other type of barter in exchange for sex? I have no doubt the percentages are very high for those men who have given something of value other than sex in exchange for sex and those women who have given sex in exchange for something else entirely. If I had to guess, it has been and already is at or above 90% on both counts.
Perhaps culture picks on those officially labeled "prostitute" for their lack of subtlety.
- Naumadd August 28, 2009 2:13AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
"Certainly, not all exchanges of sex for some other value besides the act itself, be it money or other "compensation", are called " prostitution ", but they are nevertheless prostitution in nature."
Not at all, prostitution is an act by an individual, not a property of that individual. If an individual who works as a prostitute has sex with someone else but does not do so in exchange for monetary compensation then they are not engaging in prostitution.
"Perhaps culture picks on those officially labeled "prostitute" for their lack of subtlety."
Not in a legal sense. Prostitution in a legal sense is defined rather strictly, and it is that definition that we are working from in this discussion.
- MrBook August 28, 2009 6:14AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
I have a better question: Why should prostitution be illegal?
The way the original question is stated mis-frames the entire debate and predisposes a clear bias. In matters of ETHICS, the status quo - the fact that it HAS BEEN made illegal - should have no influence on the debate at all. The weight of history should be left at the door when ethics are at issue. I won't even waste my time trying to argue or answer that original question.
- VulcanTourist June 24, 2009 11:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
...a sex change can turn casually a man into a woman and nobody will be able to spot the difference.
Imagine how many men would do tricks when they can turn a woman in a 4 day surgery and recovery looking like angelina afterwards and turn back with another 4 days of surgery and recovery.
Oh right, in ten years we'll be there, with full VR, And in 30 with full medical nanoids.
- Khannea Suntzu
June 25, 2009 1:25AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
when I turn off my neighborhood street onto the main thoroughfare, no matter the time of day, I see women of all ages from very young to very old, wearing anything from tube dresses to fanny packs and hauling trash bags or second hand purses they most likely nabbed from the overflow of a goodwill donation box. They are skinny and malnourished and they look exhausted. I think about what their lives must be like. What has pushed them to live on the outskirts of MY reality. I work and go to school and have a family while these women get into cars with strangers, to do god knows what, for god knows how much. Their lives, thier safety is completely in the hands of strangers, strangers willing to have sex with women who do not appear to be healthy or happy in anyway. What kind of person could find enjoyment in sex with someone so desperate, so degraded? I am all for consenting adults having sex with each other in whatever manner they wish, so long as all participating parties remain safe, but that’s just it; “consenting adults” is a relative term and what is safe really; when you are in a situation that can seem inescapable? I will tell you right now that I am stone cold against women thinking that prostitution , for whatever reason, is there only option and I am whole heartedly disgusted by men who exploit those women. Every time I pass a streetwalker, I cringe, thinking about the horrible situations they have to endure. Just look at the number of crime victims that have been prostitutes. Victimless crime my ass. They are easy targets; they appear as a disposable commodity on both sides of the law . If there is a way to ensure that prostitution be a safe industry, where the women are protected and their needs acknowledged, I’ll be the first to support it. But just look at porn these days; It’s filthy, vile, disgusting stuff. We have exceeded our desire for what is taboo or risqué and now we border on the insane. I have seen some sick and twisted stuff out there and I have seen the faces of young women who were not as willing as one in such a compromising situation should be. In my opinion, it just won’t work. We will sink deeper and deeper into sadism and eventually return to a primitive state of mind....unless we can raise our collective morality....and I don’t have any suggestions on how to accomplish that
- camantonio September 5, 2009 2:07AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
While you have a right to be against women thinking that prostitution is their only option, you are dead wrong in thinking that in every case, it is their only option. Blaming the johns is no better. Reasons for paying by a john tend to vary greatly.
You have seen some sick and twisted stuff? Were you forced to? Under what circumstances?
Come on people, discussing a subject based on pure assumptions is not a discussion. Certainly deciding what other people may or may not do with their own bodies should never be done under assumptions. Hell, we all assume no one would like to walk into a crowded place with a bomb strapped to our asses and hit the button don't we? But hundreds and thousands of people are totally willing to do it, and do.
There is no way to ensure that prostitution is a safe industry any more than ensuring that a doctor will not catch aids, or ensuring that a truck driver will not crash. But guess why there are ways to lessen the risks for doctors and truck drivers? Because their activity is legal . Make their activity illegal and watch them become very dangerous professions indeed.
Were prostitution not driven underground, these women could practice their chosen profession under the color of the law , and they would receive much needed protection from the police as well as proper medical treatment and vd prevention assistance. Force them into the back alleys and what do you have? Abortion clinics of the 19th century. THAT's what makes it dangerous.
- topapito
October 9, 2009 6:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
While I agree with you that if it were legal prostitution could be better "standardized", I fear it would bring with it other factors that are not being mentioned. You have to be licensed to provide a service, I'm sure taxes , classes, certifications, trainings, etc. would be required both for practitioners of pleasure and for the people hired to monitor their practices. These things require money ; money that an old crackhead on the corner ain't gonna have! You ask "You have seen some sick and twisted stuff? Were you forced to? Under what circumstances? " Seriously? The world is rife with sick and twisted stuff, just open a newspaper, turn on your TV, stumble the internet , it can't be avoided. Anyway, avoiding the information that's out there doesn't change the fact it exists. I don't want to watch a young girl get into a car with a stranger, but I honestly just have to drive down certain streets at night to witness it. The notion of the possibilities of what might happen to her are enough, I don't need to see it. "discussing a subject based on pure assumptions is not a discussion"....I'm not making assumptions, I am stating the obvious, relaying what I have heard or seen first hand. "deciding what other people may or may not do with their own bodies should never be done under assumptions." Again, people are allowed to do what they want with their bodies, but who is setting the precedent? Are you sure that everyone has the capacity to make educated and informed decisions, or does the world at large play a part in setting standards for its citizens, allowing and supporting behaviors that are offensive and degrading to some? I don't know the answer, and I doubt anyone does, but I know what I believe and I believe that while women have the right to chose how to use their bodies, we also, as a society have a responsibility to raise our children with the idea that our bodies are not for the selling, we should respect ourselves and recognize our worth. I have nothing against women who enjoy having sex getting paid for it, I wish my husband would buy me new shoes every time we did it, that would be the best of both worlds. But I do have a problem with women using their bodies as a last resort, and most of all the men who take advantage of that.I'll say it again, "If there is a way to ensure that prostitution be a safe industry, where the women are protected and their needs acknowledged, I’ll be the first to support it."
- camantonio October 13, 2009 1:21PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
I agree that working girls expose themselves way more than they should. But the realities of this world are such that it doesn't really matter whether we can give our nod to a certain lifestyle or not. Bad things will happen to people who expose themselves. I think about all the criminal activity that goes unpunished and unreported precisely because these girls are forced to live on the fringe of society . Providing them a chance to within that world, legalize themselves and partake in the benefits of our society will give them a boost in many ways. Provide them with the same expectation you would have of the police if accosted on the street and you called 911. Or if God forbid, during a nighttime drive you were attacked or threatened. The fact that you do not live on the fringe allows you a certain security these poor women do not have. Legalization would give it to them. Nobody needs a class on how to perform the sexual act. All they need is a tax number and a license to identify themselves with. This is something anyone can afford. This would make these girls members of the society they live in and afford them protection you and I can demand from our police forces as tax paying legally abiding citizens. Something legalization would give them immediately. That's all I am saying. I don't agree with their choice, but if I were tasked with their protection the first thing I would do is bring them out of the darkness which society has forced them to live in.
- topapito October 13, 2009 6:44PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Where would these sex workers work from? Their homes? What if they don't have homes? Can you get a license if you have a criminal record? Would there be physical exams, blood tests, etc? What is the cost of all this and what percentage is paid by taxpayers? When I think about making this an actuality I think of women who work the streets, not women who are listed in the phone book as escorts and work out of hotels. I imagine women who have NO other options, no skills, no experiences, no resources, who would be intimidated by the legal process that licensing would entail. When a program is created to do all of what you mention, I will be a believer. But there doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer. And until then I will focus on raising my daughter with a strong sense of self worth and teaching the young men in my life that respecting yourself includes respecting others. Maybe someday people will stand up against the objectification of women and the degradation of healthy sexual relationships.
- camantonio October 14, 2009 12:28AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
As its been pointed out, it IS LEGAL!!
Even our own government has run a brothel! (The IRS when they seized the Mustang Ranch for back taxes , they kept running it, until it was made a joke on the Tonight Show.)
The question should be, should prostitution be legal EVERYWHERE.
The answer should be, only if you want to clean up the street prostitution, get rid of diseases that are spread, & be able to regulate it, to guarantee the safety of both the prostitute & her clients.
- John556 September 17, 2009 7:03AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
You could not have centered that hammer any better. Nail on the head. Please take a bow.
- topapito October 9, 2009 6:12PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
But by asking whether it should be legal the question is still the same. Should it be legal? Like, legal in those places where it currently is not. I live in Spain, and in Spain, it is legal for example in Barcelona. Legally run brothels there. Those girls have more protection in Barcelona than in Madrid where it is not persecuted, but also not legal. It's all about protection of citizens regardless of their job or profession.
- topapito October 13, 2009 6:48PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
thanks for the view point from Spain, and it gives us something else to consider.
That even places where its not prosecuted, it would be better to have it legal , to better regulate & protect people.
Thanks---
- John556 October 13, 2009 8:04PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Comprimise never leaves one victimless, only used and abused. I challenge you to go out and take some more surveys. Ask the prostitutes how they feel about their jobs . Go out into the streets and ask them how happy they are. Get some good info going. I want data. I want results. I want to hear from the girls who walk the streets after dark, wondering if they will be the next victim of a murder . Ask them if they have any hope for their future or goals. Ask them if the want a husband and children . Ask them where they will end up. Give me the stastics on the value of prostitution as a career and how it affects a woman's life. Ask them how they like catering to the desires of perverts. Prostition erodes the value of family.
- Alayna Staggers October 13, 2009 3:09PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
But making it illegal will not stop the pain and the hurt and the violations and the degradation of doing a job like that. Give them the opportunity to come out of the darkness where prostitution sits today, and afford them the civil protection you and I can legally demand from the police , and you will see far better results from these poor girls than we can ever hope to see now. Don't you see that by forcing them into the darkness we are actually harming them more? What the profession does to a person should be secondary to what we as a society do to them by forcing them underground. If they were in the legal light, think of the opportunities that would present themselves to these girls. The ability to meet regular people and actually begin to believe that they can change their lives. Keeping them where we can't see them forces them to live in the gutters of our world, and guess what you will find there. I can certainly tell you there are no wonderful grandmothers such as yourself in the dark streets. Love your picture btw! I have to small daughters who have made it a point to kill their father before they turn 5. LOL. Seriously though, I am not arguing FOR the profession, I am arguing for the women who are in it and are not seeing a way out because we force them back into the dark. WE as society need to turn on their light. Legalizing them will do this.
- topapito October 13, 2009 6:56PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
I see your point. Are we going to make it ok for pimps to own these women and if so, are there going to be restrictions on how they can be treated. Will they have health insurance ? Will the places they operate in be segregated so they are away from schools , churches and places where people don't want to observe this activity. Will the men who come and go feel comfortable as though they were going to Walmart?
My biggest questions are will the women be treated well and will they gain in self respect and what type of retirement will they have? I want to know how the prostitutes feel so let's ask them if they had the opportunity would they choose another lifestyle.
- Alayna Staggers October 13, 2009 8:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Self respect is in a large part created by the values and attitudes of the people, community, and society around us. For example,if you as a mother communicate in some way to your child that being a garbage collector means being "less", then your child would feel "less" if he/she becomes a garbage collector. If you communicate to them that any sex except that between married heterosexuals is "less", then they will feel "less" if they engage or feel desire to engage in any other kind. If you communicate to your child that being "gay" means being "less", then he/she will feel "less" if they are. If you communicate to your children that certain consensual sex acts between adults -- for example, cunnilingus or anal intercourse -- is "perverse", then they will feel "less" if they engage or desire to engage in those activities. If you communicate to your daughters that having sex for money is "less", then it is YOU who have lowered their self respect -- it is actually you and whoever else has judged them as engaging in an "unapproved" choice who has made them feel "less".
Prostitutes (and here I mean only women or men over the age of consent who choose to offer sex for profit) who suffer from low self esteem about being prostitutes do so BECAUSE women such as yourself unwittingly have communicated to them that they are "less" by being prostitutes.
A large part of the solution you hope for lies with YOU changing your attitude about prostitution .
Along with surveying prostitutes, though, surveys are also needed of other low- pay , "demeaning" professions for comparison of attitudes -- lets's ask the kids with no other choices of legal employment except at MacDonalds and WalMart if THEY would choose another lifestyle if they had opportunity.
- eojtus January 16, 2010 6:26PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
In case you're wondering...I'm contentedly married 30 years to the same wonderful woman, have six children with her, including three daughters, and have never hired nor had any desire to hire prostitutes.
And to pre-answer the question -- yes, I would fully endorse the deliberated decision of any of my wife or daughters to engage in legalized prostitution .
- eojtus January 16, 2010 6:34PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
enjoy!
- Alayna Staggers January 17, 2010 4:32PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
are you going to post what I wrote? alaynastaggers@yahoo.com
- Alayna Staggers October 13, 2009 3:18PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
As long as prostitution remains illegal women will have little to no legal protection. Bring it out into the open so that it can be regulated (and taxed).
- MrBook June 23, 2009 6:37AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
How can prostitution be regulated and taxed?I say prostitution should be legal but how are you going to tax it.
- countryboy July 2, 2009 10:17PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
The easiest way would be to license it just like any other business. Street walking would remain illegal (it is very dangerous) but licensed brothels / escort services could be taxed just like any other business. The same with the prostitutes themselves, their earnings would be taxable (just as our are).
- MrBook July 4, 2009 1:30PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
To each his own choice. In the end the results will become aparant.
Everyone has to make up his own mind how to live his life and what is acceptable for him. But, if you have a cause, stick with it and make things happen. If you really want a new law created, get a group going, start writing your congressmen and work in the direction of what you want. Write to your city council. Put a bumper sticker on your car. Get a website to promote your beliefs. Write your local newspaper. I encourage everyone to stand by what they believe in.
- Alayna Staggers October 14, 2009 12:17PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Your analogies between sex trade occupations and other occupations such as sweatshops, custodial services, and so on, breaks down because those who are forced into labor in those fields are not repeatedly raped to make them feel worthless and completely degraded. The fact is the child prostitution feeds the adult sex trade. The fact also is that demand exceeds supply, creating incentives for lawbreakers to continue to exploit children and young women. Legalizing prostitution will not diminish the demand and may increase it.
- cburkitt July 1, 2009 12:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
I believe prostitution is already legal in some places.
I used to be against the legalization of prostitution, until I realized that perhaps some people are unable to find someone to have a sexual relationship with and sex is a natural urge which needs to be fulfilled.
At least legalizing it might allow such people to have these needs met without having to consort with the criminal element to do so.
Maybe requiring a prescription and putting it under some kind of health legislation might help as well.
Certainly if we can legalize the killing of unborn babies under the guise of health issues, prostitution is a minor use\misuse of our medical system.
- james1951
July 24, 2009 1:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
This would be a first.What would you do go to your DR and ask for a prescription for sex?
- countryboy July 26, 2009 6:10PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Taxation is simple. Only licensed prostitutes can provide the service legally and must report their income.
- james1951 July 24, 2009 1:43PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Come on now.DO you think all the other prostitutes will come running to get a license so they can be tax?
- countryboy July 25, 2009 3:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
If it means a safe environment , a wage, not being busted by the police .
Legalizing it would also mean that people could open legal brothels. Which would hire legal prostitutes. Those places would be thriving with people willing to pay for sex but unwilling to break the law .
Illegal prostitution would not be completely eliminated, but it would be vastly reduced.
- MrBook July 25, 2009 5:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
They dont pay taxes now.Why would they want to start paying taxes.Brothels would put the lower income people more at risk.They cant pay for the high price of Brothels.
The only thing with having brothels would give the rich a good time.
- countryboy July 25, 2009 6:21PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
So why did the number of illegal speakeasies drop after prohibition ended?
Allow it to be legal and people will start legal brothels, because there would be a great deal of profit to be made in their operation... a chain of legal brothels would net a great deal of money .
- MrBook July 26, 2009 9:30AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
I have no problem with legal brothels but what about the poor ugly ladies how are you going to tax the $20.00 BJ'S
Like I said do you think they will come running to be taxed.
- countryboy July 26, 2009 5:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
They may not come running to get taxed, but the lure of operating in the open and receiving a set wage will bring many.
It will not completely eliminate the problem of illegal prostitution , but it will mitigate it a great deal.
- MrBook July 26, 2009 9:20PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
those ugly poor ladies will be out of a job if there are legal brothels. who wants a to a get bj from a shady guly lady for $20 when they can get a nice bj for $25 at a legal brothel?
- GlobalCitizen
August 16, 2009 12:55AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
No, many will come running for the legitimacy of the change . If you think about it, there are the many advantages of legal industries of which illegal prostitution cannot rightly take advantage. Also, one doesn't "tax sex", one taxes the commerce, i.e., the estimable exchange of value for value. What is the monetary value exchanged?
