NationStates Jolt Archive

Why would we accept something that tells people the easiest way to get by is sex...not hard work...not making something of yourself. Legalizing prostitution is just another way to desensitize citizens of the world. MAKE THE BUCK STOP HERE. DON'T LET SEX SELL. Where are your morals? Where is your faith in your citizens to find work, to work hard. Use funding to teach them skills not sex. STOP THE PROSTITUTION. VOTE AGAINST THE RESOLUTION IF YOU CARE.

By that argument, aren't all entertainers mere leeches on society?

I say no. If consenting adults wish to purchase or provide a service, I see no legitimate reason for the government to interfere.

The advantage of legalized prostitution, in the governments eyes, is that it becomes a taxable profession. Accounting of expenses and such must be taken as with any other business and the people in the profession become a more respected member of society because of the taxes that they pay. At a tax rate of, say, 15%, a billion dollar a year industry contributes about $150 million to the government coffers instead of taking out the money in other ways such as welfare.

I voted no, but only because I think this is an issue nations should control on an individual level.

who is the government to tell us who we can and can't have sex with? Santin has a good point. If both people agree to it, knowing the risks, then they should be able to have sex. The only difference with prostitution is that one side is acting. Payment for acting doesn't sound so bad.

Why would we accept something that tells people the easiest way to get by is sex...not hard work...not making something of yourself. Legalizing prostitution is just another way to desensitize citizens of the world. MAKE THE BUCK STOP HERE. DON'T LET SEX SELL. Where are your morals? Where is your faith in your citizens to find work, to work hard. Use funding to teach them skills not sex. STOP THE PROSTITUTION. VOTE AGAINST THE RESOLUTION IF YOU CARE.

It's up to the individual to tell which "skills" they will use to obtain money. If they would like to sell their bodies for money, let them. They know teh alternatives. If they would like to pursue them, that's also their choice. As for morals, what is more moral then letting people do what they want, as long as they aren't hurting others? Many so called morals invade the lives of individuals and tell them to live the way the government wants them to, instead of how they would like to live their own lives. We're dealing with adults here, they can make their own decisions. The government should get out of personal lives in general.

The Island States will vote against this resolution for the following reasons:

1. Our country has 100% income tax rates (or more than 100% if you are rich). Any prostitute in our country would have no reason to continue business when all of their money is the government's anyway (and any attempt to hold onto said money will be grounds for tax evasion and a prison sentence).

2. The resolution is full of holes and needs correction. Our interpretation of this resolution does not prohibit our government from making laws against an individual purchasing the services of prostitutes. We will be writing stricter laws into effect if this resolution comes into play.

Thank you.

Wow, what a horribly presented arguement. Prostitution, as the cliche goes is the oldest profession and simply because YOU think making it (or keeping it) illegal is going to make it simply vanish in a big puff of smoke? Because YOU think it's evil and horrible and whatever, then suddenly in a massive world-wide movement EVERYONE will suddenly agree?

And how would this desensitize people? How could you even think such a nonsensical thing? What do you even MEAN by this? They will get used to the idea of sex? Well gee I think if your society is going to last past one generation they are going to have to figure that one out anyway. Legalizing it doesn't mean it's going to be EVERYWHERE either, if anything it'll be strictly limited to certain areas and districts and thus LESS in the face of your average person who lives in a slum.

Morality? HAH. This concept was thrown out about 50 years ago when most educated people realized morality is nothing more then a social construct and therefore does not really exist in the grand scheme of things.

Where is YOUR faith in your citizens to realize if they are all selling their bodies YOU'LL GET NOWHERE and you'll all eventually starve and so on. And maybe you might not notice this, but sex happens to be alot of hard work especially if you are doing it for a living, probably more then most occupations would ask from you.

Ugh, what's next the "think of the children" arguement? I don't mind people being against the proposal, just PLEASE offer a reasonable arguement and not some fire and brimstone nonense.

