NationStates Jolt Archive

Not talking about illegal prostitution and the connection with the drug scene, organised crime and human right issues here.

I'm talking about prostitution the way Germany and the Netherlands (just examples I happen to know of) handle it. Here, prostitution is a profession same as any other, enjoying legal protection, state pension and health care. Health checkup and other issues have legal standarts, prostitutes can join trade unions or found their own if they want to, tax benefits are available.

Why would anybody oppose a system like that?

I wouldn't.

I wouldn't even use the system, but I wouldn't be opposed to it.

Its the idea that women are degraded to sell their bodies for sex, yet... if it was legalised, they wouldnd'nt be forced to do so.

:-/

Probably because some people(most of them religious, most of THEM Christan) think it's morally wrong and a sin against God.

Myself? I don't care. It's not my business to interfere with another person's life if it doesn't affect mine.

As long as you keep minors away from the *ahem* advertising, I don’t see a problem with it.

I can understand why people would oppose it. Women making money with their bodies or being opposed to birth control are valid moral grounds. I'd prefer if they didn't oppose violently or abusively, though...

Probably because some people(most of them religious, most of THEM Christan) think it's morally wrong and a sin against God.

Myself? I don't care. It's not my business to interfere with another person's life if it doesn't affect mine.

I'm catholic and it wouldn't bother me. Its against my beliefs so i wouldn't indulge in it, but everyone should make their own decisions

I'm catholic and it wouldn't bother me. Its against my beliefs so i wouldn't indulge in it, but everyone should make their own decisions
I said "most". Not "all". ;)

Not talking about illegal prostitution and the connection with the drug scene, organised crime and human right issues here.

I'm talking about prostitution the way Germany and the Netherlands (just examples I happen to know of) handle it. Here, prostitution is a profession same as any other, enjoying legal protection, state pension and health care. Health checkup and other issues have legal standarts, prostitutes can join trade unions or found their own if they want to, tax benefits are available.

Why would anybody oppose a system like that?

Last I heard things weren't all beer and skittles in Germany's red light district. Seems that the Legalized prostitution is either under fire or under considerable review. Seems the devil's in the details even with prostitution; you say they enjoy legal protection, but from what I hear many of those rules haven't reached the ears of those in the business. The results are questionable business practices, misinformed prostitutes unsure or mislead as to their legal rights, etc.

So yeah, in the vague principle that prostitution could be legal if it were well regulated and checked extremely rigorously for health and safety concerns...I would support it. But the practice has yet to live up to its hype according to the BBC and the German government.

So as it stands; no. The industry is entirely too prone to abuses of the worst possible kind, and until safegaurds PROVE effective in those nations that have prostitution like Germany and the Netherlands, I won't give it a thought to supporting it where I live.

Because if I did, I would be condoning such abuses myself in the name of a little state commerce and a chance for some men to get their dicks wet. No dice. Not on religious grounds, but on practical, "this whole damn business don't work right" grounds.

It's a tough call, with pros and cons, but I'm generally against.

Anyway, all pro/con arguments can be refuted. But here are some.

Pro: Sexually-frustrated men could "let the pressure out", and become less agressive.
Pro: Less criminality, less exploitation, more security for these women.
Pro: A better control of sexually transmitted diseases (with mandatory controls)
Pro: Old prostitutes won't be forced to end up performing the most disgusting acts. They won't end up alone, broken, drug-addict and poor, in the streets.
Pro: We can't ignore the fact that prostitution has always existed.

Con: Even if it's legal, there'll be a nasty black market.
Con: Men should obtain sex because they try to be nice, not because they have 50$ in their wallet.
Con: Official prices on sex could end up with guys dealing with girls on dates, "leasing" wife to pay debts, and other unwanted behaviors
Con: Most women will pay their studies with sex, which could become the "official female summer/night job", while men would work in other sectors
Con: Easier to cheat wife
Con: Could become a lifestyle for a lot of men

I said "most". Not "all". ;)

I know just venting my general annoyance with the Christian church

It's a tough call, with pros and cons, but I'm generally against.

Anyway, all pro/con arguments can be refuted. But here are some.

Pro: Sexually-frustrated men could "let the pressure out", and become less agressive.
Pro: Less criminality, less exploitation, more security for these women.
Pro: A better control of sexually transmitted diseases (with mandatory controls)
Pro: Old prostitutes won't be forced to end up performing the most disgusting acts. They won't end up alone, broken, drug-addict and poor, in the streets.
Pro: We can't ignore the fact that prostitution has always existed.

Con: Even if it's legal, there'll be a nasty black market.
Con: Men should obtain sex because they try to be nice, not because they have 50$ in their wallet.
Con: Official prices on sex could end up with guys dealing with girls on dates, "leasing" wife to pay debts, and other unwanted behaviors
Con: Most women will pay their studies with sex, which could become the "official female summer/night job", while men would work in other sectors
Con: Easier to cheat wife
Con: Could become a lifestyle for a lot of men

You're male, aren't you?
Well, I studied, and while prostitution wasn't yet protected under the law in Germany back then, it wasn't illegal, either. Neither me nor any of my femal friends ever even considered taking up prostitution to pay for the rent.

Nobody is going to "lease" anybody any more, that's what these laws are about. It is already happening, all over the world. Creating a legislation will stop this practice, or at least set limits to it.

Yes, there will be illegal prostitution, especially drug related. But legislation is taking a large number of risks of women and men who work as prostitutes for a living, not for the next shot.

As for lifestyle, it already is for a number of people. They pay for sex because, frankly, it's their money, they can do with it whatever they want.

Men shouldn't pay for sex, they should get it because they are nice? So, women shouldn't get paid for sex, they should give it for free? Not ever gonna happen.... you don't see young beautiful women hanging around old men if they are poor, right?

What if married men go find prostitutes?

What if married men go find prostitutes?

Well, they do, don't they?

Don't want their men to have a legal lay of ass at their disposal.

And yes I am aware that women would be able to get laid on the dime also.. but it wouldn't be used as much as men.

There would be modern time brothels. Alcohol! Jam the jukebox, play pool, real poker with real cards (or party poker online etc.) or World of Warcraft, Halo 2 or Knights of Honor (or some other RTS game) then go upstairs and get laid.

Why shouldn't they.

I forgot darts.

Con: Most women will pay their studies with sex, which could become the "official female summer/night job", while men would work in other sectors

WHA??? However does one arrive at this conclusion?

What if married men go find prostitutes?
Their problem. Not mine. THEY face the consequences because THEY chose to do something, something that is recognized in both the government and church, wrong. It's not the prostitute's fault. She's just trying to make a living.

Well, they do, don't they?

Yes. They shouldn't be able to. And now you're allowing them to do it legally??

Yes. They shouldn't be able to. And now you're allowing them to do it legally??

Excuse me, but WHY shouldn't they be able to?

edit: As far as I know, cheating has never been prosecuted by the law. Legalising prostitution doesn't change that...

Excuse me, but WHY shouldn't they be able to?

Monogamy and all that good stuff.

Monogamy and all that good stuff.

If I remember correctly, that's a personal choice. It's not punishable under the law to cheat on your spouse. Or have I missed some legislation in the States?

edit: As far as I know, cheating has never been prosecuted by the law. Legalising prostitution doesn't change that...

...What? "Cheating" better known as "Adultery" in many cultures is subject to banishment, death, castration, or a host of other punishments.

Many law codes had such punishments in them for just such an occasion. Are you referring to a specific modern nation or something?

[edit] Ah. I see now. You meant the US. Well...I think many of the early colonists would burn you as a witch or something if you cheated...but I don't remember anything about it being illegal under federal law or anything. ;)

Excuse me, but WHY shouldn't they be able to?

edit: As far as I know, cheating has never been prosecuted by the law. Legalising prostitution doesn't change that...

It should be. The marriage contract is a legal document. Cheating is betraying trust and should be persecuted.

Obviously it's not only the law. What about other social effects?

I'm opposed to prostitution, but not the legality of it. While, unfortunately, legalizing it would increase the incidence of both prostitutes and people who use them, it would also decrease some things. For instance, if a prostitute is raped (yes, it can happen, and does quite frequently) in some states she has to admit to soliciting before she can file a charge. Serial killers would also be less able to get away with killing prostitutes, as they wouldn't be seen as the "untouchables" that they are now. (Or at least that mindset would decrease somewhat.)

Ok.. so you would rather your supposibly monogamous boyfriend/girlfriend be that way because there are no other options? I'm sorry but if sex is at their disposal and they take it.. then they weren't so monogamous after all.

I'm aware that giving people the option to sex.. emotionally string free is tempting.. but c'mon.. if you feel your partner loves you.. and if they do.. they won't feel any need to call upon a prostitute. If they do.. then you were wrong in your conclusion or they weren't worth your time of investment anyway. For the married women... There are many women out there right now willin to lay your hubby.. it is up to him to dismiss it... or for you to intervene and stop it. But if you have to go to that extent .. chances are they will do it eventually or have done it already. Same goes with men having to put a hault on their women.

It should be. The marriage contract is a legal document. Cheating is betraying trust and should be persecuted.

Obviously it's not only the law. What about other social effects?

Why do you assume that a married man buying a prostitute is cheating on his wife? She might know about it and consent. Or, as it has been the case with me and my boyfriend, she might actually accompany him?
What goes on in a marriage or a relationship is between husband and wife alone. If the wife feels hurt by his cheating on her, it's up to her to end the marriage. If she doesn't, that's her desicion as well. Unless either of them gets hurt, NO laws should regulate married life. You would be making a farce out of the whole idea.

What other social consequences?

...What? "Cheating" better known as "Adultery" in many cultures is subject to banishment, death, castration, or a host of other punishments.

Many law codes had such punishments in them for just such an occasion. Are you referring to a specific modern nation or something?

[edit] Ah. I see now. You meant the US. Well...I think many of the early colonists would burn you as a witch or something if you cheated...but I don't remember anything about it being illegal under federal law or anything. ;)
But many of those 'old' codes and cultures did not see a man sleeping with a prostitute as adultery. In fact the old tesement mentions Temple protitutes.

Adultery as far as many cultures were concenred was sleeping with another man's wife. Or a wife sleeping with any other man.

*sigh* Never mind. I've already debated this topic way too many times - more than I'm supposed to...

Because if I did, I would be condoning such abuses myself in the name of a little state commerce and a chance for some men to get their dicks wet. No dice. Not on religious grounds, but on practical, "this whole damn business don't work right" grounds.

Works quite well in Nevada, and takes care of all your concerns.

If I remember correctly, that's a personal choice. It's not punishable under the law to cheat on your spouse. Or have I missed some legislation in the States?


I certainly hope you've missed something. With all the law suits against cheating husbands.. I'd think you missed something.

And Jesus said to Mary Magdalene: "Go and sin no more".

But many of those 'old' codes and cultures did not see a man sleeping with a prostitute as adultery. In fact the old tesement mentions Temple protitutes.

Adultery as far as many cultures were concenred was sleeping with another man's wife. Or a wife sleeping with any other man.

True MANY of those cultures were also prone to allow multiple wives, consorts, concubines, "bedding partners", french maids and other euphamisms for 'fuck-buddy on the side' status.

So yeah, its not like the people of the past were all prudes. After all, we're all alive today thanks to their generations of shameless fucking. My point was that legal codes DID punish "cheating" however formal and specific the definition may be.