That's what is taxable. Sex - legal or illegal - always has and always will have economic value. The trick is deciding if the "price" paid is equal to the experience. That question is as old as the act itself.
- Naumadd August 28, 2009 2:30AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Tell me who is the tester?For the price paid is equal to the experience.Maybe obama will made a prostitution Zar!
- countryboy August 30, 2009 3:15PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Many prostitutes are proud of the money they bring home to raise kids , care for parents, go to college . Arguing that the great majority of tax evasion will come from prostitutes is just ignorant. Like your local mechanic, electrician, plumber, restaurateur, and even you would not jump at the chance to skim a little off the top of your tax bill. Ever hear of the phrase, "will you be wanting a receipt with that?"
- topapito October 9, 2009 6:17PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Yes some will.And the ones with out a license would get locked up.
- countryboy October 11, 2009 9:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
What about the unlicensed prostitutes.What would you do with them?
Or the one time prostitutes how needs some extra money to pay for her childs shoes.Would you make them get a license too?
All licensing would do would harm the poor.
- countryboy July 26, 2009 6:19PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
"What about the unlicensed prostitutes.What would you do with them?"
The same thing that happens to anyone who operates without a license.. prosecute them.
"All licensing would do would harm the poor."
How so? Licensing brothels would protect the poor by moving their work out of the shadows where they can be exploited to where they can take a legal stand regarding their rights and pay.
- MrBook July 26, 2009 9:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
"Prosecute them" Thats the problem now!And thats the harm to the poor.They are branded for life after there prosecuted!Make prostitution legal and free from tax.
- countryboy July 27, 2009 6:28PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Regulation is needed to protect the prostitutes themselves, and to ensure that a healthy environment is maintained.
- MrBook July 27, 2009 9:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
We need less regulations not more.That would be more big brother that we dont need.
- countryboy July 28, 2009 6:57PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Like the FDA, the EPA, local health departments...
- MrBook July 28, 2009 7:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Like their not being prosecuted now? I'd rather be prosecuted for failure to obtain a license than for prostitution .
- topapito October 9, 2009 6:19PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Yes but why buy a license if you think your going to stop.Most dont like it and haves hopes to get out of prostitution .Some are good people just down on there luck.
- countryboy October 11, 2009 9:30PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
If old Mrs. Howard next door needs a shelf built and is willing to bake me a scrumptious apple pie in exchange, would you call that a taxable exchange? It certainly has been an act of commerce, hasn't it? Value exchanged for value? If a tenant is willing to sleep with the landlord for a reduction in rent, is that an act of prostitution ? Is it taxable? Does it require a license? Commerce has occurred, value has been exchanged for value just as surely as if pure cash had been paid. Would you demand licensure for every technical act of prostitution? Why not demand a license for every act of commerce involving barter such as the shelves for pie transaction? Should Mrs. Howard and I be jailed or fined for our behavior? Why? Why punish the sex for rent exchange? Why punish sex for cash? Why demand licensure for any of it? Is it really anyone else's business my exchanging shelves for a pie or someone exchanging sex for rent or for cash? How does licensure improve the liberty of those involved? How does is improve the liberty of all others?
The answer is, perhaps it doesn't improve anything at all. Perhaps, it is just more of the same - control of that which ought to be free to exist without coercion or interference. Perhaps, it's people pretending to respect for individual right and liberty rather than the genuine thing.
- Naumadd August 28, 2009 2:40AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Just as being paid a few dollars to walk a dog is not taxable income so to is getting a quick tumble in exchange for the same bit is not really prosecutable.
Licensing is to ensure a safe and healthy environment for both parties involved in prostitution .
- MrBook August 28, 2009 6:01AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
The laws for small businesses are already well established and clear. Nothing new need be created. A "prostitute" need only act as a small business with the usual forms and documentation and regular tax filing. Cheating on the taxes would incur the same penalties and punishments as already occur with any other small business. Of course, prostitutes might incorporate individually or together thus involving those already established practices.
One, of course, can envision certain health regulation peculiar to prostitution but it's difficult to imagine anything uniquely complex to the industry not already common elsewhere.
Forming as a business has its legitimizing qualities far more valuable than the negative tax considerations to pass up. Positive tax considerations would include deductions for business expenses, etc. that prostitutes cannot officially take advantage of now in those places where prostitution is currently illegal.
- Naumadd August 28, 2009 2:24AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
The Law which the author has stated is way over board.
- benjaminsampath
August 4, 2009 4:44AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Legalization of prostitution could free owners of small businesses from the risk of accusations of sexual harassment. They would just have to say up front to the women they hire that sex with the boss is one of the job requirements.
- fsilber September 23, 2009 12:24PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I am just going to say...
That when prostitution is legal , it may just become a problem to park your car in the subway with all the musicians playing by the subway entrances and the loafers lying in the gutters. Not to mention the birds flying through the air.
What does any of that have to do with anything? Exactly.
- topapito October 9, 2009 6:24PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Having sex for money is prostitution . If prostitution were legal , then the boss could make having sex for money (i.e. one's wages) part of the job requirements. Obviously, if prostitution were legal, then it will be legal to hire one.
- fsilber October 11, 2009 9:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Not allowing prostitution is about as preposterous as not allowing people to work in sales. An argument can easily be made that many salespeople are prostitutes at a psychological level (just go visit any car dealership) and that endless repetition of their unhealthy lifestyle endangers the fabric of civil society .
Of course there are levels of prostitution (some products sell themselves), but securing the ability to sell such products is hypercompetitive, and inevitably, commissions/margins for sellers of such products are reduced because they are such an "easy sale". Reduced margins return an otherwise balanced salesperson back to being a "whore" who must become aggressive to sell to someone who may otherwise be undecided about the product in question.
By that analysis, any producer that aggressively pursues exacting supply/demand yields (easier than ever with modern ERP systems) eventually turns their sales representatives into prostitutes.
While we aren't talking about sales reps, how is their mental hygiene less important than that of a sex worker? Doesn't this mental hardship in salespeople adversely affect society as a whole in a manner that is far more pervasive? There are orders of magnitude more sales reps in the world than there are sex workers, so any amount of adverse effect reverberates through society with far greater overall damage.
Yet, society continues to focus exclusively on sex workers as the only people forced into prostitution when it is abundantly clear that there is a massive class of white-collar workers who are also prostitutes. To allow one to ply their trade without allowing the other is class-based employment discrimination and is obviously illegal.
What we need is better mental health counseling for all kinds of folks in society, both sex workers and car salesmen alike. And if citizens are found subjugating others to such work (whether they are sales managers or pimps alike), they are the ones that deserve to be the target of the judicial system, not the ones who pursue an occupation because it makes sense for their unique circumstances.
- orangesauce June 23, 2009 1:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Yes
Equating prostitution and sales, in other than a sarcastic sense, is ludicrous. Nobody goes to college to study to be a prostitute. And those in sales have to compete to get those jobs and maintain strict quotas to maintain them. And if they exceed their goals, they are often rewarded with elaborate dinners, trips, trophies, and other prizes.
When's the last time you saw a little girl look at a prostitute and say, "That's what I wanna do when I grow up"? Never, that's when. And when's the last time a pimp said, "You have exceeded my expectations this year. Take two weeks and go to Jamaica, on me. Oh, and here's a gold necklace you can wear on your way. And I almost forgot, here's your cash bonus for spending that extra time on your back."
And your absurd argument, if it can even be called that, suggesting that those in sales suffer the same kind of mental problems as prostitutes is insulting to both sales professionals and prostitutes. People in sales are not regularly raped (in the literal sense, before you go there) by their clients. And if they don't produce, while they may lose their job, they won't be threatened physically, or severely beaten.
This must be a joke. No reasonable person could actually believe what you type. If you do, I would seriously suggest you see a mental health professional as soon as possible, because you need help.
- LagerHead June 23, 2009 4:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
If you don't want to see a sex worker, don't. If you have a friend that has a problem with infidelity, don't blame it on sex workers, help them.
Your prohibitionist fantasy is a marginalizing charade that can make anything dangerous. Legalize it, tax it, regulate it. Thousands of years of history show it works! But it's not going away because you want it to, that's for sure. You'll need a smarter plan than that.
To be fair, I don't know any strung out sex workers that get beaten up, or even any that have pimps. Most of them have college degrees, many of them advanced degrees. They are artists, writers and attorneys, and their work is entertaining and fun. They *like* it, they have time and money to fill passports before they expire, and their clients buy them "gold necklaces" because they enjoy spending the time together. They spend their time being the people that we all wish we had the time to be. They are courtesans, and their clients benefit from their service and care.
And yes, it happens that a little girl looks at a well-mannered and beautiful woman with poise and confidence and says "I want to grow up like her", while the little girl's parents and the sex worker roll their eyes a bit with a wry smile as if to say "if you only knew".
But maybe that's where your vitriol comes from, maybe you slave away for a buck and don't feel like it's ever enough to do what they do. That's understandable, but don't project your issues on other people or make baseless accusations against them. It's inappropriate for this forum and an unhealthy habit to have. Just sayin'.
As for the salespeople, I don't need to say any more, the stereotype is prevalent. Maybe someone in your family, maybe even you are a salesperson and you are offended. Pick any profession, to some degree we are all prostitutes, wiggling our ass a little bit here, dealing with demeaning crap there. If you are offended, separate it from the message and substitute in some other occupation that gets your guile. The message is economic discrimination of any kind is counter to the principles of any laissez-faire society , and if we are willing to protect one, we should protect all.
- orangesauce June 23, 2009 10:21PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
I'm glad that in the fantasy you live in women routinely get their B.S. in Whoreology and then go on get their doctorate in Whoris Prudence. But in the real world, that just isn't the case. While you might be able to point out a few high class call girls with degrees, to pretend that is the norm is crazy. And to ask anyone to believe it is even worse.
And while a little girl may point out a high class call girl, noting her expensive clothes and jewelry and say I want to be like that, she is idolizing the clothes. Not the time spent on her back with fat old rich guys panting and sweating all over them. She would never point to a crach-whore lying in an alley after her last fix and
So go ahead and live in your fantasy world where there are no victims and prostitutes are the high class call girls peddled by Heidi Fleiss and the likes. Where there are no women brutalized and living on the edge, doing whatever they have to get their next fix.
Keep telling yourself that women do not get kidnapped and sold into sex trades. Two of my wife's cousins had exactly that happen, but happily her family was able to raise enough money to buy them back. That's right, they bought two human beings. But if it makes you feel better, pretend it doesn't happen.
Just don't ask us to live in your little pretend world. While it may make you more comfortable, most of us don't even know how to get there.
And for the record, I really don't care if they legalize prostitution. Personally, I think it's wrong, but if you want to sell your body like a cheap car, I really couldn't care less. And if you want to be with women who have been with hundreds of other men (or vice versa) then more power to you. I'm just saying don't pretend there is no down side.
- LagerHead June 24, 2009 9:12AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: No
Sorry to hear that about your family. Now let's bring you back to reality.
Your are projecting your experiences on the rest of society , presuming they are universal fact, and making personal attacks on anyone that disagrees with you. Just because your wife's cousins have issues with crack cocaine and got involved with the wrong people does not mean that you are going to be able to will "the oldest profession" out of existence.
Quite to the contrary, you need to come up with something a little more innovative. Given your line of personal attacks and inability to focus on anything but trying to vilify me, I'm now going to assume that you are incapable of that and that this conversation with you is a waste of time.
Good luck with your life, and if your ego insists on getting in the last word, please do. Take some great shots. I'm not going to bother responding, and your fifteen minutes of fame on teh internets will be legend. lulz.
- orangesauce June 24, 2009 9:33AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
First, don't vilify ME for personal attacks and then accuse my wife's family members of being crack addicts. They are not drug users at all. They were kidnapped. So I guess all kidnapping victims are now crack addicts. Yea, that makes sense.
And as to my "inability to focus on anything but trying to vilify me" I pointed out several flaws in your argument, which you haven't addressed, nor can you with anything resembling reality. So you're right, it is a waste of time.
Finally, believe me, my life won't be anywhere near as good as yours. If you can tell me how to get to that fantasy world, it would improve vastly.
- LagerHead June 24, 2009 10:38AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
"crach-whore lying in an alley after her last fix" ... "Two of my wife's cousins had exactly that happen"...
If I misunderstood something in what you wrote, well, you have my apology.
Directions to "fantasy world": Ask questions instead of trolling for a fight. Assume others may have meant something subtly different than what was written or how you interpreted it based on your own filters. Accept that we all have something to learn from our paths (with everything that has happened on those paths) and refuse bitterness at all costs. Don't be jealous of others, befriend them and ask for help. When you get there, help others do the same.
Good luck.
- orangesauce June 24, 2009 11:03AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
All work comes with it's own inherant risks-- ANd if prostitution was legal , one could make a good living at it, and most of the risks in that field would be instantly marginalized. The fact that nobody sets out to be a hooker is kind of a strange argument--how many set out to be garbage men? Or insurance salesmen? Or textile workers ? Secretary at a discount sunglasses distributor? "golly, when I grow up I wanna run the dough-extruder at a pretzel factory" Did you set out as a child to do what YOU do for a living? If so, you are one of the few. A woman finding herself faced with prostitution is a sad thing, but why is it an illegal thing? Why is it considered a worse thing than begging? The moral objections here are simply thousands of years of indoctrination, rather than logical argument. The basis of capitalism is "find a need and fill it" women have something most men want, and if stats are right, it's something a huge proportion of men would are willing to pay for. what's the problem?
- smatman October 1, 2009 8:09AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
... the most despicable profession "worse than a whore" was a nurse.
No kidding. In som periods in the middle ages, being a woman who cared for the sick and dying was held in such societal contempt and scorn that after having been a nurse, these women could find no husband, had to live apart, where not allowed in churches and weren't even attractive as whores. A woman became a nurse if she had no alternatives and was not pretty enough to be a whore. They were regarded with the same loathing as people who buried the dead, streetcleaners, sewage collectors (urine was a critical component in staining clothes - don't ask) and dogcatchers.
But that changed. Right now being a nurse has a wholly different meaning. After religions appropriated the care for the sick, we started seeing the nursing profession in the light on highly disciplined, self-sacrificing nuns who gave and gave, under strict patriarchal supervision.
The same can happen with sex workers, as soon as this business is placed in some form of societal context. Exclusion and scorn is a form of abuse and should not just be silly or counterproductive - it should be il;illegal. Persecuting prostitution should be more illegal than prostitutes.
I can easily see this turn around. Right now a new generation is emergez that glamorizes pornography . Yes, the days are quite near when young girls and buys look with mezmerized starstruck eyes at a pornstar 'when she does anal' and have the earnest intent to emulate them every step of the way.
- Khannea Suntzu June 25, 2009 1:34AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
I am a nurse and what I do comes through education , compassion and character. I would hope we would not equate nurses with prostitutes as we would have to open up a college for prostitutes. Would one be able to get a government grant to attend prostitution school ?
Probably one reason nurses were put on such a low pedestal in the past was their becoming contaminated with incurable illnesses which spread rampantly in those days. TB, Bubonic plague, almost every disease was a death sentence as there was no antibiotics or other medication .
- Alayna Staggers October 13, 2009 3:26PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
... prostitutes gravitate towards a certain degree of desperation, or even opportunism. But what makes you think that ANY professional group would, under the same degree of societal marginalisation, have the same negative attitudes. As for prostitution schools , they exist even though you don't hear about them, and do not receive or need government recognition. The students of this (czech) private school tend to retire in their mid 30s.
But can I conclude from your position you look down on prostitutes? Can you unambiguously say that nurses are better than prostitutes? Is there something inherently sinister about prostitutes, aside from the context of societal contempt?
Bear in mind , nurses are under enormous pressure and by and large nurses are not the nicest people to be exposed to. Nurses are overworked, rude and sloppy. There is increasing hostility to nurses and physicians in general. Are you sure that the previous level of prestige physicians and nurses enjoyed might not change in the future.
What if in the future very few people are desperate and prostitution becomes a vocational profession that not just requires skill - you need to be good to be one. Not just pretty, but really nice company. Under such conditions prostitution might very well become a respectable career choice.
- Khannea Suntzu October 13, 2009 4:48PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
I am a woman and I conclude that women 's rights should be protected. I certainly do not look down on anyone, except the men who take advantage of these women. I am woman, so I am a part of all women. I care for the women who are hurting because of the abuse inflicted upon them by men who use them and contribute to their low self esteem.
I am not a nurse for prestige as most of my work the average person would not think of doing. I serve and care for others in their most vulnerable moments and if I am kind and compassionate while I am doing my job, that makes me a good nurse. Attending nursing school does not teach you how to care. I hope that I am nice company because the Lord guides me in how I treat people and gives me the words and actions to ease their suffering. My skills are a blessing to others, not something to bring gratification but comfort to the hurting.
God Bless, alayna
- Alayna Staggers October 13, 2009 8:51PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
I could introduce you to a friend I knew ten years ago. You'd be instantly surprised - tall, leggy and elvish blonde, alluring jaw-lines and cheekbones, and eyes to drown in - she looked stunning with a hint of make-up. She started school studying a variant of astronomy no less, but switched to business economics in the mid 1980s. She needed money and sought out a german agency where she could work, and she had a tempestuous power exchange relationship with her pimp/mistress for nearly 6 years. So now she speaks five languages, and when you spot her you'd think, "old money" - real classy. After she turned 30, her secret was more or less out - she had for years prostituted herself, and even though she was no average hooker (empowered success stories are still rare in this business) she was very clear to anyone who asked (politely) - she liked the sex and excitement. She liked the 1000+ euro she got for the average night out in town partying and night in bed afterwards. It is very easy if you *have* to smile.