I voted yes because I believe that a person can and should do anything necessary to feed themselves and their children. Further more the last time I checked sex for money (which is never pleasant) is hard work. Do you have any idea what it is like to go through your day screwing people for money? Do you think people enjoy that? no. But some people have children and some live for them, and if they wish to sell themselves its their decision.

Let people run their own lives, the government should just stay out of their lives.

Personally, I think prostitution should stay illegal because I believe it is immoral. If other nations want to implement it, that's fine, make it a government issue and be done with it. It is not right to implement it throughtout UN member nations though, as it is very controversial and does not involve the safety and well-being of citizens. In fact, to allow such a thing is against most peoples' religions, and its wrong to force them to do something that goes against their religion. True, you're not forcing anyone to engage in prostitution, but you are forcing leaders to allow it, which is against their religion. This is not an issue allowing someone the right to live, the right not to be discriminated against, etc. This is immoral by most peoples' standards, and should either be outlawed entirely throughout the UN or its status left up to the Individual Sovereign States or possibly Regions.

I voted yes because I believe that a person can and should do anything necessary to feed themselves and their children. Further more the last time I checked sex for money (which is never pleasant) is hard work. Do you have any idea what it is like to go through your day screwing people for money? Do you think people enjoy that? no. But some people have children and some live for them, and if they wish to sell themselves its their decision.

Let people run their own lives, the government should just stay out of their lives.

And of course, some of the people who sell themselves for a living are children...

I believe that any nation who votes for legalization of prostitution should be destroyed. Our good nations should not be brought down by such a degrading act.

And for all the people who think the government should stay out of other peoples' lives, in democracies, the people vote. And if the majority of the people want it outlawed, it should be outlawed. This is a principle of democracy; government by the people, for the people. Even if a dictator is in control, the people have given implied consent of his control, and if they don't like the decisions, eventually, they rebel. As I said, by FORCING people to accept Prostitution, you go against their religious beliefs and freedoms, which is a PRIMAL right in life. The right to be left alone, as long as you don't hurt anyone, is secondary, especially when in prostitution, you CAN hurt others, and DO hurt others when STDs are spread. When you violate such basic rights as freedom of religion, there is a problem.

A) Religion isn't a right whatsoever. REGARDLESS of if you believe religion is man-made or not, the "right" to religion is secondary as it spawns from an organization such as government to grant it, as religion itself wouldn't exist without an organization to establish it and THEREFORE it cannot be a primal right as you require some sort of civil society for it to exist in the FIRST place.
B) If the majority vote to genocide a minority group, that's ok to you because they voted for it?

I for one voted against this because i don't think prostitution is correct; but the bigger issue is: how did this issue make it to the UN floor. This is not an internation crisis that requires the immediate attention of the world. If this resolution passes, the UN would have faild to do its job as an international governing body because as we sit and deliberate this issue, one of importance is being ignored.

Obviously the right to religion is primary. Religion has existed even in anarchic times where there was no government at all, and there are always exceptions to where you say there is always state support, or that state support is required for it to exist in some way or another. Religion is a main right, as it is important to most people on earth. Whether you believe in it or not, most people do, and for most people forsaking your God ends you up in hell....you don't force people to do that. Prostitution is not a right, as prostitution is not necessary, it spreads disease, and it is considered immoral by most. Prostitution is NOT the only way in most places for people to support themselves, it just gives them more money than they need and to have a more lavish lifestyle than they apparently deserve if they can't get off their asses and find something better. And don't give me that B/S saying they can't, because the majority of the time turning to prostitution is a result of them screwing up earlier in life, or just being too lazy to pull themselves up. In any case, it's the right of the people to decide, especially on debatable issues. And personally, of course its not ok for people to genocide a minority group....most people are good though, and wouldn't do that. In fact, even in Nazi Germany, even though people did not speak out against it for fear of death, they did not vote for Jewish genocide, and most did not know that was occurring until it was well underway. But in the end, the vote goes to the people, and you are not one to tell them what's wrong or right. Democracy has the ultimate control, not some gay UN resolution that tells all the good things about prostitution, leaving out all the bad things which well outnumber it.