Why would anyone oppose legal use of drugs?
Why would anyone oppose public intoxication (or open use of alcohol)?

Basicailly, society always tries to self-regulate itself in the direction of a "more moral" social situation. Starting from the premiss that sex is an act of love between two people and that woman are equal to men inside of society, it is hard to support legal commerical exploitation of women's bodies...

The counter arguments that the legalization of prostitution creates a situation where said exploitation occurs in a "better enviroment" is a worthy argument. However, we are talking about the goverment condoning, in our name, activity that most of us regard as immoral. How can we have a moral society if our government supports illegal activity...?

There are many other questions that need to be asked...

Why are there so many men who can't find stable, healthy relationships to satisfy their sexual needs?

Why is the promescuity of men, and the idea of a man's "sexual needs", blindy supported? How much of this is biological, how much of it is social, how much of it is cultural...?

In the end my key objection is as follows:

Prostitution represents a glaring example of the economic (women earn 30% less for the same work in the US, in Europe it is often higher) domination of women by men. More money means more buying power, which equals more economic influence. Furthermore, it denigrates human beings and equates them with products... a man NEEDS sex, so he BUYS it from a WOMAN. Thus prostitutes often become means to an end, rather than ends in themselves.

And in the end, where in this oversexualized, over commercialized, desentitized world is the love, trust, and passion that is NATURAL to a sexual relationship?

Prostitution is a complicated subject that often reveals much about the socialization of gender and the concepts of sexuality within a society...

It's been legal here for a year or so, and I haven't had any problems.

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.

And Jesus said to Mary Magdalene: "Go and sin no more".

I'm sorry but whats that got to do with the law?

Prostitution is a complicated subject that often reveals much about the socialization of gender and the concepts of sexuality within a society... -SNIP-

Excellently done. Very well said indeed. I must admit that I have serious reservations about legalized prostitution, both its efficacy and its implementation.

I understand full well that it WILL happen, and that it happens more often than many of us would like to admit already, but I still can't find myself supporting it. There is simply so much room for things to go wrong. And every time it goes wrong we're talking about people's lives getting destroyed.

I'm really not sure its worth legalizing. The potential costs and benifits just don't add up for me.

First of all.. all the prostitutes should be disease free. Also imo all the men should be given tests also. but it is really hard to track and keep up with ones sexual nature and cleanliness. Other than condoms I don't know what to say about the prevention of spreading std's. Only other option is to abstain. Unless they are contracted to only have sex with the girls/guys in that paticular place. And there is some legal way of knowing who has sex with whom.. or not. Without violating someones civil rights.

That was directed at NianNorth. I don't use quote boxes, I prefer to follow th conversation.

We can't all be down on Prostitution in general I think. I think we are too ready to dismiss all they have already done for us.

In all these thousands of years of men and women creating men and women, who's family tree DOESN'T have "Product of a drunken sailor and a cutprice whore" somewhere on it?

I mean seriously, the odds are with you on that one ;)

Dream on about the disease free comment, as well as most of your statement as a whole.

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.

We do have legalised abortion and drugs :confused: . AIDS can't be caused by drugs but by dirty needles, its not like your going to get AIDS having a nice coffee in the morning. Prostitution doesn't possibly lead to AIDS, unprotected sex could possibly lead to AIDS.
On a side note as your all for the health of people, what do you think is going to be safer, a regulated prostitution service controlled by the Government that requires regular checkups or an Illegal prostitution system that doesn't enforce certain rules and where people could possibly be exploited.

The rest of your post is plain exageration but hey

We can't all be down on Prostitution in general I think. I think we are too ready to dismiss all they have already done for us.

In all these thousands of years of men and women creating men and women, who's family tree DOESN'T have "Product of a drunken sailor and a cutprice whore" somewhere on it?

I mean seriously, the odds are with you on that one ;)
MEE! I'M THE DESCENDANT OF A CHINESE IMPERIAL DYNASTY. WHAT DID YOU EXPECT? LOL.

True statement Niccolo, but is not man and society expected to learn from history and mistakes from the past?

How about no sex except with your spouse, Gateway?

MEE! I'M THE DESCENDANT OF A CHINESE IMPERIAL DYNASTY. WHAT DID YOU EXPECT? LOL.

Yeah, but if its the Qin Dynasty you have that whole Lu Buwei is the Emperor's daddy thing going on...

And not all of the many, many, many, many Imperial sons were of...*ahem* purely imperial lineage either...some of THEM had sons and daughters of 'dem hookers, or had consorts from families who did. ;)

So perhaps you're a great-great-great...great, great, great-grandson of a whore and a tipsy sailor ;)

By the way, yes I always tend to give exagerated examples. Just to prove that anything is possible in any society at any given time.

How about no sex except with your spouse, Gateway?

Thats a personal decision for each of us but not something in my opinion that the law should decide. Same with prostitution

Edit: I'm not used to the way you post so I took that exageration at face value and probably hit it a little hard

Dream on about the disease free comment, as well as most of your statement as a whole.


Was that directed at me?

If so.. I understand.. it would be hard as hell to know who's doing who or what and when. But.. it would be a hell of alot safer than it is now.. wouldn't it? In a way yes..

But oh! more will go for paid sex than now because IT IS legal. So .. even more could be at risk than they were before since these prostitutes are having more partners (it's legal) and their partners are possibly spreading it to more partners etc etc. There is no way of controlling disease unless you have them under strict rule(control who and when whomever does what to whom and when)... and that isn't gonna fly in the US or many countries for that matter.. it would defy their civil rights.

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.

First of, prostitution isn't murder, as nobody is getting harmed.
By putting legislation in place to regulate prostitution you can make sure that the use of condoms is enforced, thus reducing the number of AIDS cases. In that respect, legalising prostitution will save lifes.

Drugs don't lead to AIDS. Smoking pot doesn't lead to AIDS nor does it kill people. I'm all for legalising soft drugs, but hard drugs ought to remain banned.

True statement Niccolo, but is not man and society expected to learn from history and mistakes from the past?

Ah, but some mistakes are like chocolate chip cookies. Joyous mistakes, worthy of admiration and repitition! Some of our societies best people, most influential men and women, were bastards, even the product of illicit unions. What lessons do we take from that? Do we stigmatize the act...even when it benifits us as a society?

I'm simply arguing that we stigmatize a little too much, I'm not in favor of legalized prostitution, but lets not take ourselves too seriously here. We probably all have such unions in our family trees, and we all turned out pretty good I'd say.

We have to learn to balance societies wants and desires with realistic asessments of what is better for us; to keep it illegal or move to legalize it? I personally think its better to keep things as is, but I'm open to that changing in the future. That's all.

It's also a matter of opinion. And I am a firm believer that you can't have anything more ways than 1. 1 universal law and rule that all must follow. Now that would avoid a lot of conflicts. The never ending story of personal choises. I doubt there will ever be a clear cut solution. Bye bye!

Anyone else noticed that I've been completely ignored here? Are all of you men?

Was that directed at me?

If so.. I understand.. it would be hard as hell to know who's doing who or what and when. But.. it would be a hell of alot safer than it is now.. wouldn't it? In a way yes..

But oh! more will go for paid sex than now because IT IS legal. So .. even more could be at risk than they were before since these prostitutes are having more partners (it's legal) and their partners are possibly spreading it to more partners etc etc. There is no way of controlling disease unless you have them under strict rule(control who and when whomever does what to whom and when)... and that isn't gonna fly in the US or many countries for that matter.. it would defy their civil rights.

Isn't prostitution legal in parts of the US anyway?

Not that I am ware of. If you're talking about Vegas(sin city).. it isn't true.

Not that I am ware of. If you're talking about Vegas(sin city).. it isn't true.

Not within Vegas, but within Nevada. Unless I've been horribly mislead by 60 minutes and about a dozen other programs that covered the last bastion of whorehouses in the US.

And yeah, we were all ignoring you pointedly (seriously, I had lost you in the shuffle of comments from "Mr. I don't like quote boxes".

And yeah, I'm a guy. What of it?

Not that I am ware of. If you're talking about Vegas(sin city).. it isn't true.

I think there's a difference here between legalised prostitution, that's to say prostitution with the states consent and legal protection for prostitute and customer, and non-illegal prostitution, that's to say prostitution that isn't unlawful and not prosecuted in any way, but that has no legal protection either.

I think there are states in the US following that second line...

Not that I am ware of. If you're talking about Vegas(sin city).. it isn't true.

http://www.bayswan.org/NTFP.html

Well sex workers have their own union so it must be legal in some form?

Edit: Is this link allowed, just thinking about the "PG13" envionment

Not within Vegas, but within Nevada. Unless I've been horribly mislead by 60 minutes and about a dozen other programs that covered the last bastion of whorehouses in the US.

And yeah, we were all ignoring you pointedly (seriously, I had lost you in the shuffle of comments from "Mr. I don't like quote boxes".

And yeah, I'm a guy. What of it?


I'm unaware of legal whorehouses/brothels here in the US.

Thought I had been ignored because of my posts.

http://www.bayswan.org/NTFP.html

Well sex workers have their own union so it must be legal in some form?

Edit: Is this link allowed, just thinking about the "PG13" envionment


NORTH AMERICAN TASK FORCE ON PROSTITUTION is sorta like the ACLU..but for prostitution. ?

I think there's a difference here between legalised prostitution, that's to say prostitution with the states consent and legal protection for prostitute and customer, and non-illegal prostitution, that's to say prostitution that isn't unlawful and not prosecuted in any way, but that has no legal protection either.

I think there are states in the US following that second line...

I was unaware of that. I wasn't against it in the first place. But I can see how some are.

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.
Don't see the relation between Prititution and murder. Drugs yes, should be legal, still won't use them but why should that stop others.
Casual sex leads to aids but that is legal, let's make everything that could harm you illegal and the world population could explode and the mental agility would go etc etc.
Would not at present consider suing a prostitute but would not like to take that choice away from anyone else. Wouldn't want a vegan to pass laws on what should be eaten!

Sorry I questioned why I thought I wasn't being acknowledged. I'm buzzed. Apologize for busting your thread. I'm outta here.

I'm unaware of legal whorehouses/brothels here in the US.

Thought I had been ignored because of my posts.

Nah, not more than any of us get ignored because a thread moved too quickly. Happens all the time to me...even when the thread moves slowly, come to think of it...

But yeah, I remember several news magazines and the like taking visits to "legal brothels" and them specifically stating they were legal in parts of Nevada. I have no specific knowledge of them other than that, but it is my belief that there are legal brothels within certain counties in Nevada.

The prostitutes will oppose legal prostitution! Can you imagine the amount of income tax they would have to pay?

The prostitutes will oppose legal prostitution! Can you imagine the amount of income tax they would have to pay?

With the benefits of legalising it? I think it would be a fair trade

Nah, not more than any of us get ignored because a thread moved too quickly. Happens all the time to me...even when the thread moves slowly, come to think of it...

But yeah, I remember several news magazines and the like taking visits to "legal brothels" and them specifically stating they were legal in parts of Nevada. I have no specific knowledge of them other than that, but it is my belief that there are legal brothels within certain counties in Nevada.
*sighs* I feel ignored. YES prostitution is legal within most of the counties of Nevada. It is illegal within the Las Vegas city limits, the city limits of Reno/Sparks and Carson City. It is VERY regulated, checked within an inch of its life, and honestly, we don't have any problems with them what so ever. Actually, unless I point it out to you, you'd be unaware you just went past a cat house.