When watching television and you'd spot a destination on the planet, she had been in every single one I could care mention - in europe, middle east and america. Even once or twice in asia. She got rich of it too and you can easily find her with some casual research in her boutique in Amsterdam. Only thing that bothers her now is a nasty problem with the anti- fur people. She is a very happy human being.
You so casually (and revealingly) shower 'those women ' with uninvited scorn for being predated upon by 'those men'. In my friends case this is unwarranted, even though the cliche is that the women in this business are poor, desperate and deceitful; while the men are perverts and cheaters. I'll give you another cliche - the wives of men who visit whores routinely overflow in passive-aggressive contempt, are secretly jealous of the courage of career-prostitutes, are generally too insecure with their own looks to feel sexually liberated or empowered. But what is most humiliating to all those angry wives of men who visit whores - is the realization that those 'monthers' (guys who visit a key escort once a month, often for years at a time) get a few hours of rather amazing intimacy and openness and *attention* from these prostitutes. Don't ask me how I know all this, because you already know, but prostitutes do in fact have often very open, uninhibited, passionate and emotionally fulfilling relationships with their clients. The 'transaction' is a blank check for a guy to say 'put you ass up a little... stroke it like that... yes more tongue' - which makes it all amazingly easy. A guy can say, "stand there, I want my friend to see you in the light when you dance". This makes business often amazingly easy for a career escort - no barriers, no filters, no shields in what they are supposed to do. The guy goes for what he wants because he pays for it. It is amazingly uncomplicated, especially if the price is over 500 euro. I can guarantee you - to serve in this way can be acutely spiritual.
If that isn't caring, or blessing or nourishing, I don't know. As a prostitute you get access to mending broken lives.
And as a message to you - you do not need to be a catwalk model in this business. Escorts and prostitutes and 'models' may not enjoy the blessings on that "the Lord" franchise you so condescendingly invoke, it all generates a decent income and no small amount of satisfaction. Unless you look like a horse - why don't you give it a try once? Just go to a different city, wear the appropriate clothes in an appropriate bar. If you are a nurse you understand people enough to score a client in less than an hour. Prepare a little by getting a hotel where the manager doesn't mind, and give the guy what twice he wants. Slip him a card and he'll be emailing you once a month.
And afterwards stare at how easy that money was and who took advantage of who? Look in the mirror afterwards. You will very likely to not cry afterwards - rather you will giggle.
Remember - it isn't politicians who want to make sure prostitution is illegal . It is the politicians wives.
http://fora.tv/2009/09/29/Republican_Gomorrah_Max_Blumenthal
- Khannea Suntzu October 14, 2009 4:10AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
His argument is not absurd. He's stating that they are providing a supply to a demand, just as in any other service or sales industry. The parallel is clear.
He's not implying that sales associates have mental health problems, let alone the same ones as prostitutes. He says only that anybody is capable of having mental health problems and that they should be treated instead of persecuted.
Lastly, we don't need therapists to treat our unbiased reasoning.
- userk June 25, 2009 1:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
"While we aren't talking about sales reps, how is their mental hygiene less important than that of a sex worker? Doesn't this mental hardship in salespeople adversely affect society as a whole in a manner that is far more pervasive? There are orders of magnitude more sales reps in the world than there are sex workers, so any amount of adverse effect reverberates through society with far greater overall damage."
That doesn't imply that sales reps suffer from mental health problems similar to sex workers? "Mental hardship" is in that quote, so it's not as much implication as it is an outright statement. He also continues by asking if salespeople suffer "in a manner that is far more pervasive[.]" So if anything, he's implying they are worse off!
And your implication that only those who agree with your logic are unbiased is in itself biased. It's amazing to me how you can present an argument, completely ignoring one side of it, and then claim to be unbiased. It is the very definition of bias. (bias - A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.) So if you ignore the evidence, for example, that even in areas where prostitution is legal that there is an illegal human trafficking problem, guess what? You're biased.
You are ignoring the same thing as Orangesauce. Like I said more than once, but apparently need to repeat, I really DO NOT CARE if prostitution is legalized, but to use those arguments and ignore the realities of the profession is not only dishonest, but unfair to those who might choose to practice the profession.
So if anything, my mind is more open. While I may disagree, I am not pretending that I didn't say something that I clearly did. And I'm not ignoring the position that there may be benefits from legalizing the world's oldest profession. But at the same time, if you make an argument that is clearly nonsensical, I will reply appropriately, albeit with an open mind.
- LagerHead June 25, 2009 2:44PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Many of the "implications" you pick up are really just your own inferences that were in no way meant by us.
I still stand by my original positition that orangesauce never, in any way, stated that prostitutes and salespeople had the same mental health issues.
I never said that any of those who agree/disagree with me are biased/unbiased... I was simply responding to your statement that anyone who harbors the same opinion as orangesauce did is in need of "help" for some sort of mental health issue.
Lastly, I did not ignore any piece of an argument. I did not even criticize or evaluate the pieces of the arguments presented by you or Orangesauce. All I said was that our argument is not absurd and that we are not in need of mental help for believing so.
You need to let up a bit on the hostility and assumptions you make about other people. Open your mind up a bit.
- userk June 25, 2009 3:16PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Tell ya what? You pretend you/he never said those things, despite what is right in front of you and everyone else in black and white, and I'll pretend that those things which you/he did not say actually make sense. How's that for an open mind?
In the words of Ren and Stimpy: "Happy happy joy joy joy!"
- LagerHead June 25, 2009 3:23PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
they do not have the SAME mental health issues. same. same. same. my goodness do you love to feel right.
- userk June 25, 2009 6:22PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
While I didn't agree with everything"orangesauce" had to say, he did make some good points. And while your counter appears valid on the surface, a closer look reveals the fallacy. While it is true that prostitutes are rarely rewarded and often abused by their pimps, those in illegal sales ( drugs ) are often mistreated as well. Nobody wants to grow up to be a drug dealer, they are often abused and robbed, and nobody wants to go to college to be a drug dealer. But when it becomes legal , suddenly all of that changes. Bartenders are treated pretty well, despite the fact that they are selling drugs, and pharmacists receive all of the benefits above described. The fact that abuses occur when illegal goods are sold cannot be denied, but that is hardly a reason to keep them illegal. If anything, it is an argument for legalization!
- richardsonkr September 2, 2009 8:43AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Now bartenders and crack dealers are the same thing. Hmm. Well, now you've really changed my mind.
- LagerHead September 2, 2009 8:53AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
That's an appeal to ridicule, a logical fallacy. Since alcohol was once an illegal drug, bartenders and drug dealers do provide examples of people who provide a similar service, but on different sides of the law . The differences demonstrate what could happen if prostitution was also legalized.
- richardsonkr September 2, 2009 3:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Actually, some of the sexworkers i know knew quite early what they wanted to do. As a little girl I saw a picture of a courtesan an thought i wanted to be like her- beatiful, intelligent and seductive. I didn't know much about sex then, so i wouldn't have thought of choosing it as a profession. Comparing sales to prostitution is not far-fetched at all, and the ones who work as prostitutes, especially the ones who have also experience as a salesperson, know this is true. Of course nobody studies it, because it's not accepted publically. But if sexwork was recognized as the valuable work it is, a degree would probably take just as long as other studies...after all, most of us get good at what we do with more experience.
- Sina
October 19, 2009 2:02PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Should prostitution be legal ? Yes.
Should slavery be legal? No.
Your arguments conflate several facts. A woman's personal decision to engage in prostitution should never be criminalized. That is a decision which many women freely make. Even if that is incomprehensible to you, you have no right to criminalize that decision and by doing so exacerbate every one of the risks, to the woman, that you attribute to prostitution.
Should thugs be allowed to ensnare women into prostitution then coerce them to work while stealing the profit of their labor. Never. These slavers must be prosecuted to the full extent of rational laws. Despite your misrepresentations, that is the position of the Dutch government. It is also the position of every government that truly supports in human rights.
As in the other social issues that are being turned into political wedges to divide voters from one another --- i.e. abortion , euthanasia , drug use , etc. --- the question is: "Who decides?" If you think that you have the right to make those decisions for other citizens, we are in fact on opposing sides.
- Joey Tranchina June 24, 2009 12:25PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(5)
Side: Yes
Joey, I see your point, but I don't know if I would call legalized prostitution a human rights issue. Maybe a morality issue. And maybe the U.S. is wrong on this one, I don't know. And to insinuate that the U.S. doesn't support human rights is a bit unfair, in my (not so) humble opinion as well.
Our record is not perfect, but neither is any country's. But I dare say our record is up there with the best.
As I have stated in other threads about this issue, I am not a supporter of legalized prostitution, but I really don't care if they do legalize it. I would only say make sure the arguments make sense and that both sides present factual arguments. Then let the people decide.
- LagerHead June 24, 2009 12:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Lagerhead: I appreciate your desire to see that "both sides present factual arguments." I am in total agreement with that. It is a factual argument that, in those instances where a woman of her own volition chooses to engage in prostitution, and is then forced to face the humiliation of arrest and the threat or actual suffering of going to jail, at the hands of police who our society has turned into armed clergymen, that is a violation of her human rights.
The people can decide what they will, that women in fact those thousands of women who daily make that decision and face that denial of their human rights at the hands of intrusive amateur moralists who refuse to see situations other than their ugliest fantasies, are victims of this moral myopia. Again, in fact, unjust laws against legitimate prostitution, deny police and prosecutors the discretion to enforce intelligently written laws that would protect women from the, all too real, abuses that these faux protectors of women claim to be the whole picture. That focus on abuse, obscures the true nature of freely chosen prostitution, while it provides us with unjust and less enforceable laws that, in the end, create gray areas that protect the predators.
This is part of a long-standing pattern of the abuse of women, in the name of "protecting" them. The extreme example of that exists in Saudi Arabia and is currently enforced by the whips of the Taliban. I choose to be on the other side of that argument.
- Joey Tranchina June 24, 2009 3:00PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Just noticed you're from Redwood City. Great town. My aunt and uncle have lived there for 20+ years. That's all.
Thanks for keeping it civil.
- LagerHead June 24, 2009 3:43PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Our forefathers fought wars so we could be free. So let's really be free, shall we? Free to choose our own destinies.
IF: "Even in jurisdictions where prostitution has been legalized, the welfare of prostituted persons has not improved." (according to the only "no" side to the argument here)
THEN: Does it really make sense to add criminal charges and jail time to the list of welfare problems these people have?
No.
Liberty is a far more rare and precious commodity than safety or fairness, and we ought not be so quick to sacrifice it in order to obtain the others. "Those who would trade their essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin. What old Ben forgot to say is that those who would do this not only DESERVE neither, but will also HAVE neither. That's the nature of liberty. Having it means some people suffer. The tragic thing is...not having it means that MORE people suffer, and to an even greater degree.
Vices are not crimes. Morals should never be legislated. One man's vice is another man's virtue, or possibly even sacrament. When one group sets itself up as moral arbiters for the whole of society , it makes itself supreme dictator, and denies the rights of all those who do not follow the "one right way as dictated by our creed." That's just as bad whether one man does it, as in the manner of a dictatorship, or whether it is done by many people over a single person, as in the manner of a modern democracy .
- ebsarver June 24, 2009 2:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Again, I'm neither for nor against this. But there are indeed instances where it is necessary to legislate morality. For example, it wasn't that long ago, even in our nation's history, where it was not at all uncommon for a man to take a bride as young as 14 years old, sometimes even younger. However, I don't think many today would argue that it is OK for a grown man to have sexual relations with a 14 year old girl, even if she gives her consent.
I do see the difference though, so I'm not arguing that point. To be honest, I'm just nitpicking one thing you said, or playing the devil's advocate, if I may. Sorry about that.
That is one of my favorite quotes by Ben Franklin, by the way. My very favorite, though, not surprisingly is "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." :-P
- LagerHead June 25, 2009 3:40PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Laws making anything that gives people pleasure illegal are doomed to failure,as proven by everything we have ever tried to prohibit using federal laws. All you do is drive the activities underground or into a black market trade. You cannot force your morals on anyone,you can tell them about it,but you can't
legislate morality.
- Clay June 24, 2009 4:34PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Monetary compensation for sexual access is the rule in more ways than one in the vast majority of the remotely-or-more-free world. It seems to be a wildly successful social experiment.
In fact, in the less-than-remotely-free world, the main difference is that the abuse of women is accepted as a norm, or there is no compensation, or both.
Here we have labeled a particular form of "the world's oldest profession" in the most capitalist context because that makes it easiest to characterize negatively. The fact is obvious that its the nature of class economics that brings the worst in the sex trade. This is seen in every other prohibition based legal campaign, particularly those with victimless crimes.
Of course there are a lot of negative aspects in the sex trade - its an illegal activity which puts it in the domain of criminals; historically criminals are terrible at HR management, long term sustainability, or creating nonhostile work environments.
Hehe, we should make it a government service. Most would agree that the government is mostly good for screwing us, and the rest are likely to agree that government is at least better than the crimeworld at providing a non-hostile work environment with sustainable equal oppurtunity and health and conform standards.
- Submariner June 25, 2009 3:39PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Prosecuting prostituted persons does nothing to interdict demand. It only reduces supply, providing incentive for criminals to continue providing new sex workers through illegal and abusive means. Sweden has exactly the right idea: go after the sex buyers.
- cburkitt July 1, 2009 1:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
It is already illegal to hire a prostitute in the US, it's called solicitation.
- MrBook July 5, 2009 7:29AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
but prostitution is legal in sweden it is a very bad system, and it does not work
- jelle August 19, 2009 7:38AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
This argument in opposition to legalization of prostitution is laughable.
Let's break down your points, shall we?
1- Prostitutes, even legal ones are subject to being threatened, assaulted, or raped. That may be true. But it is equally true of many other jobs such as store clerks, cab drivers, and just about any other job that requires (or at least allows from time to time) one on one interaction without outside observation. Would you suggest criminalizing those jobs as well?
2- Research suggests that as many as 9 out of 10 prostitutes wish to leave the industry. Even were I to grant that point, which frankly I do not, I wonder what percentage of garbage haulers, or cops, or any other profession would, if they could, leave their career or choice. Even if true, it is irrelevant to the question of legalization.
3- Pimps have not yet been eliminated, even in areas with legal prostitution. OK, if you say so. So what? I would postulate that with universal legalization, it's only a matter of time until the pimp role is history. And when a prostitute need not feel legal ramifications simply for what they do, filing a legal complaint becomes a viable option. And all of us, at least those who pay taxes as required by law , regardless of our profession have to deal with the hidden third pimp that is Uncle Sam.
4- Areas of legal prostitution have seen increased demand. Duh! If I have a choice of seeing a legal prostitute on the west side of the street, or an illegal one on the east side, I'm going to the west side every time. As long as areas of legal prostitution are islands amongst oceans of criminal prostitution, they will attract increased demand. When it's universal, no such phenomenon will occur.
5- Women in Las Vegas are 3x more likely to be raped than women in NYC. Even assuming this ascertain were true, it's irrelevant to this argument. Prostitution is not legal in Vegas, or NYC, so any disparity to rape statistics has to be, by definition, due to other circumstances. Perhaps because Vegas is a 24x7 party, people are consuming more alcohol than usual, and otherwise letting loose. I strongly suspect that many of the so-called rapes you referred to only became rape the next morning after second thoughts set in.
Your arguments are off point, irrelevant, and unconvincing. That you believe society has the right to tell women what they are and are not allowed to do with their sexuality says a great deal about your organization, and none of it good.
- nyckevin July 19, 2009 6:31PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Do any of the National Coalition’s points carry water ? I just don’t see it.
People engaged in illegal activities tend to be prayed upon by criminals is not naïve, it it’s a fact of life. Making the activity legal won’t make it safe, but at least those people will feel entitled to police protection.
The linkage between legal prostitution and human trafficking is a clear case of facts not in evidence. More likely, those engaged in human trafficking would continue to operate illegally, by not complying with any required supervision or registration.
Rape and sexual assault are crimes most heinous in normal society . The degree diminishes within the context of the sex trade to commercial issues more akin to fraud, theft, and physical assault, still crimes, but not as monstrous.
Pimp is clearly a pejorative term, but not so different in meaning from boss or marketing agent. Just like in other industries, some have better management styles and provide better work environments than others.
Money laundering is a service needed by criminals to recycle their ill-gotten gains. Tax payers find normal banking cheaper and more useful.
In free societies the people’s tastes shape government activities. In repressive governments, the law is used to limit people’s choices to the tastes of the powerful.
- RichNau August 7, 2009 12:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
The expert's comparison of New York to Las Vegas is null. Prostitution is illegal in Clark County. There is no evidencethat shows that legalized prostitution does not increase the likelihood of sexual assault.
- richardsonkr September 2, 2009 8:34AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
that prostitution is bad for a society proves how depraved it has become.
- truehappiness September 30, 2009 10:31AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Yeah, that's pretty much the worst reasoning I've ever heard in my entire life.