The Holy Republic of Franciscia believes that premarital sex, and especially prostitution and pornography, weaken the holy sacrements of Marriage and Holy Orders. Premarital sex simply weakens the bond of the married, leading to divorce, annulments, adultrous thoughts, polygamy, AIDS, and a whole wreched basket of terrible problems. The Department of State of Franciscia is urging its UN regional representative to vote No, and is applying to the United Nation now. If the law is passed, we have no reason to worry, because the Holy Republic will illegalize pre-marital sex through traditional democratic process.

May the Sword of Peace burn brightly in the skies of the East Pacific!

The United States of Catatonius has decided to vote against this resolution, on the grounds that we feel it is not specific enough. Before we vote in favor of such a resolution, we would require that there be an amendment requiring the age of the prostitute to at least be 18 years. Prostitution of children is not something that the nation of Catatonius wishes to endorse.

-- United States of Catatonius ambassador to the U.N.

I for one voted against this because i don't think prostitution is correct; but the bigger issue is: how did this issue make it to the UN floor. This is not an internation crisis that requires the immediate attention of the world. If this resolution passes, the UN would have faild to do its job as an international governing body because as we sit and deliberate this issue, one of importance is being ignored.

i actually have an answer. you might have noticed that we have extremely limited control over our own legislature-- we get a couple of issues a day and that's it. if a nutcase dictator wants to abolish vanilla tea in his country, he can't stroll over to his puppet senate and say "my will be done." the puppet senate doesn't exactly exist. the only real way we can indulge our whims-- in some sort of observable fashion-- is to take them to the UN. of course, we can always throw the topic on the forums and hear somebody scream out one of the five or six standard responses the issue can get, but it's somehow more satisfying to put it to everyone else in the UN in the hopes that it might actually pass and start applying somewhere. i mean... the *private*, intra-state aspect of this game is pretty minimal-- it's all about the interactions. and if you want a private life but can't have one, you just let it all hang out...

I for one voted against this because i don't think prostitution is correct; but the bigger issue is: how did this issue make it to the UN floor. This is not an internation crisis that requires the immediate attention of the world. If this resolution passes, the UN would have faild to do its job as an international governing body because as we sit and deliberate this issue, one of importance is being ignored.

i actually have an answer. you might have noticed that we have extremely limited control over our own legislature-- we get a couple of issues a day and that's it. if a nutcase dictator wants to abolish vanilla tea in his country, he can't stroll over to his puppet senate and say "my will be done." the puppet senate doesn't exactly exist. the only real way we can indulge our whims-- in some sort of observable fashion-- is to take them to the UN. of course, we can always throw the topic on the forums and hear somebody scream out one of the five or six standard responses the issue can get, but it's somehow more satisfying to put it to everyone else in the UN in the hopes that it might actually pass and start applying somewhere. i mean... the *private*, intra-state aspect of this game is pretty minimal-- it's all about the interactions. and if you want a private life but can't have one, you just let it all hang out...

. As I said, by FORCING people to accept Prostitution, you go against their religious beliefs and freedoms, which is a PRIMAL right in life.

No one is _forcing_ anyone to use the services of a prostitue. We merely want to redirect tax dollars towards keeping the real criminals off the street.


The right to be left alone, as long as you don't hurt anyone, is secondary, especially when in prostitution, you CAN hurt others, and DO hurt others when STDs are spread. When you violate such basic rights as freedom of religion, there is a problem.

Which is the real reason I voted to legalize prostitution. In places where it is legal, you can also make _condoms_ legal. And make the prostitutes get tested for STD's, and get them support against violent johns. It's been proven that it works. There are places where it is legal now.