*sighs* I feel ignored. YES prostitution is legal within most of the counties of Nevada. It is illegal within the Las Vegas city limits, the city limits of Reno/Sparks and Carson City. It is VERY regulated, checked within an inch of its life, and honestly, we don't have any problems with them what so ever. Actually, unless I point it out to you, you'd be unaware you just went past a cat house.

hasn't it got something to do with the population of the area, as to whether its legal in that part? Or have I just made that up

hasn't it got something to do with the population of the area, as to whether its legal in that part? Or have I just made that up
Actually, it's more to do with economics. Nevada is a lopsided state, all the major cities and jobs are around the edges and either in the Reno/Sparks area or the Las Vegas Metro area.

In order to provide a new source of money, the legistlature allowed the rual counties to open brothels, delberately stating that Clark County (Vegas) and Reno could not open one with in the city limits. Carson City voted to not open one. The rest of Nevada's 17 counties did. From what I remember, about 14 currently have running brothels.

Some pro's & con's as I see it...

Pro: Less exploitation of women
Pro: Less slave trade
Pro: Less organised crime
Pro: Less violence & abuse of women
Pro: Decriminalization of a profession noone have ever been abole to put a stop to
Pro: Less STD problems
Pro: More tax money
Pro: Decriminalization of the clients
Pro: Less stigmatization of whores

Con: It's still exploiting women, albeit a lot less
Con: A potential rise in prostitution
Con: Less stupid wankers die, which might not be all that great for our future generations
Con: Moralists everywhere will go even more bonkers
Con: Thinking about it drives me nuts

I'm for it. I hate being for it, but I'm for it regardless. The problem is there's no way to put a stop to exploitation of women.
Right now prostitution is heavily organised crime. International drug, prostitution and pornography rings pretty much runs the show across the globe. It's unfortunately not possible to put a stop to it.
Legalizing prostitution does a lot of neat things. It let's prostitutes have legal rights, it makes them pay taxes, it ensures they have safe sex, it tests them for diseases, it helps a few of them into drug programs, it removes the profession from the clutches of organised crime etc...

My main problem is: It doesn't stop the 95% of the women who ruin their lives and become emotionally crippled. It potentially makes what illegal prostitution that's left, much much more abusive.

About cheating husbands and the like: Who's stopping them from cheating right now? And what purpose will it serve to make cheating illegal?
Perhaps there would be a point if you needed a definition of what a crime of passion is, but you - regardless of where you are - already have such a definition.

If you want to stop your spouse from cheating, improve your sexlife. Get an imagination. Be nicer. Or dump the fucker.
If you want to see your loved one behind bars, you're the one with a problem

Well, I would oppose legal prostitution because it is against Gods will.

Prostitution represents a glaring example of the economic (women earn 30% less for the same work in the US, in Europe it is often higher) domination of women by men. More money means more buying power, which equals more economic influence. Furthermore, it denigrates human beings and equates them with products... a man NEEDS sex, so he BUYS it from a WOMAN. Thus prostitutes often become means to an end, rather than ends in themselves.

Funnily enough, dominatrixes who not even sleep with men earn about 200% more than the average prostitute!

Well, I would oppose legal prostitution because it is against Gods will.

But should we force gods will on others?

But should we force gods will on others?

Yes.

By putting legislation in place to regulate prostitution you can make sure that the use of condoms is enforced, thus reducing the number of AIDS cases. In that respect, legalising prostitution will save lifes.
Apparently there is a rise in men who want to do it without a safety net. As prostitution is legal here, the health authority checks that at least in licensed brothels condoms are used.

The drug addict on the corner is hard to check, of course, but that is not the problem of legalized prostitution. You will always have illegal prostitution - I don't think there's a single country on this earth without a few prostitutes at least.
By legalizing prostitution an environment is created, where those who want to (and many do) can leave illegality behind, thus taking prostitution awy from organized crime.

Yes.

why should we force the will of a being on people who don't acknowledge their existence?
Furthermore if God waned his will enforced and obeyed at all times why bother with free will?

I hate being for it, but I'm for it regardless. The problem is there's no way to put a stop to exploitation of women.
Right now prostitution is heavily organised crime. International drug, prostitution and pornography rings pretty much runs the show across the globe. It's unfortunately not possible to put a stop to it.
Legalizing prostitution does a lot of neat things. It let's prostitutes have legal rights, it makes them pay taxes, it ensures they have safe sex, it tests them for diseases, it helps a few of them into drug programs, it removes the profession from the clutches of organised crime etc...

Well said!

But should we force gods will on others?

Yes. I don't want people to go to Hell. Therefore, to stop them from going to Hell, Gods will must be placed upon them so they can protect themselves from Satan.

WHA??? However does one arrive at this conclusion? Someone did it in Britain recently, that's all I can say. I'm not sure whether it was illegal or not.

why should we force the will of a being on people who don't acknowledge their existence?
Furthermore if God waned his will enforced and obeyed at all times why bother with free will?

Because we can. We can make prostitution illegal, we can make drug use illegal, we can restrict gambling, we can do lots of things like that because we vote and have the right to choose to NOT live in a society with no rules...

Yes. I don't want people to go to Hell. Therefore, to stop them from going to Hell, Gods will must be placed upon them so they can protect themselves from Satan.

by resticting free will? People have to want to be christian. Forcing christianity on prople will just make people resent christianity. For some reason I don't think God wants to be resented.

by resticting free will? People have to want to be christian. Forcing christianity on prople will just make people resent christianity. For some reason I don't think God wants to be resented.

I'm not forcing Christianity on people.

And anyway, I don't think we will agree because I believe that I have a duty to help people stay away from temptation and you believe in individualism and individual liberty. We are never going to agree.

Because we can. We can make prostitution illegal, we can make drug use illegal, we can restrict gambling, we can do lots of things like that because we vote and have the right to choose to NOT live in a society with no rules...

Sorry whats this got to do with forcing God's will?
I'm not talking about a "society with no rules". I'm saying why should the rules be based on God's will?

I'm not forcing Christianity on people.

And anyway, I don't think we will agree because I believe that I have a duty to help people stay away from temptation and you believe in individualism and individual liberty. We are never going to agree.

I think the difference in our opinions is based on one thing. If people want "help to stay away from temptation" they can ask for it, thats all

I think the difference in our opinions is based on one thing. If people want "help to stay away from temptation" they can ask for it, thats all
But what if they don't realise that they are falling into temptation?!

Sorry whats this got to do with forcing God's will?
I'm not talking about a "society with no rules". I'm saying why should the rules be based on God's will?


In a secular society, that would also raise the question "based on the will of what god"? Jehova? Allah? Krishna? Odin? Zeus?

In a secular society, that would also raise the question "based on the will of what god"? Jehova? Allah? Krishna? Odin? Zeus?

Lol, that's a good point.

And raises confusing issues! :S

In a secular society, that would also raise the question "based on the will of what god"? Jehova? Allah? Krishna? Odin? Zeus? I thought it was supposed to be based on the will of the people myself…
…but we should go with Kali on these issues. :)

But what if they don't realise that they are falling into temptation?!

Its not for us to judge.
We just help them if they ask for it.

In a secular society, that would also raise the question "based on the will of what god"? Jehova? Allah? Krishna? Odin? Zeus?

Agreed

Its not for us to judge.
We just help them if they ask for it.

You sin yourself effectively if you allow someone else to sin.

You sin yourself effectively if you allow someone else to sin. You have to look at the big, long-term picture. Take that how you will.

I thought it was supposed to be based on the will of the people myself…
…but we should go with Kali on these issues. :)

Kali? No way, to extreme to base laws on. I would go with the trinity of Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. At least it would be balanced...

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.
You can NEVER legalize murder by definition silly :fluffle:

You sin yourself effectively if you allow someone else to sin.

Really? To what point? So your basically saying that you, I and anyone else are comprable for everyone we know and possibly don't know?

Really? To what point? So your basically saying that you, I and anyone else are comprable for everyone we know and possibly don't know?

No, only if we see someone commiting a blatant sin, and they don't realise but we do, we should try our most to stop them from doing it.

That's my own personal opinion anyway.

Kali? No way, to extreme to base laws on. I would go with the trinity of Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. At least it would be balanced... Sorry, the old dark gods fascinate me…

Surely it's irrelevant as to whether the laws are based on God, Shiva, Mephistopheles, Lightbringer or Tiamat? I thought you'd base it on what the majority vote was… unless your damned Constitution (I don't have one!) prevents you…

No, only if we see someone commiting a blatant sin, and they don't realise but we do, we should try our most to stop them from doing it.

That's my own personal opinion anyway.

So God hasn't decreed this then? Again too many variables for this to be a viable rule

Yes. They shouldn't be able to. And now you're allowing them to do it legally??


Ummm...adultery is not illegal and if they want it they are going to get it whether it be from a prostitute or from some woman they met god knows where. Legalizing protitution has nothing to do with adultery.

Ummm...adultery is not illegal and if they want it they are going to get it whether it be from a prostitute or from some woman they met god knows where. Legalizing protitution has nothing to do with adultery.

Well, adultery should be illegal.

Well, adultery should be illegal.
The only legal impact adultery should have is on the social contract that was agreed to between them.
Beyond that there is no reason to have any laws other then a subjective moral one

I don't think there's a single country on this earth without a few prostitutes at least.
Vatican City would be a good bet.
What i dont get is the argument of "I am against it, because prostitution denigrates women". First, the discussion isnt about prostitution or no prostitution. Its about legal or illegal. Second, if women do the job on their own volition it is safe to assume that they a) can either cope with it or b) dont feel that way. Third, dont second guess these women, its their decision alone.

The only legal impact adultery should have is on the social contract that was agreed to between them.
Beyond that there is no reason to have any laws other then a subjective moral one

Well, what if a subjective moral one is correct?!

;)

Well, adultery should be illegal. Agreed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's oathbreaking.

Agreed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's oathbreaking.

Oathbreaking, law breaking and breaks Gods will etc.

Totally wrong.

Well, what if a subjective moral one is correct?!

;)
If you can prove it objectively then it would no longer be a subjective moral reasoning then it possibly should be concidered
But no one has sufficently proved an objective moral basis for it ... (or for obective morals in general)

If you can prove it objectively then it would no longer be a subjective moral reasoning then it possibly should be concidered
But no one has sufficently proved an objective moral basis for it ... (or for obective morals in general)

Well, for me the teachings of the Bible and the Church are enough for me.

And for those that are all for legalized prostitution, then you must be for legalized drugs and legalized abortion and legalized murder. Drugs and prostutution in many cases lead to "AIDS". And aids lead to death. So vote for the legalization of murder. Once passed, you can start killing everyone that does not agree with you. Eventually, we will have a world population of 1. That lucky person can then spend the rest of their life ruling the world.


The idea being that if prostitution is legal then it can be regulated with mandatory health screenings on both the part of the prostitute and the patrons of the prostitutes. Thereby reducing the spread of STDs through prostitutes.

Well, adultery should be illegal.
Oh, you can have that, including stoning the adulterers. You just have to move to the Iran.

No, only if we see someone commiting a blatant sin, and they don't realise but we do, we should try our most to stop them from doing it.

That's my own personal opinion anyway.

I bet you end up with a lot of black eyes for butting in where you don't belong.

Oh, you can have that, including stoning the adulterers. You just have to move to the Iran.