- quantummechanik September 30, 2009 10:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Ah, the classic circular argument. You start by assuming that prostitution is depraved. You then proceed to declare any society that even questions the depravity of prostitution to be depraved simply because they are questioning the depravity of prostitution.
Any questions?
- Bud December 18, 2009 5:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
If a person wants to do something with their own body, why do we interfere? The main moral argument is that we are somehow protecting women--how are we protecting them by forcing an entire profession into the alleys? The illegality itself is what makes it dangerous. THe main reason we view prostitutes with disgust is because we have been trained to over millenia by the very hypocrites who use them most. A woman gets paid money to have sex with people--if that is what she wants, how is it worse than being a bouncer in a bar? Or a security guard? or whatever any of us do? The only thing that makes it shameful is it's illegality. Picture the view of a prohibition era gangster, versus a legitimate distillery owner today--same job, the only difference is being forced into the alleys and fringes of society , to do what could be a lucrative and respectable job.
- smatman October 1, 2009 7:49AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Yes
I think your comparison with the legitimate vs. illegal distillery has some merit. But most people see sex workers as disgusting, depraved people mostly due to the fact that they provide sexual services outside of a committed relationship. And they think even less of the people who use such services. And this country has a very puritan attitute towards sex. The fact that it is illegal certainly does not help matters, but the people who refer to sex workers as "whores" and other such deregatory terms will continue to think the same way even if prostitution was legal and took place in fancy brothels or the like.
While I do agree that people should be allowed to sell sexual services, providing that both parties are willing and conscenting adults, there are limits on what we can do with our bodies. So the argument that "If a person wants to do something with their own body, why do we interfere?" does not always hold water and is rather easily knocked down. One could not, for example, sell their organs or use their body to block entrance to a public place or use their body in a way that would cause harm to another.
The main reason that prostitution should be legal is that there is no good logical reason not to do so. As stated above, our resistance to legalization is deeply rooted in our views on sex and sexual roles, particularly those of women . Everyone knows that women who "put out" are the worst kind of depraved moral deficient beings imaginable, right? So almost all arguments against prostitution can be boiled down to the fact that sex is involved, and people don't like sex being performed outside of a committed relationship. They see it as harmful to the parties involved and to society in general.
But with all that said, I have no doubt that prostitution will never be legalized in my lifetime. Any public official who supported it would be committing political suicide . And this is somewhat strange because if you look at polls about 60 to 70 percent agree that it should be legal (just "Google Legalize Prostition Poll").
- Bud December 18, 2009 4:56PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
It seems like we as a society effed this one up real bad. Getting paid to do something is a job . Jobs help the economy and individuals. Also people can sleep with as many people as they want for free but when you include money it is illegal ? The only difference is money. Honestly if you want crime down legalize it. That way you can have professional businesses that can protect customer and worker
- VarGulF42 February 19, 2010 3:07PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Should Prostitution Be Legal?
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Its our moral oboligation
This kind of business should be out lawed in all the US. Nevada should not allow this to be. First we should all have a say in this because if we are to be followers of christ and knowing christ history of forgiving the positute of her crimes. Then we should not allow this to happen. People who support this are scared to speak up for what is morally right. On the dollar bill it says in God we trust. To any american that believes this should be legal should not live in America. If you think it could generate taxes then tax them but make it against the law to operate. For years they have avoid paying there fair share of tax so instead of arresting them tax them and then fined them. you never give into sin. It may change your own heart when you daughter or mother decides to get in this business now you may not like it anymore..
- SaveDaHorses
June 24, 2009 11:42AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Prepared to get slapped around by a philosophy major.
Hello "SaveDaHorses", this is a reply to your not-so-well thought out comment regarding the issue of prostitution. I'll be de-constructing your statements and analyzing them with my commentary and response. Ready? Here we go.
"First we should all have a say in this because if we are to be followers of christ..."
First, I'm going to make the assumption that you're of the Christian religion - Thats fine. But unfortunately sir (or mam) this country 1) Is not a Christian nation, 2) Is filled with diversity. Not all of the United States' inhabitants are Christian, on the contrary only 78.4% of America follows the Christian dogma. We have muslims, atheists, those of jewish decent, and many others to account for. So you sir, cannot throw the united states under the blanket of a Christian nation.
"People who support this are scared to speak up for what is morally right."
Now you have stumbled right into my topic of choice: Morality. Now, you clearly have a skewed view of what morality is to be making such an assertion as that. Once again I'm going to lay something out that will hopefully enlighten you about the state of society in America; we are diverse in our morality, code of ethics and beliefs. What is morally right for you may be considered morally offensive to someone else. You cannot bring morals into political jabber. Morals play only a role in how you yourself live your own life.
"To any American that believes this should be legal should not live in America."
What an outlandish statement. If you are unaware (and I do believe you are) America has a nick-name: The melting pot of the world. Do you know why we have this nick-name? Its because of the Diversity (I'm stressing this key issue to you here) of our country. Our wonderful country is open to many different ideologies, practices, political commentaries and beliefs, and should always remain that way, else we are in danger of becoming an "un-free" state if you will. What you are saying right here is essentially this - "If you believe different than me, you do not deserve to live here." Now, I'm no scholar, but wouldnt you agree this is clearly anti-american? Telling someone to leave just because they are different? You have such an inflated sense of self worth and knowledge that you cannot even tollerate a different ideologie than yours? Thats quite unfortunate. And yet still, I am under the assumption that you're christian - but this is highly contradictiory to Christs teachings of love and acceptance is it not? Now, I admit, I am no christian, but I am willing to be that I have studdied your own religious book more than you have.
You sir, ought to seriously re-think your political, social, and spiritual dogma before posting anything such as that again.
Your thought for the day.
-Shabbro
- Shabbro
June 24, 2009 4:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(9)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Prepare to be slapped around yourself.
Realize this.
Reply to your first statement: America was FOUNDED on Christian principles. That is why it says, ON AMERICAN BILLS, "In GOD We Trust".
Reply to your second statement: Just so you know, some morals are international. For instance, in what country is murder morally correct? I know that this example is an obvious one, but it's the first one I thought of.
Reply to your third statement: Some laws in America (and Canada, where I live) are required. You come to this country, you obey OUR laws, you learn OUR language. If you want to live exactly as you lived in your old country, WHY DID YOU MOVE HERE? Yes, some things are cultural, and I respect that. But, if you're not going to even start to make an effort to learn and respect our culture, then why should we learn and respect yours?
- debator101
June 27, 2009 3:38PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'm not going to slap, I'm just going to comment
I hope that's okay.
America wasn't founded on Christian principles. If anything, America was founded on principles that stemmed very much from the early modern philosophical period, starting with Machiavelli, moving into Hobbes, taking a really big part out of Locke and including Baruch Spinoza, who was really underrated. If we can state the ONE principle that America was founded on, it would be "refutation of monarchy". So, that's that. No Jesus here.
Second. Canadian. Man. Multiculturalism is the LAW here. I mean that literally, we have bills affirming commitment to the multicultural ideal. Canada's national policy is directly opposite to the "join us, be like us" idea.
Murder's morally correct in a lot of countries, depending on the who and the why. Saudi Arabia has the Mutaween, which are sort of roving bands of Sharia law enforcers. They go around in bands of six, carrying billy clubs and knives, and when they find someone breaking sharia law, they'll beat them up. And yeah, kill them. For talking to a man that's not their relative or husband, women die. For wearing makeup, women die. This is fine, to them.
- quantummechanik
June 27, 2009 7:20PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
we don't always agree
You and I have had our go arounds but I do agree with you here.
- muffmonster36
September 9, 2009 2:28AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Some Thoughts
America was founded on a mixture of both Enlightment philosophy and Calvinist Christianity.(Standing Order of Churches in Massachusetts provided the example for democratic polity) Its not popular to say that these days but you can't ignore the contributions of protestantism just because today our popular culture is predominantly secular.
Multiculuralism is not the defacto law in the USA, it is the politically correct ideal- yes Law-no. For example sharia law is not recognized in the USA. If a Saudi family conducted an honor killing in the USA they would be charged with murder under US law, just like any other jealous spouse who in a rage kills their unfaithful partner.
To the topic of prostitution - the idea of legalizing it in order to regulate it in a way to minimize its negative impact on society , and protect the health and welfare of those who participate in the sex trade is an idea which can stand on its own merits. We don't need to rewrite history to advance a good idea.
- Ole Salt
October 23, 2009 6:33PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Did I mention I... go to school for this?.. Ah yes, yes I did.
Ah, Wonderful, something constructive to respond to!
Lets get right to it.
"America was FOUNDED on Christian principles. That is why it says, ON AMERICAN BILLS, "In GOD We Trust". "
You're sadly mistaken. Take this document from Scribd:
The Constitution never once mentions a deity, because the Founding Fathers wanted to keep their new country " religion -neutral." Our Founding Fathers were an eclectic collection of Atheists, Deists, Christians, Freemasons and Agnostics. George Washington, the Father of our country, and John Adams (Second President of the USA) CLEARLY stated in the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli: "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian Religion.‚ G.W. rarely attended church and instead followed a popular 18th century philosophy called Deism‚Äîa Star Wars-esque philosophy that believed in a cosmic energy or bigass universal "Force." The dictionary says that Deism is "a system of thought advocating natural religion based on human reason rather than revelation," that had nothing to do with Christian principles. James Madison, original mastermind of our Constitution, was an Atheist to the core who loved skewering Christianity. In 1785 he wrote, "What have been [Christianity‚Äôs] fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.‚ Thomas Jefferson, who sat down and authored The Declaration of Independence, rarely missed an opportunity to laugh at Christianity. In a letter to John Adams in 1823, he wrote: "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus‚will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." More ammo: In 1814, Tommy J. wrote about the Bible's Old and New Testaments, "The whole history of these books is so defective and doubtful -- evidence that parts have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds.‚ In fact, it was President Jefferson himself who first wrote (to a Baptist church group in 1802), "The First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between Church and State." Therefore, when Jefferson talked about ‚Nature‚ God, the ‚Creator‚ and ‚divine Providence ‚ in the Declaration that he wrote, he was being a hippie and referring to a general cosmic energy-- not the Christian God. America is not a Christian nation. Period. Our Constitution derived from the postChristian Enlightenment values of reason and truth...never from the paranoid yammerings of that otherwise compassionate cult leader who died in the Middle Eastern desert 3000 years ago
"Just so you know, some morals are international."
What you're referencing are ethics, not morals - think of ethics as the framework and morals as the finished product
Your third statement is somewhat true. "Learn our language" - Nah, you dont have to, "Why did you move here?" Ah, thats a circumstantial point not to be judged by you. Im not exactly sure what culture you're referencing here though...
- Shabbro
June 29, 2009 1:23AM
Reply to this Recommend
(6)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
In God We Trust -- A Cold War Ploy
Remember that "In God We Trust" was only added to currency during the cold war to distinguish the U.S. from the "godless" Communists.
Thomas Jefferson himself was highly suspicious of organized religions and was often called an atheist in the newspapers of his day.
I still don't understand why the Bible suggests that prostitution is bad if Jesus himself hung out with a prostitute – Mary Magdalen?
- batymahn
July 2, 2009 7:54AM
Reply to this Recommend
(4)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Christian love again
Don't you get it Jesus is what love is about.Jesus loves all. Just like any good Christian should do.
- countryboy
August 1, 2009 9:05PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Blah blah blah blah
Blah blah blah Jesus throws people into the fire blah blah blah Jesus says I come not in peace but with a sword blah blah blah Jesus said I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled blah blah blah
Good christian is an oxymoron. Anyone who believes that everyone who doesn't believe what they do will burn in an eternal lake of fire is not a good person.
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." Blaise Pascal
"With or without religion , good people can behave well and bad people can do evil. But for good people to do evil -- that takes religion."Steven Weinberg:
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 2:58PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Vishnu
What does that have to do with the fact that "In God We Trust" was added to our currency back in the 50s to 'counter' Communism?
"Don't you get it Jesus is what love is about."
To someone that is non-Christian that statement makes about as much sens as saying that Vishnu is what love is all about to a non-Hindu.
- MrBook
September 4, 2009 3:15PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Revisionism
The so-called "fact" that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute was a political invention suiting the leaders of the church . I would say that most if not all of the purported "historical record" of the hebrew and christian bibles is rife with fabrication in any event and thus arguing the finer points such as this one is the equivalent of arguing whether Mickey Mouse wears boxers or briefs.
- Naumadd
August 28, 2009 1:47AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Exactly!
Something that Mary Magdalene was not, is a prostitute. All serious religious scholars agree on this point as does the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.
It began as a shameful lie, invented by Pope Gregory I in 597 C.E., in which he combined three separate women from the New Testament into one. He combined Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany and a woman who is not named but is referred to as a 'sinner.'
In great part because of pressure from within, the Vatican finally over-ruled this interpretation about Mary Magdalene in 1969, with neither an apology nor even an official statement. The Second Vatican Council simply altered the reading for the feast day as part of a general reform of the church calendar regarding the way many saints were to be remembered. The Roman missal [book of readings for Catholic Mass] and the Roman calendar now directed the reading be changed from Luke 7 to the Gospel of John, Chapter 10, verses 1-2 and 11-18.'
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 2:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
In Goe We Trust_ A Cold War Ploy
Jesus would not hang around people like Mary yet would welcome anyone that believed in God. The door was always open for people who believed and with the power of God Jesus knew who were true believers or not..
Take this site. I only addressed it to give my opinon and now Im getting emails from these idiots who believe it should be legal .
Why dont theses idiots say way they want and not throw rocks at me..
By looking at the votes seems there are just evil people.
- SaveDaHorses
September 2, 2009 8:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Define an evil person
What constitutes an evil person?
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 2:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Just evil people
First, I don't know what you are asking people to do.
"Why dont theses idiots say way they want and not throw rocks at me.."
I honestly don't know what you're trying to say.
Second, you are calling me an evil person. I disagree. Never have I harmed another person either substantially or intentionally. If you can say that I'm evil just because I believe people should be free to do what they wish with their bodies, you should probably stop calling people evil based on opinion alone.
- sunshiner424
October 13, 2009 12:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Hence why...
...I am a progresive christian. We love all good people regardless of their religion , race , gender etc etc. We look at the bible objectively and rule out anything that promotes hate (In the bible translated from the original langauge most of the hate mongering passages are gone). And it's not just a case of eliminating what we don't like. We eliminate things that we feel in our heart God tells us is wrong. These days "faith" seems to have been replaced with "Do what the book says and only what the book says". Jesus taught "Love thy neighbor" and that is what I will do till my dying day despite what the more traditional christians say.
That said. I believe prostitution is wrong simply for 2 reasons. 1) Way too many prositutes get hurt or killed in their "profession" and 2) I believe sex without love is empty (However, this is my personal belief and I don't expect anyone to follow it because I say so). So I'm on the "no" side of things.
- Songbird21
November 18, 2009 12:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
something about glass houses....
Define evil.
If by evil you mean people who make you feel stupid and make you feel the necessity to call names as your only defense against logical conversation...then yes, mean, horrible, 'evil' people.
Please go read a book . I actually recommend the Bible...maybe then you would see why you don't get your 'morals' from that book as much as you say you do.
- RyeToast11
December 3, 2009 10:27PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Cold War Fear
Same time they added 'Under God' to the pledge of allegiance . Any of you out there thinking we're making this up...look it up.
- RyeToast11
December 3, 2009 10:21PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are rude and wrong
I am half American indian (comancha) our country goes back alot farther then you are going it was not founded on Christian principles They were brought to this land, and to read what you write you sound like no christian to me. FOUNDING father..My people were the founding father and many other American Indain tribes.
- muffmonster36
September 9, 2009 2:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
grow up shabbro
there's plenty of students in the world. i'm one of them. but there are people out there who have lived a few of our lifetimes. so what if we're philosophy majors? get over yourself.
- userk
October 26, 2009 7:45AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes you did mention that
Yea, what Shabbro said!
- Ruttroh24
November 9, 2009 9:47AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Founded on Religious Principles
So where in the Constitution does it say that the country was founded on Christian Principles. What I find is "no religious Test shall ever be required". In a document that is sometimes vague on purpose, this is very clear. If it was founded on any religious principles, why is that statement in there.
It is the common belief, supported by elementary education from a few years ago, that the country was founded on Christian principles. But it simply is not the case.
- morrishagerman
October 22, 2009 11:34AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
you're wrong
"That is why it says, ON AMERICAN BILLS, "In GOD We Trust". "
Err no, that was put on the bills in 1864, LONG after most of the founders were dead.
- Father Time
November 11, 2009 10:54PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Alrighty.
1) The phrase 'In God We Trust' was added to the currency after the civil war . This nation was founded on Human rights and the freedoms of mankind not something as small minded as religion .
2) Murder is wrong because it has an innocent victim. Who is the victim of prostitution ? The man/woman seeking sex or the man/woman selling it?
3) There is nothing to say about your third arguments comeback except, what culture? Seems to me that our culture is whatever the reality of our country is and right now, this wouldn't be a question if prostitution wasn't part of our 'culture'. Not to mention your flaming bigotry in assuming you're more American than someone who 'moved' here. We all did, barring the Native Americans . You sound very ignorant. And angry.
- RyeToast11
December 3, 2009 10:19PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
your comments
you know morally right's it is your morally right to not stick your nose in other peoples business,and another thing what you feel to be unmorall someone else might not,and even tho ur opinion was ask for here people like you need to remember that an opinion is only valued if it is ask for!!!!