Well, I don't agree with the stoning part and I don't think I would be welcome in Iran, what with me being a Catholic and all.

What a lot of people don't realise is that illegal prostitution is still going to happen. In Europe we get immigrants who are brought here and then enslaved by gangs, sometimes forced to work as prostitutes. That's not going to go away by legalising it, as the gangs wouldn't get any profit through running it legally.

I bet you end up with a lot of black eyes for butting in where you don't belong.

I beg your pardon.

I have never had a black eye for any reason.

And I will butt in anywhere I want.

No, only if we see someone commiting a blatant sin, and they don't realise but we do, we should try our most to stop them from doing it.

That's my own personal opinion anyway.

That would cause a lot of interesting "confrontations" on every block and street corner. I mean, how many people eat pork? How many major religions have SPECIFIC injunctions against the eating of Pig meat? What about Hamburgers? There are one helluva lot of Hindus out there who could just as easily take offense at your burger.

I mean really, even EATING would get complicated quickly if we all ran around telling each other what NOT to do. Lord knows what we would do about that whole "mixed threads" thing, and suchlike. Which Sabbath do we keep holy? Friday, Saturday or Sunday? 'cause nobody seems to agree on which day to have off.

I would suggest that EDUCATING a person about your religion is a perfectly fine thing to do, but to try and stop them, or worse yet try to get others to force them to stop through legislation? These people aren't being saved by you, they are being crushed by you.

You're playing god, mistakenly believing that you personally should will them to stop when god himself has not done so...and I think that declaring yourself the will and hand of god is a sinful practice too.

That would cause a lot of interesting "confrontations" on every block and street corner. I mean, how many people eat pork? How many major religions have SPECIFIC injunctions against the eating of Pig meat? What about Hamburgers? There are one helluva lot of Hindus out there who could just as easily take offense at your burger.

I mean really, even EATING would get complicated quickly if we all ran around telling each other what NOT to do. Lord knows what we would do about that whole "mixed threads" thing, and suchlike. Which Sabbath do we keep holy? Friday, Saturday or Sunday? 'cause nobody seems to agree on which day to have off.

I would suggest that EDUCATING a person about your religion is a perfectly fine thing to do, but to try and stop them, or worse yet try to get others to force them to stop through legislation? These people aren't being saved by you, they are being crushed by you.

You're playing god, mistakenly believing that you personally should will them to stop when god himself has not done so...and I think that declaring yourself the will and hand of god is a sinful practice too.

I get what you're saying.

Just saying that if it is preventable then the state has a duty to prevent it from happening. If someone truly wants to sin then it will happen no matter what. But the state should do its utmost to stop people from committing sin, IMO.

I am a throne and altar person so, the state has a moral duty to implement the Church's teaching(s).

No, only if we see someone commiting a blatant sin, and they don't realise but we do, we should try our most to stop them from doing it.



I beg your pardon.

I have never had a black eye for any reason.

And I will butt in anywhere I want.


My guess is that you DON'T put forth a whole lot of time and effort toward stopping people from sinning then. Either that or you have a very small list of sins.


Edit because I just read your last post.

Ohhh...I see...you personally don't want to stop sin....you want the state to do it. I think that bringing the goevernment back under the care of the church is a wonderful idea! Look how well it worked the first time. I'm guessing by your name though that you would want it under the control of the catholic church and you could just hope that all other denominations and religions approved of that. Of course if they didn't them the government would have the power to just massacre them.

No thanks!

I beg your pardon.

I have never had a black eye for any reason.

And I will butt in anywhere I want.
where do you live cos I wanna meet the people with such tolerence

You're playing god, mistakenly believing that you personally should will them to stop when god himself has not done so...and I think that declaring yourself the will and hand of god is a sinful practice too.


And if Christians weren't to follow God's will in commanding others to stop, what would the world be like? Murder, rape, pillaging, and all. We have laws to enforce decency, and legalizing prostitution would be counterproductive to a civilized society.

My guess is that you DON'T put forth a whole lot of time and effort toward stopping people from sinning then. Either that or you have a very small list of sins.



Yes, we all know every sinner is a truculent maniac looking for a face to punch :rolleyes:

I am a throne and altar person so, the state has a moral duty to implement the Church's teaching(s).
You ever heard of the concept of secular nations, did you? Good thing, that seperation of church and state. Nationstates have no morals at all, at best they incorporate some ethics.

I get what you're saying.

Just saying that if it is preventable then the state has a duty to prevent it from happening. If someone truly wants to sin then it will happen no matter what. But the state should do its utmost to stop people from committing sin, IMO.

I am a throne and altar person so, the state has a moral duty to implement the Church's teaching(s).



I'm not Catholic, but amen. :)

where do you live cos I wanna meet the people with such tolerence

I live in London, in the UK.....and I don't really see what I've done that is so bad. I merely posted my own opinion to the opening statement of the thread and people then start attacking me.

And if you think I'm bad now you don't even know what bad is, I swear to God!

And if Christians weren't to follow God's will in commanding others to stop, what would the world be like?
Alot less condemning of Christians


Murder, rape, pillaging, and all. We have laws to enforce decency, and legalizing prostitution would be counterproductive to a civilized society.
Do you live in the Vatican? I didn't recall being against murder, rape, or pillaging to be solely opposed by teh Christian faith. Psh decency, "Let the people do what the ywant as long as they don't do it in the streets and scare the horses."

You ever heard of the concept of secular nations, did you? Good thing, that seperation of church and state. Nationstates have no morals at all, at best they incorporate some ethics.



It doesn't mean we can't make the state less secular through the legal process :)

My guess is that you DON'T put forth a whole lot of time and effort toward stopping people from sinning then. Either that or you have a very small list of sins.


Edit because I just read your last post.

Ohhh...I see...you personally don't want to stop sin....you want the state to do it. I think that bringing the goevernment back under the care of the church is a wonderful idea! Look how well it worked the first time. I'm guessing by your name though that you would want it under the control of the catholic church and you could just hope that all other denominations and religions approved of that. Of course if they didn't them the government would have the power to just massacre them.

No thanks!

Lol, well glad we got that misundestaning sorted out lol! I had absolutely no idea what you were going on about first time!

Ihatevacations']Alot less condemning of Christians



Do you live in the Vatican? I didn't recall being against murder, rape, or pillaging to be solely opposed by teh Christian faith. Psh decency, "Let the people do what the ywant as long as they don't do it in the streets and scare the horses."



There are plenty of societies that are not Christian yet oppose prostitution...and for good reasons. You must remember, prostitution is not good for a civilization under any circumstances.

There are plenty of societies that are not Christian yet oppose prostitution...and for good reasons. You must remember, prostitution is not good for a civilization under any circumstances.

Listen to the man! He talks sense! All societies oppose prostitution and there is a reason for that....because it's wrong!

Yes, we all know every sinner is a truculent maniac looking for a face to punch :rolleyes:


I would bet that if he went to any mall on a Friday night and tried to stop every "sin" that he saw that he would leave with, at the very least, a black eye.

You're talking about a whole lot of approaching people who don't want to be approached much less told that they are going to hell.

Then again MOST people would roll their eyes at him and ignore him.

There are plenty of societies that are not Christian yet oppose prostitution...and for good reasons. You must remember, prostitution is not good for a civilization under any circumstances.
Which civilizations? And how is prostitution not good for a civilization? Who does it hurt? We had this discussion on another forum and the opposing side (anti-prostitution) tried to make their argument around teh fact married men or men with girlfriends would use prostitutes, THUS implying that only coupled men would see prostitutes. You know what I did? I laughed at them because that is one of the more ridiculous arguments I have heard

How to make prostitution legal: Have some one film it and sell it online as porn.

I live in London, in the UK.....and I don't really see what I've done that is so bad. I merely posted my own opinion to the opening statement of the thread and people then start attacking me.

And if you think I'm bad now you don't even know what bad is, I swear to God!

I'm not attacking you, I'm just taking a different view and see where it goes thas all.

So your in London and you see someone commiting a sin. what would you do?

I would bet that if he went to any mall on a Friday night and tried to stop every "sin" that he saw that he would leave with, at the very least, a black eye.

You're talking about a whole lot of approaching people who don't want to be approached much less told that they are going to hell.

Then again MOST people would roll their eyes at him and ignore him.

I didn't say that I do that, just that we should do that (and more importantly, the State should do it).

Anyway, I go to the 'mall' (Bluewater) all the time and I never been punched ever.

And if Christians weren't to follow God's will in commanding others to stop, what would the world be like? Murder, rape, pillaging, and all. We have laws to enforce decency, and legalizing prostitution would be counterproductive to a civilized society.
Yeah, thats why all those heathens have already died out, they have no bible, thus they all must be raving maniacs who could never grasp the fact that certain behaviour patterns are detrimental to society and harmfull to individuals.
Dont get me started on buddhists, they behave worse than vkings on a bad day, all the time, what with them being without God.[/sarcasm]
Decency is a hindrance to freedom and a subjective one on top.

I'm not attacking you, I'm just taking a different view and see where it goes thas all.

So your in London and you see someone commiting a sin. what would you do?

Depends what it was, but probably nothing.

Didn't say I did something about people committing sin, just said I should.

Depends what it was, but probably nothing.

Didn't say I did something about people committing sin, just said I should.

ah ok

Always remember to Pillage before you burn. :)

What if married men go find prostitutes?

yeah, nobody's mentioned the effects it would have on marriages/families...

yeah, nobody's mentioned the effects it would have on marriages/families...
Do not make me get the fire hose, I will wash away that false logic while laughing all the while

Though I see no point in arguing obvious logic. On the other board I only had one zealot who doesn't care to contend with, here I have dozens.

And if Christians weren't to follow God's will in commanding others to stop, what would the world be like? Murder, rape, pillaging, and all. We have laws to enforce decency, and legalizing prostitution would be counterproductive to a civilized society.

Well dress me up and call me Susan, but I have a tendency to think that civilizations BEFORE the christian faith had injunctions against Murder, rape, pillaging and all...In fact, I'm sure of it.

Moreover, AFTER the christian faith set down its own rules...Murder, rape, and pillaging still happened, and still happen. A brief study of Christian states ruled by Christian rulers, with Christian followers will show you that there is ample evidence that Christianity and the ACT of sinning is fairly unrelated.

Christians are no more or less likely to be sinful than any other human. Period. We are all sinners in the eyes of the Christian god and must be saved to be saved. They have just one thing going for them; they can find forgiviness in Christ. All others are SOL.

And really, how many muderers, rapists, and pillagers were are and continue to be Christian? Quite a few, I would venture to guess.

Your point is completely invalid. You equate Christian morality to being moral, where in fact Christian morality is merely a guide to telling Christians what laws they shouldn't break...and which ones they've already broken and should probably apologize to God for if they want into heaven.

ah ok
I prefer the State to do it really.

Well, for me the teachings of the Bible and the Church are enough for me.
For you but you have to have faith to believe in thoes teachings

It is a valid subjective position but little ol me without faith does not accept thoes teachings. You need an objective reason for making laws restricting freedoms.

I prefer the State to do it really.

So the state can fill out all of our religious goals and make sure that we all good religious people? Then where's the sacrifice it takes to become a good <Insert religious sect>?

For you but you have to have faith to believe in thoes teachings

It is a valid subjective position but little ol me without faith does not accept thoes teachings. You need an objective reason for making laws restricting freedoms.