- muffmonster36
September 9, 2009 2:24AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'm still American
I don't believe in God, and despite my religious beliefs or views on legal prostitution, I'm just as capabable of being an upstanding American citizen as you or any other Christian. Thanks much.
- userk
June 25, 2009 1:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
prostitution, religion, sin, oh my!
I suppose it was inevitable that someone drop the R bomb. The problem I have with this is that when people get caught up with religion that it becomes a shield against almost any social debate. That simply is not acceptable. Since when has your religious/moral standpoint been more important than mine? But lets make this a little more blatant and use an example shall we?
let's assume that I am an American that practices satanic values and morals. Well, the satanic bible states that I should partake in self indulgence, I.E. prostitution . I think you should respect my religion.
So you read a sentence on a dollar bill, big whoop. I read the constitution and it states that all religions should be respected, after all, it is our "moral obligation" right? oh, and I'm not satanic.
- VerbalAssasin07
July 5, 2009 10:26PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Christian love
As a Christian I do not think we need laws to make prostitution a crime .And they should not be taxed either.
When a prositute is arresrted they are branded for life and alot of them do it because they need help.As a christian I do help.The police in lots of city's pimp the girls them selfs.They can't go to the police for help,no one at there home whats them.They need help from loving caring people.As a Christian we should help them not lock them up or arrest them.When was the last time you prayed for a prositute or feed one or got one a job? They are GODS children also. What makes there sin any worst then yours?
- countryboy
August 1, 2009 8:54PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
What makes there sin any worst then yours?
Men?
btw, your grammar and spelling are really bad...don't you have spell check? I makes it difficult to read, and it's not cute or funny.
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 3:03PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Sin
No spell check here!My spelling sucks I know.
There sin is no worst than the pope 's.
- countryboy
September 4, 2009 6:06PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Well at least you know one thing
Yer speling is ril bad
What is the pope 's sin?
- Enlightened1
September 8, 2009 2:00AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
We all have sinned
We all have sinned.There was only one person who every walked on this earth who never sinned and that was JESUS.He was perfect with out sin.
- countryboy
September 8, 2009 5:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
What about wrath?
Didn't Jesus smite the money lenders at he temple? That's not very nice. They were just earning a living. He forgave prostitutes, but not money lenders?
- smatman
October 7, 2009 11:07AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
One thing.
You can spell and countryboy can think. Who do you think I'm going to listen to?
- mike1948
September 8, 2009 10:49PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Ha Ha Good comeback!
I guess if you can read his posts, you should go for him! However, how will you know if you are really understanding what he means?! lol
- Enlightened1
September 10, 2009 3:14PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Dick Gregory
once said the way to tell the real Christians was to take a prostitute to church and watch the way people react.
- mike1948
September 5, 2009 1:05AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
show
Yes in most modern day churchs today that would be a show!
- countryboy
September 5, 2009 4:42PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Freedom first
@SaveDaHorses: It's your moral obligation to support FREEDOM. Period. Others DO NOT BELIEVE in your religion and you have no right to FORCE it upon us. FREEDOM first.
- paladin713
September 2, 2009 12:19PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Correctness via shouting
That's...a common tactic, I suppose.
What is the nature of freedom? Why should it be supported? And how far? Is there such a thing as "Too much freedom"? Is "Forcing Freedom" possible?
These are questions that need to be asked by all Americans . They're not easy questions.
- quantummechanik
September 2, 2009 8:43PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Correctness via objective argument.
1) To do anything I want in my own interest.
2) Because if you don't support my freedom you have set the precedent for someone else to restrict yours.
3) As fas as you can imagine up to the point that you initiate force or commit fraud.
4) No, "do as you will, harm none"
5) No. That would be called 'defense'.
- paladin713
September 2, 2009 9:26PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Was that Crowley?
Who said that? I can't remember.
In which manners are we free, and in which manners are we not free? I'm free to walk around, but I am not free to walk around inside your house or on your trampoline if you do not wish it. This implies a hierarchy of freedom--which ones are rated at the top, and why?
On what basis is freedom awarded? If freedom is "awarded" by an outside body, does it truly exist? You can't bestow "freedom" on something and have them be TRULY free.
- quantummechanik
September 2, 2009 10:23PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
'Objective' was a hint
I can honestly say that I have had these views my entire life but did not know how to express them until listening to Ayn Rand's lectures and interviews. I realize she is not 100% mainstream in Philosophy and I hope you will not disreguard my views because I share them with her. I also would like to say I do not agree with Objectivists on everything, their objection to current thinking in Physics for example. I am also temtatively Determinist pending further understanding of quantum mechanics. Rand believed in Free Will.
Anyway I see objective answers to your questions and am trying my best to communicate them. I do appreciate them.
The only manner in which we are not free is when it violates anothers freedom. In the example you provided you would be encroaching on anothers right to property. So the 'hierarchy' is more of a balance because your rights are protected equally in the same manner.
I am not Platonic in any way. I don't see ideas, concepts, numbers, etc. as literally existing anywhere aside from within our minds. My basis for freedom comes from objectivity with a concern for precedent. If one person limits the freedom of another person based on his beliefs or religion or faith then that person is not behaving rationally because he has set the precedent for another person to limit his freedom.
I enjoy being challanged on these points. For a very long time I was the ultimate 'flip-flopper' because I always consider other peoples criticisms seriously. Thank you.
- paladin713
September 3, 2009 8:15AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Randalandabingbong
It's not that I discount everything that comes out of the mouth of Randians. I mean, when comparing, it seems like a MORE valid philosophy than some. I was introduced to the Randinator in high school, after some sort essay on the non-existence of altruism or some such thing, and then was assigned Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged, the etc. Then Steve Ditko comics. So...yeah.
Good luck on the understanding of the quantum mechanics. No one understands quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman said that, not me, and he won the Nobel prize for quantum mechanics. So...we have no idea what's going on.
Back to Freedomland. If our rights are equal, mine to walk wherever I please and yours to have a trampoline that is walked on only by those you give permission to, our rights are conflicted as soon as I set foot on the blue apron part around the bouncy bit. But, if they're equal, which one of us is wrong when it comes down to that conflict?
- quantummechanik
September 4, 2009 1:12AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Truth v. Truth
Perhaps it should be 'freedom from religion '. It seems like the only ones infringing upon religious rights are the religious. 'I have the truth and the light! Convert or be damned!' says the Evangelist 'No, no! I have the real truth and light! You are completely wrong! Convert and quit taking blood transfusions or your soul is lost forever!' says the Jehovah's Witness...and so on and so on...
- RyeToast11
December 3, 2009 10:34PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Dude.
Don't recommend your own posts. It's just sad.
- quantummechanik
September 2, 2009 8:48PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
This is not a xtian issue, it is a women's and children's issue
It should be illegal, but not from a religious standpoint. After all, the bible was full of incidents of prostitution and demeaning of women and children . I am not sure what your reference to the dollar bill saying in god we trust means.
It should be illegal because it encourages trafficking of women and children into the sex industry.
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 2:23PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Whoa there
The absence of laws does not mean society encourages something ethically wrong.
Trafficking people in anything is harmful to that other person and that act itself should be / is (?) illegal . Therefore, pimps already break the law (?) and don't care. Making prostitution itself illegal wouldn't affect the pimps but would mean unemployment for many people who would rather not break laws.
Essentially, the idea of laws discouraging law breaking is absurd. Law breakers will still break it and honest citizens will still not. With more laws, we have more crime .
I'm having some trouble agreeing with myself on the wording because I do not know whether pimping and/or prostitution are currently legal or not. I hope my idea still gets across.
- sunshiner424
October 13, 2009 1:07PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Not based on fact, just wishful thinking
A christian nation ? Only in your deluded religious dreams! Oh, and you DO realize that there were entire nations of people on this continent before the christians came and systematically annihilated most of them? You have the internet , use it and do a little research!!
From John Adams:
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion ."
"Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, 'this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.' letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756)
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" letter to Thomas Jefferson:
"Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?"
"The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."
"...Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to Danbury Baptists, 1802
... the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced or knew that such a character existed.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Major John Cartwright, June 5, 1824 (see Positive Atheism's Historical section)
Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
Millions of innocent men, women and children , since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 2:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
None of your business
It come's down to the facts that we are all suppose to be free American to make our own choice's I personally do not approve of this pratice have ever I respect the right's of john or jane doe to do as they will as long as it don't affect me and other than that it is none of my business and I think this world would do good to remember that and not think about wasting taxs paiers mony on issue's that should be left to the person facing the issue.
- muffmonster36
September 9, 2009 2:16AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Forgive her?
Forgive her for her sins? What about the men that pay for prostitutes? What about their sin? I say make it legal . If a woman wants to sell her action, so be it! I would not let them stand in the streets and sell their goods however, it would have to be done in a private building like the bunny ranch!
- Ruttroh24
November 9, 2009 9:41AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
A little high and mighty aren't we?
So because you have a certain belief set the whole nation should be run that way? Get off your high horse kiddo. The questions are: will people do it anyway? Is it doing any good to have it outlawed? What benefit would come of regulating it legally? Answers: Yes and they do. No it makes it even worse for the women and children ( the average age of entering prostitution is 13 because it's unregulated and they have no other choice and people who take advantage of their vulnerability) and it would be beneficial to all involved. The Pro would have a real profession and access to testing . The consumer would be assured of safer goods and the American people would reap the tax dollars of a previously untouched market.
You're ignorant to try to put your fingers in your ears and say in my head it shouldn't happen so I'll say it's outlawed and it won't happen.
As for your 'tax them but make it against the law ...I really don't know what to say but...wow. You're logic defies the imagination.
- RyeToast11
December 3, 2009 9:56PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
It's not your concern
Prostitution is going on around the world whether we like it or not. Most of those areas have no regulation, or don't investigate sex slave trading.. which is the biggest form of prostitution.
There are people that prostitute in this country already. There is no way you are going to stop it.
Once a woman (or man) decides they are going to do it, and sees how much money they can make from it..whether it destroys them or not, they will continue.
I bet half the people saying make this illegal, are busy in strip clubs after work. America's closest form of legalized prostitution.
So legalize it, but with high regulations. This would bring about a lot of new rules. A lot less people being arrested for something they are going to do anyway when they get back out.
Though if the freedom is abused..by doing something like beating women, or something involving children then keep them in there.
I don't think it is a good profession for anyone, I think it can destroy you as a person.
My morals are not going to stop it though, and neither are yours.
It already is illegal, just like marijuana , and look at how many people beat the system and do it anyway.
People don't want it to be legalized because then they have to worry about the "downfall" of society .
Well right now you are society,will you let it fall? Later your kids will be...oh no you may have to educate them on something new..
Crime rates are not going to go up.. in fact sexually related crimes may go down..now someone can pay to have sex instead of hiding behind a dumpster to rape their victims.
Besides..if you don't want to hire a prostitute, or be one...mind your business.
- Firecracker
June 24, 2009 12:35PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Fly in the ointment
The problem I see with your argument is the supply/demand issue. If there are not enough women willing to provide sex services and the involvement of men who see it as a profit making venture, how will supply=demand? It ends up in enforced sexual slavery.
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 3:09PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
retort
I am sure there are a lot of men and women out there that would go for it- if you make it legal ..
also - brothels, call girls, freelance etc.. the way people are already safely doing it..it's not turning into sex slavery now..and I am sure there is a way to regulate. No more on the corner pimp and hoe cheap tricks..
Also, who says a man has to have anything to do with it? I have always wanted to run my own brothel, but never wanted to be a hooker/ whore. And I am a woman. Men really should have no say in what women do..
And men, can be hookers too.. don't forget that.. let's not be sexist here.
Amsterdam can do it, and so can America.
Granted I am not a huge fan of the idea of prostitution .. but if people are not going to start pulling their heads out of their asses and stop taking away all the legit jobs .. what do you think is going to happen?
- Firecracker
September 5, 2009 12:31AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are being naive
If you believe what you said in the above post, you are either being naive or ignorant. If women wanted to go into prostitution as a career, they could certainly move to some counties in Nevada where it is legal , and you could move there and open a brothel.
You view that it 'isn't turning into slavery now' is ludicrous.
Sex Slavery: America in Denial March 2, 2009
SOCIETY calls them prostitutes, but it would be more accurate to call them slaves.
Hollywood glamorizes the "happy hooker" and the media deceive by portraying the exception (the woman who is enjoying the "high life" as a prostitute) as the rule. The reality is much more gruesome.
Just last week, the FBI rescued 48 teenagers, some as young as 13, who were working in the illegal sex trade. Suffice to say, they weren't taking bubble baths at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel with a Richard Gere look-alike.
Rather, young girls - and sometimes boys - are held hostage by a pimp, who forces them to turn tricks or auctions them off to the highest bidder.
Right here in America.
Consider: Had that FBI sting last week come a few years later, many of those rescued girls would be over 18, and people would argue that as adults they "chose" to become prostitutes - and the girls would be treated as criminals.
In fact, they're still simply sex slaves. And it is slavery, because they never see a dime of money from the pimps, and they have no freedom of movement.
Advocates talk ominously of the initial "seasoning period" when the victim is repeatedly raped, beaten, starved, locked in a closet and generally forced into submission. The pimp then gives her a new name and tells her she's now a prostitute.
Why don't they run away?
Linda Smith, the founder of Shared Hope International, rescues victims of the sex trade. She says, "The pimp tells her, 'I know where I got you and I will get you again, and what just happened to you it will be worse. If I don't get you, I will get your family - your grandmother, sister or mom.' After that, the girl looks like a willing participant, but she is terrified."
Some are kidnapped, like two cousins (ages 14 and 15) in Toledo, Ohio, who were grabbed during a walk in 2005 and forced to turn tricks at a local truck stop.
Some are runaways, like Ingrid Hayward's daughter, who was held captive in New York City for 11 months and forced into prostitution. Due to a lack of police resources, Hayward was left on her own to rescue her daughter.
Hayward told me, "Our country is in denial about this problem."
True. Human trafficking is a global epidemic, but one most Americans associate with Thailand, not Toledo.
Hayward started the Newark Coalition Against Human Trafficking, one of countless groups battling what advocates call modern-day slavery.
The frustration shared by every advocate I spoke to is with federal and local governments' unwillingness or inability to enforce the laws on the books.
Sex Slavery in America
It’s the largest category of forced labor in America and with good reason:
– it’s tied to organized crime and highly profitable;
– the demand for sex services, including from children , is high and growing; and
– the lack of safe and legal migration facilitates it.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) states that the average entry prostitution age is between 12 – 14. Shared Hope International documents modern-day sex trafficking and examines conditions under which it exists. It confirms that most victims are underage girls. A congressional finding estimated that between 100,000 – 300,000 children are at risk at any time. A DOJ assessment was that pimps control at least 75% of exploited minors by targeting vulnerable children using violence and psychological intimidation to hold them.
Making prostitution legal will not stop trafficking, it will only increase it as it becomes more prevalent and accepted in society . Please consider the facts before making off hand statements about the health and safety of women and children.
And statistically speaking, men are involved in criminal activities, and particularly, organized crime and sex trafficking in particular, on a much higher basis than women. That's not a sexist statement, it's just a fact. Check the bureau of justice crime statistics for verification.
As for the economy,I would like to see NAFTA repealed, and some legislation passed that would encourage business to remain in the US. I fear we WILL become a third world country if we don't act very soon.
- Enlightened1
September 7, 2009 12:01PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
They need help
I can say your mostly right on this.But there is more to it than your side.As a worker with prostitutes and drug users.I think it would be better on the girls if prostitution was legal .It is very hard to get these women jobs after they have a police report for prostitution.As it is now the police are pimping them and they have no were to go.They come to me for help and with police and there local pimps after them.
I try to give them help but with a rap sheet for prostitution its getting harder to get them jobs.A lot of them there family dont want them.They need loving care,clothing, housing ,selfrespect and a job.
- countryboy
September 7, 2009 8:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Giving up.
To say that we should make prostitution legal because once they get a police record it's hard to get them a job, is giving up. Legal prostitution doesn't end illgal prostitution. A lot of john's don't like the restrictions. A better solution would be to get a group of ministers like yourself in neighboring communities and relocate them. Locking them into a life of sin is not the answer.
- mike1948
September 7, 2009 9:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Never give up.
I see your point.We do relocate and house them.Time and time again I run into a brick wall with people.When they find out about a police record and wont hire them.There are a lot of great people out there that are happy to help out.And some great business too.
Some think once there busted that they cant go back home.That they would not be welcome.In lots of cases this is true.But there are lots of family that loves them and wants to help them get on with a good life.With a police record it makes it worst.
- countryboy
September 8, 2009 5:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Prostitutes = Dogs? Sofas? What are they?
What, you relocate people at will and whim? So here you come and decide that Jennifer needs to relocate because she sells sexual favors. Free country my ass.
- topapito
October 7, 2009 12:58PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are being naive
Read your whole post. And though I see that there is a definite problem, I don't see how making or keeping prostitution illegal helps, if anything, I would see that as further punishment to the slaves. So you got abducted, turned into a prostitute, raped, beaten, threatened? And you had the nerve to actually prostitute yourself? Well off to jail with you for being a victim!
Frankly, legalized prostitution would actually help put an end to this as it would allow for tight controls of the real professionals. Johns looking for illegal sex would have to look a little harder. I don't know, making something illegal doesn't always accomplish what you might think it would.