I see what you are saying but can't agree with it. Can't explain why either lol! Just can't.

So the state can fill out all of our religious goals and make sure that we all good religious people? Then where's the sacrifice it takes to become a good <Insert religious sect>?
No, it can't make us good religious people but it can damn well enforce religious teaching and do its utmost to ensure that everyone becomes religious.

No, it can't make us good religious people but it can damn well enforce religious teaching and do its utmost to ensure that everyone becomes religious.

Oh and on a side not what religion?

Decency is a hindrance to freedom and a subjective one on top.



Decency preserves freedom.

Oh and on a side not what religion?

Lol, is that not obvious mister?

yeah, nobody's mentioned the effects it would have on marriages/families...
Of course it would be vastly different if the married man went to a illegal prostitute, right? I bet the john's wife will be happy if he gets charged with a crime on top of being unfaithfull. :rolleyes:
It isnt like prostitution does not exist if its illegal. Crimes dont go away because of black letters on white paper. Laws dont prevent things from happening, they deal with the consequences.

Lol, is that not obvious mister?

Well the most logical one would be the national religion which would be The Church Of England as we are both English?

No, it can't make us good religious people but it can damn well enforce religious teaching and do its utmost to ensure that everyone becomes religious.
Hooray for dictatorship! All hail Chairman Mao! Erm, i mean God.

Well the most logical one would be the national religion which would be The Church Of England as we are both English?

Lol, now you're just playing dumb.

For me it would be Catholicism, even in England and other non-Catholic countries (well, the UK was Catholic for longer than it has been Protestant).

Well dress me up and call me Susan, but I have a tendency to think that civilizations BEFORE the christian faith had injunctions against Murder, rape, pillaging and all...In fact, I'm sure of it.

Moreover, AFTER the christian faith set down its own rules...Murder, rape, and pillaging still happened, and still happen. A brief study of Christian states ruled by Christian rulers, with Christian followers will show you that there is ample evidence that Christianity and the ACT of sinning is fairly unrelated.

Christians are no more or less likely to be sinful than any other human. Period. We are all sinners in the eyes of the Christian god and must be saved to be saved. They have just one thing going for them; they can find forgiviness in Christ. All others are SOL.

And really, how many muderers, rapists, and pillagers were are and continue to be Christian? Quite a few, I would venture to guess.

Your point is completely invalid. You equate Christian morality to being moral, where in fact Christian morality is merely a guide to telling Christians what laws they shouldn't break...and which ones they've already broken and should probably apologize to God for if they want into heaven.


Prostitution does not violate just Christian morals, it falls under the category of detrimental activity in any nation. It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty), it promotes the spread of STD's, it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)

Lol, now you're just playing dumb.

For me it would be Catholicism, even in England and other non-Catholic countries (well, the UK was Catholic for longer than it has been Protestant).

sorry we are out voted, majority rules.
And that means we get taught about abortion, divorce and homosexulaity. These things are obviously frowned upon but nothings really done about it

Decency preserves freedom.
And you can, of course, show me examples for that, right? Just stating it doesnt really cut.

Of course it would be vastly different if the married man went to a illegal prostitute, right? I bet the john's wife will be happy if he gets charged with a crime on top of being unfaithfull. :rolleyes:
It isnt like prostitution does not exist if its illegal. Crimes dont go away because of black letters on white paper. Laws dont prevent things from happening, they deal with the consequences.




Following that logic, we should dicriminalize murder, drug usage, and child molestation :rolleyes: Of course laws aren't always followed! But they provide an incentive to not commit the crime...

Decency preserves freedom.

Actually...no. The opposite is true. Decency means restricting behavior to fit societal norms...Freedom means NOT haveing to restrict behavior to fit such norms.

Thus if you want things to be safe, decent, and child-friendly, you'll have to prevent people from saying and doing what they want when they want to. That means you have to restrict their freedom. On some levels that's acceptable, on others its not acceptable.

The only real quesiton is HOW MUCH decency should we allow to override our freedoms? I'm fairly sure that public displays of affection like kissing are something we can let slide, but public sex is crossing the line. How many years ago were Ankles considered "private parts"? The very concept of decency is nebulous, Burkah's are considered too restrictive for most Americans, but going nude is too free for us.

Where YOUR comfort zone ends and where MY legal rights start is the grey area we can never fully define.

Seriously. This is pretty basic logic. Simple stuff.

sorry we are out voted, majority rules
Not at all. That's totally rubbish. It's dangerous to always do what the majority says.

Very dangerous indeed.

Actually...no. The opposite is true. Decency means restricting behavior to fit societal norms...Freedom means NOT haveing to restrict behavior to fit such norms.

Thus if you want things to be safe, decent, and child-friendly, you'll have to prevent people from saying and doing what they want when they want to. That means you have to restrict their freedom. On some levels that's acceptable, on others its not acceptable.

The only real quesiton is HOW MUCH decency should we allow to override our freedoms? I'm fairly sure that public displays of affection like kissing are something we can let slide, but public sex is crossing the line. How many years ago were Ankles considered "private parts"? The very concept of decency is nebulous, Burkah's are considered too restrictive for most Americans, but going nude is too free for us.

Where YOUR comfort zone ends and where MY legal rights start is the grey area we can never fully define.

Seriously. This is pretty basic logic. Simple stuff.



Legalized prostitution crosses the line for a majority of Americans. It won't be legalized anytime soon, I can say with confidence.

Not at all. That's totally rubbish. It's dangerous to always do what the majority says.

Very dangerous indeed.

I agree but we can't have a minority religion as our main one to be taught in schools now can we?

I agree but we can't have a minority religion as our main one to be taught in schools now can we?

Lol, well if it's right and true..... ;)

Prostitution does not violate just Christian morals, it falls under the category of detrimental activity in any nation. It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty), it promotes the spread of STD's, it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)

Yeah...so? That wasn't your point a minute ago. Your point was about Christian morals. I adressed that problem you presented.

If you read my arguments you'd find that I'm AGAINST prostitution, for reasons very different than easily questionable acts like legislating Christian morals...Sheesh.

Lol, well if it's right and true..... ;)

nice try but I'm not going down that road even if I do agree with you

Not at all. That's totally rubbish. It's dangerous to always do what the majority says.

Very dangerous indeed.
Amazing I say the same thing when Christians try to prohibit gay marriage based on the “we are the majority” line

Kind of comes full circle

Legalized prostitution crosses the line for a majority of Americans. It won't be legalized anytime soon, I can say with confidence.

This is true.

Amazing I say the same thing when Christians try to prohibit gay marriage based on the “we are the majority” line

Kind of comes full circle

Hmm, well they shouldn't use that as an argument. It's never good to say something is right because you are the majority, even for Christians. And anyway, they are probably Protestants that you are talking about....

Prostitution does not violate just Christian morals, it falls under the category of detrimental activity in any nation. It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty), it promotes the spread of STD's, it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)
Besides from not adressing the issue of christianity not having the sole copyright to morals, you miss on the issue of prostitution once again. Its no choice between prostitution or no prostitution. Prostitution will happen, nothing you can do about it. Legalised prostitution can do a lot about the problems that come with it.

Hmm, well they shouldn't use that as an argument. It's never good to say something is right because you are the majority, even for Christians. And anyway, they are probably Protestants that you are talking about....
Actually roman Catholic’s are the ones I hear it out of usually (In Minnesota they are a majority by FAR)
On this board it is a mixed bag … have heard it out of almost everyone lol

What if married men go find prostitutes?

then they'll end up with a scratch mark on their *ahem* "key" shall we say ;)

I'm unaware of legal whorehouses/brothels here in the US.

Thought I had been ignored because of my posts.

Under Nevada law, any county with a population of less than 400,000 is allowed to license brothels if it so chooses (NRS 244.345). As of January 2005, Clark County (which contains Las Vegas) is the only county in Nevada with a population of over 400,000, but Washoe County will soon reach that point as well.
Incorporated towns and cities in counties that allow prostitution may regulate the trade further or prohibit it altogether.

As of July 2004, brothels are illegal in Carson City, Douglas County, Lincoln County, and Washoe County. Eureka County neither permits nor prohibits brothels and does not have any. The other 11 counties permit licensed brothels in certain specified areas or cities.

The precise licensing requirements vary from county to county. License fees for brothels range from an annual $100,000 in Storey County to an annual $200 in Lander County. Licensed prostitutes must be at least 21 years old, except in Storey County and Lyon County, where the legal age is 18.

State law requires that registered brothel prostitutes be checked weekly for several sexually transmitted diseases and monthly for HIV; furthermore, condoms are mandatory for all oral sex and sexual intercourse. Brothel owners may be held liable if customers become infected with HIV after a prostitute has tested positive for the virus (NRS 041.1397).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Nevada

It is also my undertstanding that prostitution per say is not illegal in Rhode Island, but street solicitation and operating a brothel are.

Prostitution in some form is legal in many countries where NSers hail from. As I understand the situation, prostitution is legal in: New Zealand, Australia, Germany, parts of the US, the Netherlands, the UK, and France.

Here in Japan it is semi-legal. Sex for money is legal, but soliciting, pimping, and operating a brothel are illegal. However, only genital-genital coitus is considered sex legally (leading to several recent difficult to prosecute rapes - anal penitration is legally not sex, and thus isn't rape).

As long as force isn't involved, prostitution should be legal. Public health risks sould be accounted for by a liscensing and inspection system. Knowingly spereading disease should be considered either felony assault and battery or murder (depending on the diseases) and it should be the prostitute's or brothel operator's reponsibility to prevent the spread of disease.

Actually roman Catholic’s are the ones I hear it out of usually (In Minnesota they are a majority by FAR)
On this board it is a mixed bag … have heard it out of almost everyone lol

Oh well, we don't have Federalism in the UK so that is where we got mixed lines.

(Protestants are the majority in the USA and if you didn't have federalism in the US, like the UK, then they would be the majority on laws, you get me).

You're male, aren't you?
Well, I studied, and while prostitution wasn't yet protected under the law in Germany back then, it wasn't illegal, either. Neither me nor any of my femal friends ever even considered taking up prostitution to pay for the rent.

Nobody is going to "lease" anybody any more, that's what these laws are about. It is already happening, all over the world. Creating a legislation will stop this practice, or at least set limits to it.

Yes, there will be illegal prostitution, especially drug related. But legislation is taking a large number of risks of women and men who work as prostitutes for a living, not for the next shot.

As for lifestyle, it already is for a number of people. They pay for sex because, frankly, it's their money, they can do with it whatever they want.

Men shouldn't pay for sex, they should get it because they are nice? So, women shouldn't get paid for sex, they should give it for free? Not ever gonna happen.... you don't see young beautiful women hanging around old men if they are poor, right?

and you're female right, i could tell cause you're nagging like hell :rolleyes:

Because if it was legal, it wouldn't be hidden. Then everyone would know they're cheating on their wives or breaking their vows of celibacy.

You're male, aren't you?
Well, I studied, and while prostitution wasn't yet protected under the law in Germany back then, it wasn't illegal, either. Neither me nor any of my femal friends ever even considered taking up prostitution to pay for the rent.

Nobody is going to "lease" anybody any more, that's what these laws are about. It is already happening, all over the world. Creating a legislation will stop this practice, or at least set limits to it.

Yes, there will be illegal prostitution, especially drug related. But legislation is taking a large number of risks of women and men who work as prostitutes for a living, not for the next shot.