- topapito
October 7, 2009 12:56PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
j8716
The real problem in England is not prositution but drugs. Many of the girls are working to support a drug habit. Typically waiting in the street for motorists thereby causing a nuisance.
The high class prostitutes are not a problem.
- j8716
June 24, 2009 3:16PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
In the US
Thats the same here in the US.The street walkers they need help.
- countryboy
August 1, 2009 9:08PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No.
People can be forced by their circumstances to work a nonpreferred job--even a job that causes them physical pain. For example, witness the single mom with bad knees working long hours as a waitress... Happens all the time.
If prostitution were a job like any other--like that waitressing job--then people from all sorts of backgrounds could be forced by their circumstances to take that job when nobody else would hire them.
Think of how things are now. We have people with PhDs working as janitors because they got laid off. Teenagers with no experience can't seem to find work anywhere. That's bad enough. But if one of the last jobs still hiring is prostitution?... Well, the kids are hungry; the rent is due.
People should be able to choose who they have sex with; and they shouldn't be forced, economically, into "choosing" prostitution. It's bad enough that some people are forced into it now, while it's illegal, because they're addicted to drugs or they're underage and homeless or whatever reason.
There's two ways of forcing somebody, you see: One is to overpower them and make them do what you want. The other is simply to take away or hide all the other options, until they have only one path they can take.
- Callista
June 24, 2009 6:10PM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Nonsense
Opening another option == forcing women to choose it? Pure nonsense. You've got it backwards. Current laws criminalize one of the choices that women are free to make. These laws load prostitution with consequences that have no correlation to any injury: they punish women for making a choice that didn't harm anyone. Slavery (forced prostitution) is an abomination, but in that case the slaver -- not the prostitute -- is the true criminal. And, going back to your argument, do you really want to punish women for what the economy "forced" them to choose?
- Charles Ames
July 22, 2009 4:14PM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Need help
Good post
But untill there is help for the people out there who cant find a job to pay there rent or buy there food .What should one do to stay alive.
Do you feed them or give them shelter?Most need help.
- countryboy
August 1, 2009 9:18PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Two ways of forcing somebody
1. Overpower them and make them do what you want.
Yup, arresting people is the primary way of enforcing laws.
2. The other is simply to take away or hide all the other options, until they have only one path they can take.
Yup, making laws saying "you can't do this" is taking away options. So instead of going into prostitution to save their home and family legally, they'll be forced to do it illegally. And then we can arrest them for it. Nice.
- sunshiner424
October 13, 2009 1:20PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
SHOULD it be legal?
No, does it make sense to legalize it? Yes!
Why? It is not going away.
It would be wizer if there were a system in place to assist in helping keep these people safe and healthy.
Will it ever happen? No!
This is another of those social questions that will not ever be settled
- bhall
June 24, 2009 7:21PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
guess what?
Umm, it is already legal in Nevada. So why wouldn't it be possibly legal anywhere else?
- Memo213
September 22, 2009 11:29PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'd call this a civil rights issue.
Persecution of women working in the sex business is blaming the victim.
What needs be done is outlawing it, requiring a female sex (including porn stars) worker to be required to follow at least a several day orientation course (and slowly expand to actual *required* longer training on risks, techniques, exploitative practices, financial management, psychology, health care ) and licensing. The state should guarantee that a one-time licensed sex worker can have a life with full anonymity after a career in the sex industry. That means - no local small town sheriff can peek in these files and incidentally discover that nice miss Sloecombe at church meeting used to do tricks at the bunny farm.
Personally I am neither a godist or jesusian, and I do not live in the US. Over here in the netherlands prostitution has been legalized. The failure of legalized prostitution in the netherlands lies not with this acceptance, it lies with continued moralist idiots persisting in excluding this from society but they regard it as incompatible with how they see society. Where prostitution used to exist not it can be outlawed or taxed - pushing it underground more effectively than it it were illegal.
A tax-record for parking blowjobs is still a very powerful shaming tool.
Tax collectors do better than cops in driving away prostitution. Ther irony is that the above -legalization, counseling, required training, licensing- may work far better to eradicate prostitution than its current legal status in the US.
Nevertheless we are already seeing a climate of permissiveness and apathy towards sex emerge in our modern "post-values" western society where there simply isn't anymore shame involved in using sex as a tool. The current generation is growing up where a brief several year stint in porn is a badge of honor rather than a stigma of shame.
Like always, the godists, one foot still sucked stuck in the mud of the middle ages, can't keep up and are making a sad spectacle of themselves.
- Khannea Suntzu
June 25, 2009 1:19AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Ok, hold on there...
Khannea, I would just as soon force parents into schools where they learn to bring up their children than try and teach prostitutes anything about their trade. They should wear a condom, well, guess what, some prostitutes cave heavily under the pressure of the weight of a dollar bill. If a john doesn't like condoms , the market will bring him a prostitute who will have sex without one.
- topapito
October 7, 2009 1:03PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Bear in mind...
The same would be true of a politician, when it comes to continuing to vote for prohibition of, say, drugs . How many politicians are paid to keep drugs illegal , when there is a clear possible conflict of interests here?
In fact, I can go on and on listing professions and categories of people to distrust. You won't however distrust those because these people haven't been marginalized and demonized.
- Khannea Suntzu
October 7, 2009 1:26PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Men need sex
As a male, I have always been aware from personal experience that men need sex. I don't understand how any normal male can think otherwise.
I have never looked down upon hookers -- they provide a valuable service (I hesitate to use the word "prostitute" because of its negative connotations)
Hookers are the best source of sex for many bachelors. Shy men need a dominant woman like a hooker, at least for the first few times. With a hooker, a man can concentrate on his performance.
I believe that the majority of people do not want our precious tax dollars being wasted on enforcement of laws against prostitution.
When prostitution is illegal, hookers often must pay pimps for protection from police -- or may even need to bribe the police directly.
I think that the porn industry opposes legalization, because the porn industry benefits from prurience.
Shakespeare's play King Lear had the right description of public officials who try to interfere with hookers:
"Thou rascal beadle, why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thine own back -- thou hotly lusts to use her in that kind for which thou whipst her."
- LarryFarma
June 25, 2009 11:21AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are a jerk.
First off, the word HOOKER has WORSE connotations than "prostitute".
Second off, Shakespeare lived in a different time. He lived in a time where prostitution was one of the ONLY jobs for women.
Oh, and with someone closer to you, like a girlfriend, they will honestly tell you what is good or bad. Why? They will trust you more.
Final thing - spending less time with prostitue will get you into a good relationship!
- debator101
June 27, 2009 3:46PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Bizarre thinking
Of course men need sex, that's why you have hands! And look, they're just the right length and everything so you don't even have to bend down.
Most men I have known in my life have never been to a prostitute because they value women as lovers and partners. In order to have sex, they have entered into relationships with trustworthy women that they know and care for. Yeah, I know that takes time, but most people think it's worth it. One night stands and prostitutes are risky business that can affect you (and your partner if you have one) for the rest of your life.
There wouldn't be a need for prostitutes or sex slaves if men didn't use them. It's just like drug use , there's no sense in going after the suppliers if we don't do something about the users first. Supply and demand.
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 3:21PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The second oldest profession.
It is said that prostitution is the world's oldest profession. Pre-historic hunters often paid with best piece of meat (like the double entendre there?). Ronald Reagan said that the second oldest profession was politician, and this, for the holy rollers, EVOLVED from the oldest. Politics is a legal profession. Check out the number of lawyers who engage in it. Prostitution should be legal because engaging in it is a prerequisite to being a politician.
Countries allowing prostitution can regulate it, requiring regular physical check-ups. In addition, taxing it as a form of recreation can generate more income for the politicians to use/abuse. It might also prevent polticians from traveling out of the country to find entertainment /mistresses.
- Rashi18
June 26, 2009 8:08AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Herein lies the problem
Since, as you have so astutely pointed out, politicians are no more than first cousins to prostitutes, they are unlikely to legalize prostitution because it will dimminish the last remaining differentiator between the two. As a Californian, this state coulod certainly eliminate a good portion of it's deficit through legalizing victimless crimes like prostitution and 420. Maybe we could trade, and make prostitutes legal and politicians illegal?
- Blackbird
July 9, 2009 10:19AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The difference being
The difference between a politician and a prostitute:
1. When a prostitute takes your money , she can be arrested.
2. The politician takes more money, does more damage and is less honest.
- Enlightened1
September 4, 2009 3:26PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
nope
it is true that we cannot stop it but that should not mean we should accept it! we should never do things at our own convenience.
- girlnumberone June 26, 2009 8:51AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why not?
True we should not do things for convenience only but I ask you, why shouldn't it be accepted? What is truly wrong with buying sex ? So wrong in fact that we should take away people's rights to buy and sell sex? Making sex illegal (paid for or not, it doesn't make a difference to me) is disallowing people from using their own bodies the way they please. Do you want someone telling you that you can't do what you want to your body? That you can't go running on sundays because it's holy? That you can't eat cheese, drink iced tea, do sports , smoke hookah, use an epi pen? Harmful or not, the choice is yours and should always be yours. Same for everyone.
- sunshiner424
October 13, 2009 1:35PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
because...
well i feel that this is a matter of principles. allowing it means a sort of acceptance and agreement from your side. do you mean that if you wanted to, you would sell your body for money ? it is not so much about us telling other people what to do. rather, we should protect the rights of those who are in danger of being exploited. take for example, a child undergoes prostitution and grows up to become a prostitute. do you think that this is truly a personal choice? if you can argue that selling your body is a right, i say that i have a right to do everything in my power to stop such an act. it is dangerous to argue in the name of rights defined by ourselves.
- girlnumberone October 14, 2009 8:25AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
well in that case
This is indeed a matter of principles.
My body. Can I sell it if I wish?
Your body. Can you smoke if you want to?
As for personal choices, what's the difference between a child growing up as a prostitute and a child growing up as rich and educated? We all do what we're comfortable with and we're comfortable with what we're exposed to. If you take a kid prostitute and stick them in a catholic school will they be comfortable and happy? I doubt it.
If I can argue that selling my body should be my choice you cannot disallow me from selling my body because that is ethically wrong. To limit someone else's freedom (if it harms nobody else) is WRONG. Even if you don't like it.
- sunshiner424
October 16, 2009 3:15PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
its not
so, if the choice were in your hands, you would let the child remain a prostitute if she or he screams and cries? even if they are thrown into a catholic school , at least the child won't be exploited. the person would have a chance of knowing other choices to life. if they grow up still thinking that prostitution is a good business then let them be. sometimes others know best, especially those who care. to limit someonelse's freedom is NOT wrong. for example, would you jail or condemn a parent from disallowing the child to attend a late-night gathering just because the parents feel that he or she is not mature enough? the answer is you cannot and you have no right to even in the name of freedom. because the one who loves the child and thinks of the child's best interests is the parent, not outsiders who think otherwise.
- girlnumberone October 18, 2009 3:16AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You're arguing two different things
On the one hand you say it is not wrong to limit someone else's freedom but on the other you say I would have no right in interfering with how a parent raises their child. I agree completely with the latter.
It is wrong to limit someone else's freedom. Even if you think you know better than they do. The issue does not make a difference. Tyranny occurs because the tyrant thinks he is doing what is best for the people. Control and regulation occurs for the same reason. Every villain has the best intentions. To criminalize prostitution is to restrict freedom in the market and in individuals' lives. Certainly punish the ethically wrong people who force children into prostitution but punish them for restricting freedom of that child, don't punish the act of prostitution because the criminal isn't even a prostitute.
By the way, until a child is 18 the parents are legal guardians and legally and responsibly control the freedom of the child. If anyone but the legal guardian tries to control their freedom, that is not legal and it is ethically wrong.
- sunshiner424
October 18, 2009 3:15PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
but...
the only way to convince people that prostitution should legalised is that it is purely his or her personal choice. it means that even with an oppurtunity and ability to find another job, that offer is turned down in the pursuit of being a prostitute. well, the fact is most prostitutes are people who have been duped by agencies, unfortunate children living on the streets, and so much more who have their own sad story to tell if you would only listen. if prostitution were legalised, this would only give companies more freedom to be able to escape with these atrocities. they can easily exploit the whole system just because people of the civilised world believes its their rights. i do believe that for those who choose to abandon their principles in a way to make a fast buck is beyond our reach, yet those are the minority.
- girlnumberone October 18, 2009 8:00PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Sex is a major integral part of all....
Yes, the sale of sex should be legal and regulated.
As Governor Sanford of Georgia just proved beyond any shadow of a doubt, sex is not only an integral part of all of us, but is a primary motivating force of action. This will come to the forefront most often in the: socially inept, disfigured, ugly. People whose soul has been crippled by events and/or war. There are other aspects to this, but this will do to start.
- Olderman
June 28, 2009 12:30PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
There is no such thing as prostitution...
The act of trading your body for goods and status ( food , shelter, protection, politics , etc.) by both men and women has been around long before laws, money or religion .
No one should ever be forced to have sex for any reason but to be honest a majority of people bartering sex for tangibles probably don't see the big deal.
Sex could very easily outweigh any currency (especially an ailing one) in times of emergency.
Don't knock what you label as 'prostitution' because you never know when you may have to barter your body for your next meal or to save a life.
- Stripper Hacks
June 29, 2009 5:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Sorry but true
You are so right.I see it all the time.They do it for there next meal,rent,or what ever.And know one cares people treat them like trash.
- countryboy
June 29, 2009 9:16PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Consider the greater metaphor
I think what Ms. Hacks is saying is that we all, in a sense, trade our time and bodies for currency in some way or another. Ditch-diggers use their muscles. Accountants use their fingers. Writers use their brains and imaginations. Musicians use their hands. Prostitutes use...other things.
- quantummechanik
July 1, 2009 3:05PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Within Reasons
I truly believe that prostitution reduces crimes against women to certain extend especially in developing countries like India. However legalizing prostitution will lead to widespread exploitation. If we can come up with solid measures for restriction and control the exploitation then I think making prostitution legal will have its benefits.
- Forex
July 8, 2009 11:33PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
NO
NO and it's obvious why.
- Coo July 27, 2009 7:51PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
not really
How is it obvious? It's not obvious to myself or others.
- MrBook
July 27, 2009 9:49PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Shold it be legal?
NO
Will it ever stop?
NO
- bhall
July 30, 2009 11:56AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Should be legal
Do I like it no.Would I use one no.Should it be legal yes.Will it ever stop no.Give me one good reason why prostitution should not be legal.
In your own word you said "Will it ever stop? NO"
- countryboy
August 1, 2009 8:24PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
why should it be illegal?
You know that is a question that I can only answer based on my feelings. Unfortunately I am older than I would like to be, and in that period of time I have learned to trust my feelings, at least for my life. One time I had a massage and the sole purpose was because I knew it would have a happy ending, it did! But I have to tell you it was an ending that I did not feel good about afterwards, and before you say anything: I am not a prude and I have always been very liberal in my thoughts, I still am. I have always been live and let live. I beleive people should be free to love who they want and not be penalized for it. I dont believe people should be ruled by religous organizations, although my base of life was pretty religous. So,my life has been molded by my experiences and those experiences have toned my feelings, or thought processes if you like. I cant imagine that the person that gave me the massage enjoyed it, it was strictly for the money . I just have to wonder if that person had any pride in that act? All of this is compltely seperate from a religous teaching, it is a social issue to me. So the only reason that I have is my personal feeling.
I totally respect your opinion and would not think of telling you or anyone else that they had to live by my feelings, but I would ask you, don't you think this profession needs some sort help? While some people, not just women men as well, are subject to crimes against them, and the spread of communicable disease; for those who have to turn to this survive cant be happy. Do you think it should be left as it is?
This issue joins one other issue that seems to be pondered. POT, what is the difference in alcohol and pot? There are just things that people feel strongly about and think theirs is the only way. Thats the only reason I have.
With your statement yes it should be legal why do you think that? You actually made me think about this issue and not just respond, thanks,
- bhall
August 2, 2009 1:13AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
legal or not
First off yes prositutes need help.It's hard for a prositute to live a normal life after beinng a prositute.Most of the lower class prositutes do it because of bad times or a lack of love.
Why it should be legal is its going on now.And once they are arrested it just mades it that much harder for them to stop.
They have a police record.And a police record makes it that much harder to get a normal job.They are not bad people they are people trying to stay alive.
What makes there sin any worst then any one else's?
Yes they need help.They need heip to get self respect, food ,shelter and a normal Job.
- countryboy
August 2, 2009 3:37PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I completely agree with everything you have said......
And nothing irritates me more than the tv shows showing the sting operations that should not be allowed. That is just as damaging to the guys who get caught, Probably ruins their life. I just know it will not stop and those people do need all that you have mentioned including self respect. But obviously after this many years no one has figured out what to do about it, so I guess we primarily feel the same. Legal or not this is a sad problem that most of society choses to ignore. You know it would seem that some of theses big Christian organizatioons would expend their energies to help thsre people instead of persecuting gay people because they want to live a normal life with the one they love.
- bhall
August 2, 2009 4:04PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Agree
Yes I think we do agree.Yes it is sad that most of the Christisn organizations dont help.
There are a hand full that do.Thats what Christian love is all about.
- countryboy
August 2, 2009 5:37PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Roe vs Wade
Isn't the main war cry of the pro-baby killing groups: It's the woman's body?
- Wildfire
August 12, 2009 12:18PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Prostitution a career option?
I don't want prostitution to be a career option for my female family members. Why do we not want to teach women to respect their bodies by not allowing men to us them for sex or mutilating them and their babies through abortion ? Men, keep your hands off my children and children of mine, you are not to make yourself available for men to ruin or make money off of you for sex or abortion.
Our bodies belong to God. He paid the price. We are indebted to Him as to what we do with our bodies and our souls. Teach your children to not to give their souls to the devil!
Women who place a low value on themselves are taken advantage of by men and we need to change our thinking about where sex fits into our lives. Old fashioned values will never bring regret. Girls should have lots of family support and love so they don't feel drawn to give their bodies to men who have no caring for them. Teachers, parents, friends, pastors-whomever is involved with my child, please help build my child's self esteem and promote a college education and discourage relationships which will only end in regret. If sex was not promoted in our media and accepted as the norm among young people, we would have fewer abortions. Women pay the price!!
- Alayna Staggers
August 12, 2009 1:13PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
If you teach your children well...
They will not become whores. You don't need to worry about that.
As for my children , if I teach them my beliefs well, they will also not sell sex to pay the bills because they will sell hopefully their intelligence and ingenuity.
For the religious argument, we are not all religious and it is not a given set of rules.
Some people may choose to sell sex if they have nothing better to sell or if that's what they want to sell. Our personal opinions should not be pushed upon them through laws. Push them upon your own children but nobody else and I will do the same.
- sunshiner424
October 13, 2009 1:45PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Push Prostitution
As I said, go door to door and get a petition signed, approach your local PTA and local churches, then take your petition to your local city council. Write your congressmen. If you believe in something, get busy working on it, ok? Alayna Staggers, nurse, mother , grandmother and Pro-Life Activist
- Alayna Staggers
October 13, 2009 2:09PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
YOU influence them the most
I didn't realize you are an activist. Well I'll kindly ask you to stop.
I believe in freedom. I believe in live and let live. I don't push my opinions on people in any way except debate. I also believe you are wrong and the fact that you are pushing your opinions is disturbing to me.
Yes, children see everything that exists in the world but instead of trying to censor the bad things or getting rid of the bad things, the best way to equip a child with the world is to teach them how you've learned to deal with it all. To change the environment is to change it for everyone else too whether they like it or not. It's so much easier and better for everyone to teach your kids about sex and the respect it deserves than to try to change the world into the place YOU want it to be. Besides, if you're spending so much time trying to change the world how do you have time to teach them properly?
Prostitution should be legal because many people either want to do it for a career or have no other financial choice. It is not a criminal activity in nature and making it illegal is telling people they don't have the freedom to do what they want with their own body.
- sunshiner424
October 14, 2009 6:32AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
So I am Excluded
Because of my religious beliefs, I am excluded from participating on this site? Sounds discrimatory. I actively believe in God and the 10 Commandments and they say "Thou Shall Not Kill." I take the part of women who are abused and babies who are aborted and that makes me bad? The internet holds more evil than this old grandma, nurse could provide. It is a shame that noone can stand up for the good and be counted. I have seen life from all different sides so I don't claim perfection, but it is a shame I am alone in what is supposed to be a God fearing country. The little work that I do harms noone, via take care of family, nursing on the side and going to church . I am sorry I am such a threat to you! I must be right on the mark to be disincluded in a discussion site!
- Alayna Staggers
October 14, 2009 11:33AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Politics vs. Religion
Yes, it's been a conflict throughout history. This country was founded on the basis that religious practices are free from government and government is free from religion . The reason: governing a whole (religiously diverse) society serves the purpose of creating a system where people can live peaceably with each other fairly/with justice. The rules set down to govern cannot be determined by any specific group or religion within that society because that would be forcing religious perspective upon others who do not agree. That is neither fair nor right.
This country is not a "god fearing" country. The majority of us are christians but that means nothing to everyone. We have many jews and muslims and atheists /agnostics. (and scientologists and buddhists and flying spaghetti monster - ists, etc.) For everyone to get along, we need to keep religion out of our system of governing.
"It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov't from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others."
James Madison
". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
John Adams
"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."
Thomas Jefferson
Most of the founding fathers were Deists, not Christians . Had evolution been proposed during their lifetimes, many historians believe that some of the founding fathers would have been atheists. They all believed that religion did not belong in government and therefore did not mention God, Jesus, divine right, or any such thing in the constitution ANYWHERE.
Please keep your religion and your religious justifications to yourself. Abortion may be morally wrong but laws do not exist to uphold morals. They exist to protect people from each other.
- sunshiner424
October 18, 2009 3:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Oh and
I am not saying you are excluded from participating in the debates. I am just simply saying you are wrong. Not bad, not evil, not anything except wrong. Only that you said you are actively trying to make abortion illegal threatens me. Everything else you do, I take no offense to.
- sunshiner424
October 18, 2009 3:47PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
We All Influence Children
Everyone your child comes in contact with, everthing he see on movies ot TV, has an influence on your child. They are not isolated from the adult depictions of sex , marriage and lack of love and respect they see promoted in our society . By taking action, I hope to create a better environment in which my children can grow up. I won't leave it to chance and they will observe me standing for more old fashioned virtures.
- Alayna Staggers
October 13, 2009 3:42PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
. "I won't leave it to chance"
As a 30-years-married-to-the-same-woman father of six and grandfather of two, ages 26 and younger, I wholeheartedly agree that children are influenced by everything around us -- whether good or bad, whether truth or error -- just as you and I were influenced when we were children.
Part of maturity is recognizing that not everything we were taught, even by well-meaning, sincere parents, teachers, and leaders, was correct, right, or truth. No one, not even a group of people, is always and infallibly right. That fallibility applies to us as parents and grandparents. For example, if you are erroneous in teaching your daughters that monogamous heterosexual marriage is the only "true and right" way, then you may seriously damage their lives by burdening them with false guilt, needlessly repressed desires, and lifestyle choices which bring them unnecessary sorrow and difficulties..
The best influence we can give our children and grandchildren, in the face of our fallibilty, seems to be to encourage them to THINK. Encourage them to consciously deliberate ethics , values, and "right-and-wrongs" for themselves, pointing out to them that we are forced by the reality of life to make those decisions and judgments not as individuals each alone on an island but as beings living in societies. Encourage them to weigh their "morality" objectively with the principle universal to all religions, philosophies, and fluorishing societies in mind: "Am I unnecessarily causing some kind of actual harm to others by my choices and behaviors?"
A deliberating person can discern for themselves whether what they see and hear in the media or in their cousins' families is harmful or not.
Don't be afraid to have strong opinions about issues, including morality -- but, make it clear, to them and to yourself, that even though you feel strongly, it is nevertheless merely a personal opinion which just might be wrong after all. And perhaps more important, maintain an open mind about issues and opinions. Changing one's mind under the weight of later information is not weakness -- it's rational.
Believing that you or I somehow infallibly, indisputably know what behaviors and morals "create a better environment " is not only presumptious, but arrogant and self-righteous. It is, in effect, setting yourself up as "God".
- eojtus
January 17, 2010 7:45PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
We All Influence Children
Everyone your child comes in contact with, everthing he see on movies ot TV, has an influence on your child. They are not isolated from the adult depictions of sex , marriage and lack of love and respect they see promoted in our society . By taking action, I hope to create a better environment in which my children can grow up. I won't leave it to chance and they will observe me standing for more old fashioned virtures.
- Alayna Staggers
October 13, 2009 4:16PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
"old fashioned"?
Sometimes we each use terms without really considering their meanings, and think we're saying something but in fact are not.
"Old-fashioned virtues" seems one of those. Do you mean by that term, "the virtues that existed in earlier days?" Which virtues are you meaning, and specifically what "earlier" years in what society (USA or otherwise) are you meaning, Alayna.
"Born in 1956".
- eojtus
January 17, 2010 7:00PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Virtues
Oh, I just think there was a time when people loved one another and were too busy trying to survive and they didn't have time to come up with new sex games. It took all they had to just maintain their families and keep them alive into adulthood. Babies died, women died in childbirth, men were fortunate to live to age 40. People had to remain faithful to survive. They had no idle time.
- Alayna Staggers
January 18, 2010 3:14PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
"They had no idle time"...3 questions?...
I'm trying to understand your perspective, Alayna.
Three questions for you that may help me, if you'll please answer.
First, can you give an actual approximate date and place for your time period of old-fashioned virtues?
I ask because I realize all of us tend to idealize "the old days" -- we focus on those aspects that were good (and there actually are good aspects at any period, even in the grimmest and cruelest times in history), especially if we remember them through the naive filter of our childhood impressions of life; and, along with focusing on the good aspects, we're either unaware of or actually forgetful of those other aspects that were as "bad" or even "worse" than the conditions and attitudes of life today. Those "good ol' days" may exist only in our misperceptions.
So, to ensure that there was such a time as you described -- can you give a concrete time and place to which we can all refer to see how those old-fashioned virtues were making life better ?
Second, do you believe that the idea behind the adage that was already old when I was a boy in 1960, "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy," is wrong?
And last, do you think that people are happier in their lives, relationships, communities, and marriages when babies die, women die in childbirth, men barely live to age 40, and there's no time for anything except trying to survive?
- eojtus
January 20, 2010 11:44AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
"Women who place a low value on themselves"...
...often do because others, including mothers, grandmothers, and other women , have unnecessarily made them feel that they are "less".
Do you believe that a woman instinctively or naturally feels -- all by themselves without anyone else having introduced or placed the idea into their thinking -- that providing sex for money is "wrong"?
- eojtus
January 17, 2010 7:08PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Leagal
I don't know because you have porn, just stick to that maybe. At the same time I don't care if a girl/guy wants to get paid to do the only thing she/he can to make good money . It would be safer if it was leagal. Hell it could be taxed haha. Imagine getting taxed on your next blowjob/eatting out. (granted it'd be hard to regulate.)
- ttut21
August 13, 2009 6:22AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Societal breakdown? Don't think so
In the 1970s I spent plenty of time in Hamburg, Germany, where prostitution was legal . They had to undergo medical exams for the license to operate, and had to undergo testing every two weeks to make certain they carried no communicable diseases.
And Save, have you ever thought about how you would feel if your son, husband or brother visited a prostitute and came down with HIV / AIDS ?
- vortex
August 24, 2009 5:23PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Should it BE legal?? It already IS!
It is already legal in Nevada. So HOW do you prosecute people in the rest of the states for doing the same thing??
Especially since our OWN government has run a house of prostitution !! (The IRS took over the Mustang ranch, BUT kept running it!)
No, it should not be encouraged, but it shouldn't be illegal either.
- John556
August 26, 2009 11:56AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Individual Liberty
The essential value at the root of civilization versus barbarism, of U.S. origins and explicit in the U.S. Constitution is mutual respect for individual right to self-determination and the liberty to exercise that right. The basic act of prostitution - one individual selling their body, knowledges, talents and skills in sexual pleasure to another individual for fair value in return - is in agreement with that essential value. In other words, at its most basic understanding, prostitution is a civilized act in compliance with the ideals of free enterprise. A free market cannot exist without mutual respect for an individual's right to self-determination and the liberty to exercise that right. If you believe a man has a right and ought to be at liberty to sell an automobile belonging to him for fair monetary compensation, to be consistent in your thinking, you must agree an individual has the right and ought to be at liberty to sell, for fair compensation, access to their physical body, knowledges, talents and skills for the purposes of sexual pleasure. If the automobile rightly belongs to the man, who could or would successfully argue against his liberty to sell it? If the customer rightly possesses the money or comparable value to exchange for that automobile, who could or would successfully argue against his liberty to purchase it?
It should be assumed that not all economic transactions in all marketplaces involve the fair and uncoerced exchange of value for value and such unfair and coerced transactions are as common in the prostitution marketplace as in any other. Still, in every marketplace - prostitution included - there have been, are and will be transactions that take place which are fair and uncoerced exchanges of value for value. Because these transactions do not violate the essential value of the free market nor that of the U.S. Constitution (the supreme law of the land), and because we in the United States at least pay lip service to respect for a free market and the U.S. Constitution, prostitution, like any other service industry, ought to be legal and protected from unfair practices and interference.
The basic assumption in a civilization is that an individual human being owns full right to their person and the knowledge, talents and skills and creative product of the same. This is what we usually intend when we say we have "individual rights". A human being owns their own life (and, on another topic, they own their own death). The act of prostitution could not be more closely related to this basic assumption at the root of civilization - the "prostitute" has sole ownership of their body and what they do with it insofar as they respect that same right in others. They may not rightly force a sexual act on another nor may another force a sexual act upon them. So too, no one can rightly prevent them from performing a sexual act for just compensation nor may anyone prevent the customer from exchanging a just value for a sexual act. No third party can rightly own the body of the prostitute or the body of the customer. Assuming a fair exchange is taking place, the act of prostitution cannot be rightly prevented and to do so violates the wording and spirit of the U.S. Constitution. Laws banning prostitution may be written and enforced, but they cannot be written or enforced RIGHTLY.
Laws and acts to prevent or punish prostitution are unjust and always have been.
- Naumadd
August 28, 2009 1:42AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
YOUR BODY!!!!!
You know the good thing is we are all intitled to our opinion and mine is that it is your body you should be intitled to do what you want with it,and if you happen to disagree with it don't do it but don't try to force your belief on other people,and try to pass judgement on them that is not our place it's that simple, remember an opinion is only valued if it is asked for!!!I personal don't appove of such actions that is only my opinion and I do not pass harsh judgement on those who do.
- muffmonster36
September 1, 2009 5:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
judgement
well said. We will all be judged at judgement day.
- countryboy
September 5, 2009 9:55PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
My opinion is no
legalizing prostitution is just asking for trouble.First and foremost is the disease's that is already being passed around from this, I mean you would have to be pretty desperate to even pertake in this act, and look at the women (and men) that you see trying to sell there bodies it is downright disgusting.
- okmom
September 9, 2009 2:37AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Legalize!? That would take all the fun out of it
One of the thrills of getting a prostitute is because it is illegal...at lest that's what my pastor says.
- runbadscott
September 23, 2009 3:50PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Hell Yes
Hell Yes
- apache39
September 25, 2009 12:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Police
Prostitution should be legal , and taxed, so should drugs , and possibly gambling , all victimless crimes.
- bartolomeo7
October 8, 2009 11:09AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
So You Want Prostitution To Be Legal
Start contacting your congressmen and the local PTA. Tell them of your ideas. Take votes from your local churches. Go door to door and have a petition signed. Present it to your city council. God Luck.
Alayna Staggers, nurse, mom, and grandmother
and Pro-Life Activist
- Alayna Staggers
October 13, 2009 2:02PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Well, you do what you have to...
in certain situations I can understand why women must sell themselves (Although, that's another issue in society of why we don't help them... That's a different issue.) But I would be afraid to say "yes" in the fact it is a major ailment to health and it runs a greater risk with society. Human trafficking is already a major issue with prostitution being illegal , if it is legal , wouldn't that just feed more into SLAVERY!
It would also give our children a ridiculous asumption and aspriations for their future.
It is a health risk... Well we all know why it is a health risk.
- frostidew
October 14, 2009 3:50PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
feeding
"Human trafficking is already a major issue with prostitution being illegal , if it is legal , wouldn't that just feed more into SLAVERY! "
And by making prostitution legal a good part of the reason for human trafficking (supplying prostitutes) would be removed... reducing slavery.
- MrBook
October 15, 2009 8:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Well...
I see where you're coming from. Although, it would just be easier to produce slaves and those slaves would [probably] be cheaper. Also, human trafficking would not go down. If forced prostitution would, unlikly, decline, it would just feed into more slavery issues such as forced labor .
- frostidew
October 16, 2009 12:53PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
easier
It would be easier to recruit free employees, because of the lack of a legal risk. With legalization and regulation forced prostitution would still be illegal (and detectable) so it would remain 'in the shadows'. The difference is that people looking to visit a prostitute would have a legal choice to turn to (one that could have its services advertised).
This would cut into the market for illegal prostitution as the legal choice would be highly visible, and much safer (little risk of being robbed and no risk of being arrested ).
This legalization would not impact those after what would still be an illegal act (such as an interest in minors) but then no level of legalization will impact that.
- MrBook
October 17, 2009 1:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Possibly...
But, in the case of legalized prostitution , then it would still be easier for illegal slavery, because no one would suspect it, no forms would need to be filed, it would be cheaper, and it's not hard to turn someone to fear.
Yes, the legal market would be SAFER, but not easier. Also, just because there is trafficking doesn't mean there is no advertisment.
Of course it would still be an illegal act, but that does not stop drug trafficking (or still, human trafficking at that.) So you're saying that even if prostitution becomes legal that it would not affect it at all? As in, it would not go up or down. Just stay the same? That's just another problem at hand!
- frostidew
October 18, 2009 8:36AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
regulation
"But, in the case of legalized prostitution , then it would still be easier for illegal slavery, because no one would suspect it, no forms would need to be filed, it would be cheaper, and it's not hard to turn someone to fear"
That is why it would not just be legalized, but regulated as well.
"Yes, the legal market would be SAFER, but not easier. Also, just because there is trafficking doesn't mean there is no advertisment. "
Why wouldn't the legal market be easier? People could openly run establishments that would be publicly visible. One could recruit legal prostitutes without the risk that comes from attempting to enslave people.