As for lifestyle, it already is for a number of people. They pay for sex because, frankly, it's their money, they can do with it whatever they want.

Men shouldn't pay for sex, they should get it because they are nice? So, women shouldn't get paid for sex, they should give it for free? Not ever gonna happen.... you don't see young beautiful women hanging around old men if they are poor, right?

and you're female right, i could tell cause you're nagging like hell :rolleyes:




































































































oh and i like the idea of legal brothels

Following that logic, we should dicriminalize murder, drug usage, and child molestation
Bullshit.
Prostitution and drug use can be victimless crimes and thus should be legal. Its between consenting adults or up to ones own mind in the case of drugs. Murder always leaves a victim, as well as child molestation. Nice try, but bring in some logic instead of emotional outcries.
Besides, i still wait for the examples were decency is good for freedom.

Bullshit

Jeez, no need to get rude.

I really wanna know when swearing was legalised in these forums.

Not talking about illegal prostitution and the connection with the drug scene, organised crime and human right issues here.

I'm talking about prostitution the way Germany and the Netherlands (just examples I happen to know of) handle it. Here, prostitution is a profession same as any other, enjoying legal protection, state pension and health care. Health checkup and other issues have legal standarts, prostitutes can join trade unions or found their own if they want to, tax benefits are available.

Why would anybody oppose a system like that?

On wholly moral grounds. And as morals are subjective, it is a difficult debate to have (see: impossible).

Legal prostitution would be significantly better for the women involved. Let's face it -- these women are going to be prostitutes, one way or the other, either because they want to or because they have to. Taking the moral high ground is all well and good, but all you actually accomplish is making these women's lives more difficult.

Presently, these women work in disgusting conditions, with no health and safety considerations. Their lives are very often put at risk, both by their clients and their 'employers', and some of them even live in a state of semi-slavery. They obviously aren't afforded the same worker's rights as everyone else, nor any EU/UN legislation designed to protect workers.
Legalise it and you can make sure they have decent working environments, regular health checkups (better for EVERYONE who makes use of their unique services, not just the women, I might add), safety, freedom, and protection from the worker's rights I mentioned. It may even benefit the economy.

Which of those is the more 'moral'?

Jeez, no need to get rude.
I decide when i need to get rude, not you.

i think legal prossies are a good idea. if somebody gets totally puny grades and their life falls apart but their still totally fit then why not shag someone to get a nice miniskirt for your next "job"? i mean, only wierdo's who think women shouldn't sho their skin and wear gloves all the time would oppose the idea. I personally wouldn't like legal gay prostitution, cos' they'd look frightening in leather pants and thongs. :eek:

I decide when i need to get rude, not you.

Ooo....this site has got rude indeed! I don't even know who you think you are!

I decide when i need to get rude, not you.

dude, just cool it man. let off some steam with a legal shag. :headbang:

dude, just cool it man. let off some steam with a legal shag. :headbang:

Lol, yeah Jester, listen to him!

Don't spark off at me mister!

Ooo....this site has got rude indeed! I don't even know who you think you are!
Someone who does what is in compliance with the rules and who does not take kindly to people telling me how i have to be/behave.

Why would anybody oppose legal prostitution?

Usual sort of thing - wanting to control what other people say or do or think or feel. Sticking their noses where they don't belong. You know.

Bullshit.
Prostitution and drug use can be victimless crimes and thus should be legal. Its between consenting adults or up to ones own mind in the case of drugs. Murder always leaves a victim, as well as child molestation. Nice try, but bring in some logic instead of emotional outcries.
Besides, i still wait for the examples were decency is good for freedom.

you just wanna get a shag and not get nicked, and don't swear young man or i'll tell my dad :mad:

Someone who does what is in compliance with the rules and who does not take kindly to people telling me how i have to be/behave.

i'd like to know where you got that attitude, u little stuck-up poof

This statement may I say is totally false. I would openly challenge anyone who says that Drug use hurts only the user.

Someone who does what is in compliance with the rules and who does not take kindly to people telling me how i have to be/behave.
I'm not telling you what to do, I was just saying no need for rudeness.

And then I got all stuffy with you because you were rude to me.

i'd like to know where you got that attitude, u little stuck-up poof
I gather you know me quite well, dont you? Or why do you fell the need to question my attitude and get personal. Besides, i dont need prostitutes to get laid and certainly am not trembling in my pants in fear of your father. Oh, and i aint little in terms of height or age.

This statement may I say is totally false. I would openly challenge anyone who says that Drug use hurts only the user.
Give it your best shot, then.

And anyway, they are probably Protestants that you are talking about.... Okay, you're Irish, aren't you?

i think legal prossies are a good idea. if somebody gets totally puny grades and their life falls apart but their still totally fit then why not shag someone to get a nice miniskirt for your next "job"? i mean, only wierdo's who think women shouldn't sho their skin and wear gloves all the time would oppose the idea. I personally wouldn't like legal gay prostitution, cos' they'd look frightening in leather pants and thongs. Yeah, if they don't get good grades they should whore themselves out, it's all they're good for really…

*SARCASM*

I gather you know me quite well, dont you? Or why do you fell the need to question my attitude and get personal. Besides, i dont need prostitutes to get laid and certainly am not trembling in my pants in fear of your father. Oh, and i aint little in terms of height or age.

Well, how old are you mister?

Okay, you're Irish, aren't you?

No, not at all. Not one little bit.

And then I got all stuffy with you because you were rude to me.
There is no right not to be offended.

I gather you know me quite well, dont you? Or why do you fell the need to question my attitude and get personal. Besides, i dont need prostitutes to get laid and certainly am not trembling in my pants in fear of your father. Oh, and i aint little in terms of height or age.

but you are little in the terms of brains and of manhood, so shut your gob unless you want me to shut it for you punk :mp5:

Well, how old are you mister?
34

There is no right not to be offended.

What are you going on about mister?

Okay, you're Irish, aren't you?

Yeah, if they don't get good grades they should whore themselves out, it's all they're good for really…

*SARCASM*

exactly mate, got it in one. *looks thick* ;)

No, not at all. Not one little bit. Oh… the way you referred to protestants was somewhat Irish.

Give it your best shot, then.

What do you say to one who's friend killed herself while under the inflience? or who's brother goes into suicidal moods as a result of his crack addiction?

this may be an emotional argument...but drug use has profound emotional effects on the user and people who are hurt by the user's poor choices.

but you are little in the terms of brains and of manhood, so shut your gob unless you want me to shut it for you punk :mp5:
I aint no tattletale, but if you dont stop the flaming i will report you.

34

oooh, big man, gonna hit me with you're walking stick? careful, you might trigger his arthritis :D

Oh… the way you referred to protestants was somewhat Irish.

Lol, don't all Catholics traditionall refer to Protestants like that?

What do you say to one who's friend killed herself while under the inflience? or who's brother goes into suicidal moods as a result of his crack addiction?
Is there any difference between someone who commited suicide under influence of someone who did it sober? The disposition is already there. Look, i have the right to stab myself and tear my eyes out, because i is my body. Of course there will be grievance for others, but nonetheless, the victim is me alone. Why cant i do the same with drugs, leaving aside that e.g. weed is disproportionately less harmfull than the sanctioned society drug alcohol.

Is there any difference between someone who commited suicide under influence of someone who did it sober? The disposition is already there. Look, i have the right to stab myself and tear my eyes out, because i is my body. Of course there will be grievance for others, but nonetheless, the victim is me alone. Why cant i do the same with drugs, leaving aside that e.g. weed is disproportionately less harmfull than the sanctioned society drug alcohol.

man, you're self-centered AND stuck up. i feel sorry for your parents if you haven't bumped them off :(

Is there any difference between someone who commited suice under influence of someone who did it sober? The disposition is already there. Look, i have the right to stab myself and tear my eyes out, because i is my body. Of course there will be grievance for others, but nonetheless, the victim is me alone. Why cant i do the same with drugs, leaving aside that e.g. weed is disproportionately less harmfull than the sanctioned society drug alcohol.

maybe one is previously inclined to depression or suicide....but drug use can only worsen this state. true you have the right to kill yourself...all i'm saying is that one needs to be mindful of the effect that we have on others.

if we crash our car into an abandoned building and it falls down...would we say...oh well...it was already a weak structure...nevermind the damage done to the surrounding area when it fell, its not my fault because it was going to collapse anyway?

Prostitution does not violate just Christian morals, it falls under the category of detrimental activity in any nation. It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty), it promotes the spread of STD's, it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)
Why does everyone always think that only married men go to prostitutes? If a married person has sex with someone else it is adultory, it doesn't matter if it's with a prostitute or not.

Secondly, legalized prostitution is by definition controlled (see earlier posts) and therefore reduces the chances of spreading STDs.

Legal prostitutes have no more unwanted pregnancies or abortions than illegal ones. Your argument is invalid.

It would be a poor state of affairs if people only had families, so they can have some sex. And again, prostitution doesn't even come into this. I could have sex with many people, without ever resorting to prostitutes. I chose to marry because I love the woman I'm with, not because I could finally get some!

It is not a question of prostitution vs. no prostitution. It is a question of legal vs illegal prostitution. Not legalizing prostitution doesn't mean it disappears, it just exposes prostitutes and clients to a criminal environment.

Btw. I live in a catholic state and we have legal prostitution. And a good thing it is!

man, you're self-centered AND stuck up. i feel sorry for your parents if you haven't bumped them off :(

He's 34....he is clearly going to die a lonely old man.

Why cant i do the same with drugs, leaving aside that e.g. weed is disproportionately less harmfull than the sanctioned society drug alcohol.


did i ever say that alchohol is not a drug? you're absolutely right. alchohol...just like other drugs...and some prescriptions....have negative emotional and psychiatric effects.

Lol, don't all Catholics traditionall refer to Protestants like that?

If I didn't believe that you are trolling I would say that people like you make me ashamed to be catholic. But then I know no catholics who share your opinions, so all is well.

maybe one is previously inclined to depression or suicide....but drug use can only worsen this state. true you have the right to kill yourself...all i'm saying is that one needs to be mindful of the effect that we have on others.

if we crash our car into an abandoned building and it falls down...would we say...oh well...it was already a weak structure...nevermind the damage done to the surrounding area when it fell, its not my fault because it was going to collapse anyway?

bub, you are soooo right. but careful he's 34 and has arthritis :rolleyes:

Lol, don't all Catholics traditionall refer to Protestants like that? I have to confess I do sometimes!

Btw, to all else, who said anything about us daemonising prostitutes? Most of them need to be helped to get OUT of prostitution… oh, but that would require taxes! Good job I don't live in a totally right-wing country.

If I didn't believe that you are trolling I would say that people like you make me ashamed to be catholic. But then I know no catholics who share your opinions, so all is well.

Well, I'm just adhering to the Church's teaching.

If I didn't believe that you are trolling I would say that people like you make me ashamed to be catholic. But then I know no catholics who share your opinions, so all is well.

hey, leave the bub alone :mad:

Decency preserves freedom.
In what manner? Decency prevents freedom. Whose decency must we follow? Yours? Bob's? Dick's? Harry's? Besides the fact that decency is totally and entirely subjective, decency hinders freedom on the very fact that you msut do things according to what other people feel or want

maybe one is previously inclined to depression or suicide....but drug use can only worsen this state. true you have the right to kill yourself...all i'm saying is that one needs to be mindful of the effect that we have on others.

if we crash our car into an abandoned building and it falls down...would we say...oh well...it was already a weak structure...nevermind the damage done to the surrounding area when it fell, its not my fault because it was going to collapse anyway?
How does the car crash relate to this?
The problem is, the circumstances of drug use cause the problems, not the drug itself. If someone consumes a dose of cocaine and watches tv all night, going to work next day and be a productive member of society, who is the victim? Getting drunk is one thing, DUI is another. Because you did something wrong while being drunk. Same with drugs. Drug usage by itself doesnt automatically mean that there has to be a victim.