Or let me ask this... did the end of prohibition increase or decrease the market for illegal liquor?
"Of course it would still be an illegal act, but that does not stop drug trafficking "
I never said that it would stop human trafficking... just that by allowing for legal prostitution the demand for illegal sex workers would decrease.
"So you're saying that even if prostitution becomes legal that it would not affect it at all?"
I am often puzzled by people assumption that such binary states exist... either legalized prostitution has no effect on human trafficking or it eliminates human trafficking. Rather you would likely find that while legalized prostitution would decrease the demand for human trafficking it would not eliminate it.
- MrBook
October 18, 2009 12:17PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
It is our moral obligation to recognize each other's human rights.
These rights, above all, include self-determination. As a sexworker myself, i feel passionate about legalizing prostitution . Where i work it's legal - i don't have to fear the police , and i'm recognised as a human being capable of making decisions for myself. Anyone ever heard "my body, my choice"? Sadly, the people who advocate this often turn their backs on this fundamental principle as soon as women 's sexuality is concerned. Outlawing sexual services in a society where every other fundamental human need is being catered to, shows a unhealthy hatred for one of the world's most joyful activities.
- Sina
October 19, 2009 12:43PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
what?
are you really one? do you know that some of your co- workers and only 5? ever heard of principles? ever heard of exploitation? do you know that sexual services and sexworker is just a euphemism? do you know that your body doesn't really belong to you cause you've already traded it for money ? do you know that this joyful activity is considered by many extremely disgusting and perverse?
to tell you the truth i cannot believe you are a prostitute. my body my choice. that's usually what i would say if my boyfriend ever wants me to have sex . if you cared so much how come you don't care now?
- girlnumberone October 20, 2009 3:07AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why so much hatred and ignorance?
Do you think that if someone's being exploited in whatever kind of job, everyone who does the same is automatically exploited? Or vice versa, becaus most are happy in their job, there are not people who have to do the same thing under terrible conditions ? It's about under which conditions and attitude you do it that determines if a job is heaven or hell. Yes I am really a sexworker. .. i care for "my body my choice" in every aspect. Nobody has the the right to tell anyone what to do and what don't with their body. Yes, i've heard of principles and believe very strongly in them. My principles are respect, kindness and reason. Having sex doesn't contradict these principles, on the contrary- sexuality is a
Strange that i still have my body..i don't see any missing body parts. If i've traded my body it's just like every other worker- we all sell our brains or body one way or the other. If you believe that i've sold my body you seem to believe one person can own the other..you should think about that attitude. So either i sell a service, or everyone else also trades their body- thats just semantics.
You probably are very young- just wait until you get married (or whenever you have sex..) and you'll see that it's not a "disgusting and perverse" thing, but something beautiful and spiritual if you just let it be that. If you have been brought up in the belief that sex is dirty it's maybe difficult to enjoy, but over time you'll learn.
- Sina
October 20, 2009 9:51AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
look here
no, i do not believe that everyone is exploited. but i know that MANY are being exploited. so you think your job is a heaven because you love sex ? your life is a heaven because you have sex everyday? attitude? are you asking those women that got sold in the sex trade to accept what they are going through everyday as an average normal, perfectly decent, career? nobody has a right to tell anyone what to do? reflect carefully. the police tells a robber to stop stealing. a parent tells a child not to play with scissors. again, the mind your own business attitude is being covered up by so called rights.
respect, kindness, reason. there is a reason for me to be against prostitution because it forces a five year old girl to sleep with perhaps a 36 year old man. i'm being kind by empathising with sex workers . i respect that women and children need to have a healthy lifestyle like me. do you believe me now? furthermore, how would you know whether the man you are sleeping with is married or not. if you sleep with a married amn aren't you being disrespectful and unkind to his wife?
i did not liken prositution to an organ transplant. what i mean is that for the sake of carnal lust and money you compromise the dignity and sanctity of your own body. people can "sell" their brains because intellect and wisdom is something worth respecting.
also, i do not believe sex is perverse and disgusting. sex done in love and respect for each other is beautiful because it is mutual trust. what you do is just throwing yourself at men at the sight of money. what they think when they see you is what carnal lust you can fulfill. is that not dirty enough?
yes i am young and i will wait till i get married till i have sex.
- girlnumberone October 21, 2009 2:12AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You're a fool
Did you seriously just compare choosing to be a prostitute with a 5 year old being forced into the sex slave?
Wow. That's like comparing regular sex to rape , and if you don't see the difference you're a danger to society .
Anyway if you think it's degrading then you can choose to not do it instead of trying to force everyone to submit to your wishes.
- Father Time
January 14, 2010 12:49AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'm not going to argue politics or religion.........
I'm just going to call it as I see it. I have never, nor would I ever pay for sex . Having said that, it's none of my business if someone else does. As long as no one's being hurt, what difference does it make? I know people will argue that people are exploited, which that argument could be made for ANYONE with a job! I'm exploited daily by my company so they can make insane profits while I juggle my bills to see which I can pay.
It's not called the World's oldest profession for nothing. Prostitution has been around forever. There's apparently no stopping it. What Nevada did makes sense. By legalizing it, they were able to tax it, thus bringing in more state revenue. Secondly, they were able to put stricter controls on it. People working as prostitutes must submit to testing to control the transmission of STDs. Condoms are supplied, government inspections are done, and it's kept under strict control. The individual towns and cities in Nevada have the final say as to whether or not it's legal there. Prostitution within Las Vegas city limits is illegal . They don't want the tourists exposed to it. I'd actually like to see it legal everywhere, though I'd never use it. It takes the prostitutes off the streets, lessens the amount of crime towards prostitutes, and helps control the spread of STDs. Prostitutes working illegally on the streets are often the targets for violent crimes, and you never know what they're carrying. Maybe they're been working just to earn drug money , which puts them and the "buyer" at higher risk.
I'm not saying make it isn't a moral issue, it is. But moral issues should be made by the individual, not government. We are all responsible for our own actions. We've turned into a society that wants government to baby sit us. Isn't it about time we stop crying, stop arguing over petty disagreements, and start taking responsibility for our own actions, and live our lives according to our own moral standards. Stop bickering over petty issues, and focus on the bigger ones!
- GrandVisier
October 21, 2009 11:50AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Real Question
Perhaps the real question should be, should be work to achieve the kind of society where no woman ever feels the need to become a prostitute? I'm pretty sure that few women grow up saying "I want to be a hooker." Having said that, if it exists, it should be regulated to protect the health and security of the women and their clients.
- expataddie
October 26, 2009 12:27AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
reality check
to all those invoking the name of religion in your arguement: the fact of the matter is that Europe is the place where prostitution is most legal . it's here in the good old USA that we're so uptight.
- jason October 29, 2009 7:57PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
positive aspects of legalization
Among the positive aspects of legalization would be;less anger particularly with men,no committment issues to acheive physical gratification,happier marriages when spouse does not enjoy the activity,economically advantageous,since their are no long leadups with dinners,shows etc. and finally the recognition that “love”is not a requirement to enjoy the act.A transaction the may be viewed clinicly where both parties are satified with the result!
- lending
October 31, 2009 5:59AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
who are you
why are you using my name to post?
- adecollibus February 25, 2010 1:05AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes it should be legal
I am a 20 year old girl and if I decide one day I'm going to whore it up for money I don't think anyone should make that choice for me. I mean really the guys are paying for it one way or another. When a woman is dating a guy he's paying for the dates in hopes that she's going to sleep with him. So there isn't much difference if the woman makes him pay for the sex up front...
- pinkduck9420
November 7, 2009 12:03AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why is this even a question?
While the media bemoans the divorce rate, and single mothers are considered a difficulty, who in their right minds would consider legalizing prostitution ?
Why is it that such practices are being stopped in other countries but here we consider it??? This makes no sense.
Yes, there is a moral argument, but many will shoot down moral arguments because moral arguments supposedly are supposedly 'personal' and only have to do with one persons 'beliefs'. If you hadnt noticed, the law of the land is imposed morality, that is all that it is. But doesn't the question itself 'Should Prostitution be Legal' deal directly with personal, moral issues?
Then there is the medical argument. STDs are transmitted by ... having sex . If a man has sex with a prostitute then he essentially is exposed to what all the men before him had. In this age of AIDS , bad idea.
- TB3
November 25, 2009 11:44AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Please... Stop the religious debates
This shouldn't be a religious debate.
We are talking about politics here. If due to your religion , you believe prostitution is wrong, then don't partake in it. We should be more concerned with if legalization would, increase prostitution? Would regulation of prostitution, mandating std tests cut down on STD's? Would legalization better protect the safety of women ? Would the amount of rapes go down, if men are able to release their sexual urges in a safe manner?
The question should be asked. Will it be beneficial to United States citizens to legalize? Not, does your religion allow it. Also, does an adult deserve the right to be able to make a decision to participate in things like this?
- zyro70
December 8, 2009 1:13AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
NO!!!
Very Young Girls....a documentary by David Schisgall....watch it and then tell me that we shouldn't punish the propagators of these crimes (because it is a crime ) or the people who think that prostitution is an informed choice that women make. The people who say prostitution should be legal are living in a FANTASY WORLD!!
- camantonio
December 16, 2009 2:35AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
oh brother
You've got your head up your ass if you think none of them choose to do it.
- Father Time
January 14, 2010 12:45AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Regulate it, tax it
What someone does with their body is their business and the government has no business intruding on that right.
Regulate it, tax the hell out of it, and watch the cash flow. I feel the same way about illicit drugs .
- bagpiper2005
December 23, 2009 7:08PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Question Is Simply Absurd
How any woman could support sex abuse labelled " prostitution " is beyond me. How any decent man would allow his name to be associated with any legislation or petition for such a thing is incomprehensible. Prostitution is a sin, it destroys marriages, corrupts men and leads to the widespread spread of infectious diseases. I wish the liberals would stop deluding themselves that Amsterdam or whatever is a model for the US of A. The only people who support this sort of thing are looking to make a few bucks from this outrageous enterprise or else they're sexually perverted men looking to justify their draining of the family bank accounts in pursuit of their unchecked physical urges. Think of Eliot Spitzer, the former governor of New York. and what it did to his family.
- Stephenson Billings
January 4, 2010 3:24PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are wrong on so many levels
This debate is not about sex abuse . It is about prostitution . Arbitrarily equating the two is the definition of straw man.
Just because there are people within an industry that taint the profession with criminal activity, such as the coercive pimp, or customers that violate the rights of the prostitute, does not mean we should ban the profession altogether. Instead, the government 's legitimate role is to focus on the criminals within the industry, rather than putting a blanket ban on an otherwise voluntary transaction between consenting adults.
An equivalent of your argument would be for me to say, "How any person could support fraud labeled as 'Retail' is beyond me," presuming that because some accessory entrepreneurs sell fake handbags, this problem should be equated with handbag retail in general, and we should therefore ban the sale of handbags as an industry, in its entirety. The principle behind this ridiculous reasoning is the same as the reasoning behind your argument against the profession of prostitution qua prostitution. Prostitution as a profession does not involve coercion, manipulation, or "sex abuse," in the same way that selling handbags does not intrinsically involve fraud. The only legitimate ban would be on the coercion, manipulation, and "sex abuse" itself, not on the profession as a whole, which is by definition and by principle voluntary and free of criminality.
Also, it is irrelevant what you think the consequences of patronizing a prostitute are ("it destroys marriages, corrupts men," etc..). Banning it is morally wrong, because it involves using the government's monopoly on physical force to enforce your subjective morality, be it religious or whatever. It is up to us to treat people as adults who can make their own decisions and deal with the consequences of these decisions, rather than children who must be forced to do what is, in your subjective opinion, in their interest, regardless of what we would do in their place.
As a sidenote, your assertion that prostitution leads to "widespread of infectious diseases," as a reason why it should be banned, is both factually doubtful and morally wrong. In the same way that leaving the food industry relatively free of regulation has not led to widespread food poisoning, the statistical data from countries that do leave prostitution relatively alone has shown that disease has not generally been a problem in the industry (see specific references in the expert debate). Even if it did lead to the widespread contraction of STDs in those who patronize prostitutes, which it does not, that risk is the responsibility of the one who makes the decision, and in no way allows a third party, such as yourself, to dictate what he should or should not do, by law . Hang-gliding is risky, yet it is not illegal , because those who do it are 1) generally careful, and 2) recognized as adults who are making a voluntary decision, and are morally in the right. The same applies to any decision that is peaceful and voluntary, including the decision to buy sexual services.
- etanheller
January 4, 2010 5:32PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Morals
"Banning it is morally wrong, because it involves using the government 's monopoly on physical force to enforce your subjective morality, be it religious or whatever"
If morality is relative, then everyone is both right and wrong and we can have no laws because we would not all agree on anything. If morality comes from somewhere, we will disagree on where or how it should be used.
You're saying it is immoral to ban prostitution because it is in your opinion the government enforcing one person's subjective morality -- but aren't you also pushing your personal morality by saying that tactic would be immoral? You can't have it both ways. Your morality can't trump anyone else's.
All laws are based on morality -- someone's, somewhere. You can say you don't agree with their morals, but if you believe that everyone's morality is equal, you ideally couldn't even complain because you have to allow others and be tolerant of others' morals.
It is a conundrum.
- Jerica
January 6, 2010 12:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Undecided
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Against moral relativism/subjectivism in government
Jerica-
I do not believe that "everyone's morality is equal." Moral relativism is exactly what I am against. The reason why I defined the original poster's morality as subjective is because his ethics are derived from either a religious, mystical viewpoint (God) or from an emotionalistic viewpoint (his feelings). Neither of these sources are valid precisely because they are subjective, and not objective.
Objective morality, a morality based on reality and a rational, objective standard, man's life, can be recognized without referencing an unprovable supernatural source or throwing the whole thing out and appealing to emotion or whim (relativism). If that which enhances man's life is good, and that which threatens it is evil (this is a biologically objective standard), then the initiation of violence, in any form, is evil, for it is objectively antithetical to life.
The only objective law , therefore, would be that which defends life from violence, not that which uses violence as a means to a subjective end (in this case, prohibiting prostitution through law, and thereby through the use of physical force). You are right that all laws are based on morality - in philosophy, politics is essentially a subset of ethics. The question is, should these laws be based on an objective morality, as demonstrated, or a subjective morality? Should the government be used as a tool for majority or minority pressure groups to enforce their non-objective, ethically-arbitrary assertions? Should the government be a way for these groups to validate the use of physical violence to achieve any end they deem "necessary" or "good" for society ?
This is the way our government is now - a tool for any group with enough influence or luck to strike gold and institutionalize, by force, its subjective views. However, this is injustice incarnate, the exact thing the government should be protecting against, not validating. Whether the one deciding which subjective view to enshrine in law is a majority (as in democracy ), the proletariat (as in communism), or the dictator (as in a dictatorship or monarchy), the principle is still the same: a subject, whether individual or group of individuals, dictates to society which arbitrary viewpoint is to be enforced.
The only system which would do away with the political subject entirely, and enshrine only objective law, would be a system in which the protection against such subjective, coercive tyranny is held as the only valid role of government, in which the objective principle of non-coercion is the sovereign political ethic, allowing all personal or subjective moral systems to operate peacefully and without help from the legislature.
- etanheller
January 6, 2010 1:49PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
not the oldest profession
Agriculture is the oldest profession.
Legalizing prostitution is tantamount to the Government endorsing it - and the government should not endorse it for any reason. There's no reason for anybody to endorse it that I can see.
Excuses otherwise:
"I needed the money ; I was broke." - an excuse for laziness
"I needed to get off." - an excuse for a sociopathic inability to have a mutual relationship with someone
"I pay for other services, why not this one? There's no good reason." - an excuse for seeing other people as commodities to be bought or sold
"It's gonna happen anyway." - An excuse legitimizing it in one's own mind
- Brian Valentine
January 11, 2010 12:14PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
That's stupid
That is really stupid, I mean REALLY stupid. Government legalizing something is not endorsing it. Government has legalized alcohol and yet they still tax it quite a bit. Government still keeps cigarettes legal and yet pours tax money into anti- smoking crap.
Hell if they wanted to endorse it they would give brothels tax breaks.
""I needed the money ; I was broke." - an excuse for laziness "
So working for money is now laziness if you don't approve of the job?
"I pay for other services, why not this one? There's no good reason." - an excuse for seeing other people as commodities to be bought or sold"
You are not paying for them you are paying for a specific service. If you hire a prostitute you can't demand that they do housework.
You have nothing but weak excuses.
- Father Time
January 14, 2010 12:44AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I can't disagree with everything you say
I was in the war in Iraq, I saw a lot of soldiers return home wounded and depressed, I know that a lot of wonderful women helped the soldiers to recover, and from that experience I can't come to the conclusion that " prostitution is no good"
and I sure don't have the right to be sanctimonious
- Brian Valentine
January 14, 2010 9:34AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
So..
I never understood the argument that legalizing prostitution should be a panacea for all of its problems before we legalize it.
Keeping alcohol legal doesn't solve all the problems
We haven't solved all the traffic problems.
People still accidentally kill themselves with... well all kinds of things.
Fuck what about on the job accidents with mining and construction or whatever?
- Father Time
January 14, 2010 12:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.