Ihatevacations']In what manner? Decency prevents freedom. Whose decency must we follow? Yours? Bob's? Dick's? Harry's? Besides the fact that decency is totally and entirely subjective, decency hinders freedom on the very fact that you msut do things according to what other people feel or want

Certainly there are some moral/ethical issues that should be left up to the individual. But a leader or government cannot avoid making some ethical/moral decisions. This is the beauty of voting. Personally I find the percentage of voters as opposed to non-voters here in at least some parts of the U.S. to be disgraceful, but that's a whole other issue.

hey, leave the bub alone :mad:

give as good as you get

How does the car crash relate to this?
The problem is, the circumstances of drug use cause the problems, not the drug itself. If someone consumes a dose of cocaine and watches tv all night, going to work next day and be a productive member of society, who is the victim? Getting drunk is one thing, DUI is another. Because you did something wrong while being drunk. Same with drugs. Drug usage by itself doesnt automatically mean that there has to be a victim.

alright fine. you just want to argue for the sake of arguing...nothing that you said here is really wrong. fine...there are people who use drugs responsibly and who are completely stabe....but unfortunately there are cases when people get hurt and to say that drug use does not hurt others is wrong simply because it does happen as you just stated. so thank you.

How does the car crash relate to this?
The problem is, the circumstances of drug use cause the problems, not the drug itself. If someone consumes a dose of cocaine and watches tv all night, going to work next day and be a productive member of society, who is the victim? Getting drunk is one thing, DUI is another. Because you did something wrong while being drunk. Same with drugs. Drug usage by itself doesnt automatically mean that there has to be a victim.

Can you say that drug use does not increase the likelihood of someone doing something that they would not do while sober?

Can you say that drug use does not increase the likelihood of someone doing something that they would not do while sober?
I said drug use is a victimless crime, not that no people might get hurt. But the same can happen with any irresponsible behaviour.

I said drug use is a victimless crime, not that no people might get hurt. But the same can happen with any irresponsible behaviour.

excuse me then...i misunderstand....how is it victimless?

Isn't there also "children" (aka not legal) and male prostitutes?

Isn't there also "children" (aka not legal) and male prostitutes?
Male prostitution legalised too (no sexism)

And the coppers can crack down on child prostitution harder when they don't need to fuss so much over the other prostitution

Isn't there also "children" (aka not legal) and male prostitutes?
Child prostitution will never be legal (since sex with minors won't ever be, I guess), so it is not not an issue here. Legal male prostitution? Why not?

excuse me then...i misunderstand....how is it victimless?
Buying, owning and consuming drugs is a crime. Please show me who is the victim if i have a gramm of speed in my pocket. Who gets victimized if i buy extasy? And who gets hurt if i smoke a joint?
That i could hurt someone under influence is a possibility, not an automatism. It is the same as driving a car. You have to be responsible with it or someone might get hurt.

Buying, owning and consuming drugs is a crime. Please show me who is the victim if i have a gramm of speed in my pocket. Who gets victimized if i buy extasy? And who gets hurt if i smoke a joint?
That i could hurt someone under influence is a possibility, not an automatism. It is the same as driving a car. You have to be responsible with it or someone might get hurt.

who made the drugs that you bought?

do you know? i don't either....but how can you really know...if you drive carefully then safety is increased... fine same with drugs....but for me...and many others...drugs are considered to be too risky. fine...take that hard line...there's very little black and white. drugs are illegal for good reason. but hey...don't listen to me. its fine. but know this. there are no decisions made that have no negative consequences....if you really think about it...im not going to argue that because we could go on forever about that. one simply has to decide what risks he/she is willing to take. its a personal decision.

so if you decide that driving's too risky fine...don't drive....i've decided that drug use and sales is too risky...so i dont' use drugs....but again thats a personal decision. one can only decide for themselves.

its a personal decision.
That exactly being the point. I want to be able to make that choice, i dont want Big Daddy Government telling me what to i can chose.
All my examples aside, i dont do drugs, except half a joint once every other month. It is about the priciples behind it, not about drugging myself to death.

im not attacking someone who uses once in a very long while...but the fact is the government can't protect its citizens from irresponsible users without placing restrictions.

Can you say that drug use does not increase the likelihood of someone doing something that they would not do while sober?
So drug use should be restricted because people who use drugs tend to be more likely to break the law? Ok, let's carry that logic through...

Being male increases the likelihood that an individual will commit a crime. Being under the age of 30 increases the likelihood that an individual will commit a crime. Being religious increases the likelihood that somebody will be convicted of a crime. Living in a city increase a person's likelihood of committing a crime.

Or hey, how about the fact that owning a car increases a person's likelihood of getting in a car accident, driving drunk, or committing vehicular manslaughter?

Let's all be very clear on one thing: in pretty much all other situations, we do NOT consider it just to punish people for taking actions that may increase the likelihood that they will commit a crime. To try to claim that drugs alone should be prohibited on those grounds is bunk.

im not attacking someone who uses once in a very long while...but the fact is the government can't protect its citizens from irresponsible users without placing restrictions.
And thus the government fosters organised crime that costs more lives than legal drugs could take. The war on drugs is the replication of the prohibition, only the times are more violent nowadays.

So drug use should be restricted because people who use drugs tend to be more likely to break the law? Ok, let's carry that logic through...

Being male increases the likelihood that an individual will commit a crime. Being under the age of 30 increases the likelihood that an individual will commit a crime. Being religious increases the likelihood that somebody will be convicted of a crime. Living in a city increase a person's likelihood of committing a crime.

Or hey, how about the fact that owning a car increases a person's likelihood of getting in a car accident, driving drunk, or committing vehicular manslaughter?

Let's all be very clear on one thing: in pretty much all other situations, we do NOT consider it just to punish people for taking actions that may increase the likelihood that they will commit a crime. To try to claim that drugs alone should be prohibited on those grounds is bunk.

good then decide not to take these risks. don't drive...write to your senator and demand that driving be outlawed and that children be incarcerated in case they do something wrong. i also happen to think that drugs inhance the risks involved with driving and being too young to understand right from wrong. i don't claim to have all the answers...but are we really here to make things better or to argue...? you bring up very valid points. thats great. but can you not see any sense in my arguments? if you can fix it all then thats great..go make the world a better place. i applaud you. really...this world needs better solutions to our common problems. go vote..run for office..write letters. yay for democracy...or whatever you believe it to be...there are ways to make a difference and be heard...go and do it.

good then decide not to take these risks. don't drive...write to your senator and demand that driving be outlawed and that children be incarcerated in case they do something wrong. i also happen to think that drugs inhance the risks involved with driving and being too young to understand right from wrong. i don't claim to have all the answers...but are we really here to make things better or to argue...? you bring up very valid points. thats great. but can you not see any sense in my arguments? if you can fix it all then thats great..go make the world a better place. i applaud you. really...this world needs better solutions to our common problems. go vote..run for office..write letters. yay for democracy...or whatever you believe it to be...there are ways to make a difference and be heard...go and do it.
We are … by voicing our opinion that restricting drugs are an unnecessary restriction on freedom

Why are there so many men who can't find stable, healthy relationships to satisfy their sexual needs?

Why is the promescuity of men, and the idea of a man's "sexual needs", blindy supported? How much of this is biological, how much of it is social, how much of it is cultural...?


Women have hormone cycles that generally make them want to have sex 1-2 times a month. Usually enough time to tell if they are pregnant. Men's hormone cycle lasts a day refreshing their desire for sex every day. I am not trying to defend those feed their desire through vile means (rape). Just explaining why they perform such actions. Most men can resist these urges, those who dont are assholes.

Women have hormone cycles that generally make them want to have sex 1-2 times a month. Usually enough time to tell if they are pregnant. Men's hormone cycle lasts a day refreshing their desire for sex every day. I am not trying to defend those feed their desire through vile means (rape). Just explaining why they perform such actions. Most men can resist these urges, those who dont are assholes.
Except when you meet my GF :) She is a 4 times a day woman lol

if i was a woman then i wouldn't like my man running off with someone who shags for a living, would you? he'd end up with his bits on his head. :eek:

if i was a woman then i wouldn't like my man running off with someone who shags for a living, would you? he'd end up with his bits on his head. :eek:
Just because I don’t like it or wouldn’t like it does not mean I think we should outlaw it

It is HIS responsibility not to jeopardize our relationship not the governments

if i was a woman then i wouldn't like my man running off with someone who shags for a living, would you? he'd end up with his bits on his head. :eek:

So there should be a law making him stay with you, is that what you're saying?

Yes. I don't want people to go to Hell. Therefore, to stop them from going to Hell, Gods will must be placed upon them so they can protect themselves from Satan.

I know you must be a joke, but I'm pointing this out anyway. Nobody is saved by works alone. Works must be accompanied by faith and faith by works. Making them obey God's law doesn't keep them out of Hell.

I can understand why people would oppose it. Women making money with their bodies or being opposed to birth control are valid moral grounds.
I agree, but that's just theory. Banning prostitution doesn't make it go away; it just creates a whole load of problems.

Women have hormone cycles that generally make them want to have sex 1-2 times a month.

Source please? I'm pretty certain you're just talking to talk.

Women have hormone cycles that generally make them want to have sex 1-2 times a month. Usually enough time to tell if they are pregnant. Men's hormone cycle lasts a day refreshing their desire for sex every day. I am not trying to defend those feed their desire through vile means (rape). Just explaining why they perform such actions. Most men can resist these urges, those who dont are assholes.

Well, not in my experience. I wear my boyfriend out every other day at least. 1-2 times a month is a ridiculously low figure.

The difference is, most women get taught that sex is not everything, that the thing to look for in life is a long, stable, fulfilling relationship. Our entire education and social conditioning is focused on that. Girls are cool if they have a steady boyfriend and are true to him only. If they try things out, if they so much as try to satisfy their sexual appetite, society instantly labels them as "sluts"

With boys, it's the other way around. They get conditioned that it will make them look really good if they have as many girlfriends as possible, if they get to try out everything in the book. That's when they get respect and are regarded as cool. A guy who's always true to his one girlfriend, never cheats and looks for a lasting relationship is smiled on, until they reach a certain age. And even then it's more acceptable for a man to cheat in a relationship than it is for a woman.

Result : guys have fewer scruplesto employ the services of a hooker. Girls don't rent guys, hardly ever, even tough they are on offer as well.

I KNOW HOW TO GET AROUND PROSTITUTION BEING ILLEGAL!!


Film it. When being filmed it becomes pornography, pornography is not illegal and thus paying some one to have sex with you on camera is totally legal.

Ihatevacations']I KNOW HOW TO GET AROUND PROSTITUTION BEING ILLEGAL!!


Film it. When being filmed it becomes pornography, pornography is not illegal and thus paying some one to have sex with you on camera is totally legal.
Nice kind of like how if you are a stalker keep a camera on you ... if you are paparazi its all legal (or an independant photographer)

or maybe demand and supply
or perhaps demand and opportunity to make an easy (pleasurable,sometimes if one closes ones eyes and thinks of the cash...)buck,so is it laziness or lack of balance in rates of pay that make some taste the dark side... :eek:

What a lot of people don't realise is that illegal prostitution is still going to happen. In Europe we get immigrants who are brought here and then enslaved by gangs, sometimes forced to work as prostitutes. That's not going to go away by legalising it, as the gangs wouldn't get any profit through running it legally.

Actually, the main reason I'm for legal prostitution where I am (I'd be against if I were American), is because it will stop most of the slavetrade. Not only would it be very hard for the slavers to compete, but it would be much easier for the police to take action. Btw, that's also why the police officially reccomended legalizing it in Denmark some 5-6 years ago.

Vatican City would be a good bet.
What i dont get is the argument of "I am against it, because prostitution denigrates women". First, the discussion isnt about prostitution or no prostitution. Its about legal or illegal. Second, if women do the job on their own volition it is safe to assume that they a) can either cope with it or b) dont feel that way. Third, dont second guess these women, its their decision alone.

Yea it's the womens choice alone. Especially in a country like USA where the gap between the poor and the middle class is starting to be comparable to Brazil. I bet choice, real meaningful choice, you know, one with alternatives, has an aweful lot to do with... Well something. Imaginary roastbeef or imaginary tunasalad maybe.
The ugly truth is most legal prostitutes still have their lives ruined. Very few women can cope with being prostitutes, try as they might.

I beg your pardon.

I have never had a black eye for any reason.

And I will butt in anywhere I want.

For your own sake, be very polite about it. Personally I do not take kindly to strangers "offering advice". I did time once for my show of gratitude...

I get what you're saying.

Just saying that if it is preventable then the state has a duty to prevent it from happening. If someone truly wants to sin then it will happen no matter what. But the state should do its utmost to stop people from committing sin, IMO.

I am a throne and altar person so, the state has a moral duty to implement the Church's teaching(s).

Anyway, I thought the point of your God - and your church - was to give people the choices and offer them guidance. If you admit prostitution can't be helped, I would assume you made it your business to make it as safe for prostitutes & customers as you possibly can?
Or is it "Wrong choice bitch, have a miserable life and rot in hell"?

Listen to the man! He talks sense! All societies oppose prostitution and there is a reason for that....because it's wrong!

Listen to the man! There's a reason why everyone thinks the world is flat.... Because... We hadn't really bothered to check it out!

Like I was hinting at above, if you can't resolve a problem, you can at least try to make the best of it. Letting people rot in prison won't reduce the number of prostitutes or clients. After a few thousand years of experience, that much is clear. Can you even for a moment consider there might be a better way to go about it? One that might even help people? Or is giving a shit too blasphemic?

No, it can't make us good religious people but it can damn well enforce religious teaching and do its utmost to ensure that everyone becomes religious.

Besides rioters firebombing churches, governemt property and eachother, what would it accomplish?
- I mean, you don't honestly expect people would put up with a totalitarian theocracy, do you?

Prostitution does not violate just Christian morals, it falls under the category of detrimental activity in any nation. It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty), it promotes the spread of STD's, it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)

...Arg... So horribly wrong...
It contributes to destroying the family unit (let's just say, if I had a husband and found out he was visiting the local harlot, things wouldn't be so pretty)
While noone will ever be able to prove prostitution has any influence on infidelity, it's true that a lot of married men visit prostitutes from time to time. However... Prostitution is here, and it will stay here. The only difference between legalizing it is the spot where that "not so pretty" scene takes place. The police station where you'll have to bail your hubby outta jail, or your home where you can kick him out with good consience.
it promotes the spread of STD's
Actually it's the opposite. Right now there's no way to force prostitutes to practice safe sex. There's no way to force them to have regular medical check-ups. Legalizing prostitution goes a long ass way towards keeping the prostitutes & customers safe from STD's and other harmfull shit.
it increases the number of accidental pregnancies and, subsequently, abortions, and discourages responsibility (why have a wife and raise a family if you could simply pay some slut?)
Accidential pregnancies amongst prostitutes is astronomical. It's like that, because noone keeps tabs on prostitutes and clients. There's no way to enforce safe sex, and clients are - for a large part - willing to pay extra not to have safe sex. Again this is something legalizing prostitution will change.
I suppose I can see why you'd worry about finding a husband, but more openminded and fun people fall in love. At some point, they want to have kids. The usual stuff... Prostitutes have been around longer than human writing, as far as science can tell. If what you outline was the natural consequence, we, as a species, wouldn't be around anymore.

Following that logic, we should dicriminalize murder, drug usage, and child molestation Of course laws aren't always followed! But they provide an incentive to not commit the crime...
Let's see... Someone doing something with her body you don't aprove of is the same as someone killing your family, raping your children and eating your minister, right?
My ex girlfriend had tatoos and listened to rock music, do you think she should be in jail for doing things you don't like (yea I'm assuming you disprove of those things. I don't know for certain)?

Lol, well if it's right and true.....

It may be for you. But forcing your morals on others is neither compassionate, tolerant or conductive to peace. Look at all the oppressive regimes in history. One thing they all have in common is the staggering amount of their own citizens they've had to kill to make the remaining scared enough to see the light. And remember, if you had might as you have intentions, the first one who'd be shot in the eventual revolution would be you. You'd also have earned the right to have your name live in infany forever after.

Not at all. That's totally rubbish. It's dangerous to always do what the majority says.

Very dangerous indeed.
First sensible thing you've said all day mate.

alright fine. you just want to argue for the sake of arguing...nothing that you said here is really wrong. fine...there are people who use drugs responsibly and who are completely stabe....but unfortunately there are cases when people get hurt and to say that drug use does not hurt others is wrong simply because it does happen as you just stated. so thank you.

Look, legalizing drugs is a complex issue. Drug abuse is very easy when drugs are criminalized. It's very much harder, and lot easier to treat if it's legal. The example you came up with earlier (or happened to someone you know, can't remember), would most likely be prevented if the drug(s) in question were legalized.

But most hard drugs is risky shit. A certain procentage of people will go permanently bonkers the first time they try. That's a pretty strong arguement against legalizing. But then, some drugs don't carry that risk.

...But this is off topic, and a huge topic to get into. Involving anything from parenting, education, the health sector, crime fighting and forign policy.

Besides rioters firebombing churches, governemt property and eachother, what would it accomplish?
- I mean, you don't honestly expect people would put up with a totalitarian theocracy, do you?But of course. They do... a little...

...in Iran...

Good God-fearing country, that.

It's a tough call, with pros and cons, but I'm generally against.

Anyway, all pro/con arguments can be refuted. But here are some.

Pro: Sexually-frustrated men could "let the pressure out", and become less agressive.
Pro: Less criminality, less exploitation, more security for these women.
Pro: A better control of sexually transmitted diseases (with mandatory controls)
Pro: Old prostitutes won't be forced to end up performing the most disgusting acts

Wouldn't that be down to economic pressures? If a prostitute isn't as young and good looking anymore she might find she has to um...expand her repertoire to keep getting the clients, be prepared to do more things. How would prostitution being legal prevent that?



They won't end up alone, broken, drug-addict and poor, in the streets.
.

How could legalisation guarantee that? I suppose they won't necessarily be involved in the drug scene if it's legal, but legalisation can't guarantee riches.


Con: Even if it's legal, there'll be a nasty black market.


Why?



Con: Official prices on sex could end up with guys dealing with girls on dates, "leasing" wife to pay debts, and other unwanted behaviors


I doubt it's just the law that stops men from pimping out their wives and girlfriends.


Con: Most women will pay their studies with sex, which could become the "official female summer/night job", while men would work in other sectors


Many women already pay for their studies by getting into prostitution (or other related jobs like stripping). However, I can't see why making it legal would suddenly mean that 'most' women would pay for their studies that way. The illegality of it isn't the only thing that stops women become prostitutes- you're forgetting that many women would simply find it distasteful. Prostitution is legal where I live, and it certainly isn't the part time job 'most' women take to pay for their studies.

Look, legalizing is a complex issue. abuse is very easy when are criminalized. It's very much harder, and lot easier to treat if it's legal. The example you came up with earlier (or happened to someone you know, can't remember), would most likely be prevented if the (s) in question were legalized.

I to be rude, but quite frankly, I find the whole "legalize all " stance to be idiotic. First of all, you claim that e abuse could be better treated if legalized? What? People will still be getting high/stoned/etc. even after legalization, but this time it will be even more prevalent. Factors that may prevent eager participants from buying illegal (dangerous gangs, breaking the law, fear of punishment, possible loss of job, the list goes on), will be completely eliminated and those timid people will now be free to divulge to their hearts content. People doing will rapidly increase. Of course, you are also going to have your common heads in prison--that certainly won't change, except, wait...they won't be in prison...they'll be on the street, legally selling . Perhaps they'll even get some help from the government too! I mean, hell while we are so caught up in legalizing we might as well subsidize them.

You see where this is going? Let's face it, illegal cannot possibly do any good being legalized. They are dangerous (yes even pot, which no one considers dangerous can make one irresponsible, dangerous drivers behind the wheel, and, yes addicted). They are not only one of the main reasons most of the poor (in the U.S.) remain in poverty (due to their constant need to use their limited funds to buy ), but also they CAUSE poverty. Some can lead to normal people turn into rapists and . They must remained banned for the safety of society.

Ok, besides this being a topic about PROSTITUTION, you gotta rip on pot? And you rip on it because of teh following reason: causes irresponsible behavior, makes one dangerous behidn the wheel, and is addictive. I'm sorry, isn't that ALCOHOL - a legal drug. Lets see, its MUCH more addictive than marijuana, not to mention the irrational mood swings and random cancers

i dont know if this has been brought up before because i didnt feel like reading 100 some-odd posts, but my best (non religious) reason not to legalize prostitution is rape. under current laws, a woman who is offered a job while dependent on government support must take the job or lose her income. basically, if you legalize prostitution then a woman can be left with the decision to sell her body against her will or find a way to live on zero income. this is a problem just now arising in Germany. a woman who takes the job so that she can eat, is being paid by men who are raping her. she doesnt want the sex, therefore it's rape. that's my thought.

*edit* here's a news link. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml

if you legalize prostitution then a woman can be left with the decision to sell her body against her will or find a way to live on zero income.... a woman who takes the job so that she can eat, is being paid by men who are raping her. she doesnt want the sex, therefore it's rape. that's my thought.

But that's how it is anyway. Or do you think illegal prostitutes all do it cuz they want sex? No, it's a job like any other, designed to be better than "zero income," only if it's illegal, you're working for a pimp and run the additional risk of getting jailed for doing your job.

But that's how it is anyway. Or do you think illegal prostitutes all do it cuz they want sex? No, it's a job like any other, designed to be better than "zero income," only if it's illegal, you're working for a pimp and run the additional risk of getting jailed for doing your job.
are you trying to say that we should have government sponsored rape???? it sure sounds like it. please expand on your argument.

*edit* oh and i'm not saying that i would support the imprisonment of a prostitute under all circumstances. if anything, there should be some sort of support group/clinic type of thing to help them control their own lives. i'm not sure what could be done for the willing ones, but for those coerced into it i'm sure some kind of caring and support would be much appreicated.