NationStates Jolt Archive

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution). With that being said, do you actually own your own body?

If your answer is yes then how is it that a government agency can tell you what you can and can't do with it?

If no, then I don't remember selling it to anyone.

This also makes me think of ticket scalping laws. I can buy the ticket, but I'm not allowed to resell it? Is there anything else that you can purchase but then after purchasing your still told what you can and can't do with it....

.....

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.

Yeah, I was on sale for 6.99 at Meijer's a few years ago. It was an impulse buy.

Yeah, I was on sale for 6.99 at Meijer's a few years ago. It was an impulse buy.

You should have waited for the price to go down some more. :p

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.

He eventually wrecks them. :(

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution). With that being said, do you actually own your own body?

If your answer is yes then how is it that a government agency can tell you what you can and can't do with it?

If no, then I don't remember selling it to anyone.

This also makes me think of ticket scalping laws. I can buy the ticket, but I'm not allowed to resell it? Is there anything else that you can purchase but then after purchasing your still told what you can and can't do with it....

.....

Do you own your car? You're not allowed to drive above the speed limit in it and you have to have a license to actually use it, not to mention the fact that it has to get certain gas mileage.

Do your own your land? If you can't pay your property taxes they kick you out and in many states, the lawbooks on what you can and can not do with it are 1000 pages long.

Do you own your business? The government can regulate, reregulate, change the tax codes and nationalize you pretty much any time they want, and all you are entitled to is the cost of your assets.

It seems that ownership may be a relative term in any realistic sense. As for prostitution, even if it was legal (which I personally do not think is a bad idea) it would have to be thoroughly regulated to prevent the spread of disease, although one wonders if the prostitution industry might do that voluntarily to increase it's customer base.

I don't think drugs and prostitution were made illegal primarily due to religious concerns. I could be wrong, but I always thought that they banned drugs and prostitution because of the negative externalities that spill over into society by an individual's usage of them. For example, you may have a right to your body, but the damage to society you incur (both potential or actual, like second-hand smoke, the threat of violence, etc) by being a drug addict harms society as a whole and tramples on other people's rights to their lives and safety. Prostitution may have a tie to STD's, population concerns or general pride (as some nations take the prostitution of their women as very dark stains on their reputation)

Ownership is an illusion. Even when you buy a house or property, you truly only have liscense for the use of that property. Hence, the government can come in and say you can't grow marijuana or that it has to look a certain way to conform with normality.

Think of it this way, if we owned ourselves, why is suicide considered a crime?

It's like the big Spa (or mostly any other brand of popular water/soda) bottles, it says it stays property of the manufactor :\ Imagine condoms having that claim =p

Where I live, it's legal to do soft drugs when you're old enough, and same for prostitution. Gay marriage has the exact same rules as straight marriage. When you're 21, you can pretty much do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt people^^

I love my country <3

Think of it this way, if we owned ourselves, why is suicide considered a crime?

It is? I thought it was generally frowned upon, and you usually got restrained if you are diagnosed as having the potential threat to commit suicide, but I never thought people actually got convicted for suicide or attempts to commit suicide.

I mean, what, they put your corpse in the slammer?

It is? I thought it was generally frowned upon, and you usually got restrained if you are diagnosed as having the potential threat to commit suicide, but I never thought people actually got convicted for suicide or attempts to suicide.

I mean, what, they put your corpse in the slammer?

In some places attempted suicide is indeed illegal.

Think of it this way, if we owned ourselves, why is suicide considered a crime?

They should give it the death penalty! :rolleyes:

Geez, I'd think being put in jail after trying to kill myself would just make me more depressed and inclined to repeat the attempt.

Just because the government says I don't own myself doesn't mean that I don't. I do own myself. My word is my law. Their laws are simple dictations to actions and reactions.

Just because the government says I don't own myself doesn't mean that I don't. I do own myself. My word is my law. Their laws are simple dictations to actions and reactions.

I agree. And I'd like to think of some laws as the Pirate Code, 'more guidelines than actual rules' =P

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.

Right because those laws only exist in the united states, and not in more left wing countries like say Sweden. :rolleyes:

Ownership is an illusion. Even when you buy a house or property, you truly only have liscense for the use of that property. Hence, the government can come in and say you can't grow marijuana or that it has to look a certain way to conform with normality.

Think of it this way, if we owned ourselves, why is suicide considered a crime?

I agree but also disagree. "Property" is an idea that we made up, but so is "government." Neither has any objective reality, both only have sway over us if we allow it. You can say, "But what about the police?" The "police" are actually people, that's all. "Might makes right," except there is no "right" or "wrong," only ideas in our heads. Just because we agree to share a delusion doesn't make it real.

Theoretically, seeing as the government is made up of civilians, elected into their positions by civilians for the purposes of representing their interests, we do own ourselves in a roundabout way. It could be argued that because we elected the politicians into power, we are indirectly the ones who made the laws we now live by.

Of course that's complete bollocks in practice, but there you go.

With that being said, do you actually own your own body?

human bodies aren't the sort of thing that can be owned. the idea that they can be is inherently dangerous.

human bodies aren't the sort of thing that can be owned. the idea that they can be is inherently dangerous.

It may be dangerous but does that make it untrue?

Btw I don't own myself. I'd explain but the details are too kinky.

human bodies aren't the sort of thing that can be owned. the idea that they can be is inherently dangerous.

In what sense? Are you talking about the potential to sell yourself?

human bodies aren't the sort of thing that can be owned. the idea that they can be is inherently dangerous.

so who owns the cadavers in a hospital morgue?

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.
No, you don't.

The reason that drugs are banned is due to their extremely harmful effect on a lot of those who take them, and the fact that a lot of people get into theft to pay for the more addictive and expensive end of drugs.

As to prostitution, it spreads venerial diseases and is an absolute minefield to legislate on what can and can't be done to a prostitute. So it's all banned (sort of, although IIRC it's not totally banned in the states, is it?)



Do I own myself? No more or less than anyone else, I guess. In most respects, aye, in others, I'm a slave to the wage as much as the general public.

It may be dangerous but does that make it untrue?

Btw I don't own myself. I'd explain but the details are too kinky.

You do realize that this just makes us want to hear them more, yes?

....I sold my soul to the devil.......

....I sold my soul to the devil.......

Is the soul the same as the body? Interesting theological question . . .

Is the soul the same as the body?
No, it isn't.

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.


No, you don't.
The reason that drugs are banned is due to their extremely harmful effect on a lot of those who take them, and the fact that a lot of people get into theft to pay for the more addictive and expensive end of drugs.

As to prostitution, it spreads venerial diseases and is an absolute minefield to legislate on what can and can't be done to a prostitute. So it's all banned (sort of, although IIRC it's not totally banned in the states, is it?)


I'm reasonably sure Knights of Liberty is right and Yootopia is wrong. I dimly recall an excellent article in the New Law Journal (UK) which showed that the abolition of drugs came about owing to the activities of religiously inspired temperance crusaders in the US.

Hold on a mo, I'll see if I can dig it up...

Is the soul the same as the body? Interesting theological question . . .

Well I gave him a two for one deal. He gets 'em both.

I sold my sister's soul to the devil.

In what sense? Are you talking about the potential to sell yourself?

i'm talking about treating people as property at all. this is fundamentally a mistake and morally perilous. the opening of a justification for slavery is a part of the danger, though not all of it.

The reason that drugs are banned is due to their extremely harmful effect on a lot of those who take them, and the fact that a lot of people get into theft to pay for the more addictive and expensive end of drugs.

As to prostitution, it spreads venerial diseases and is an absolute minefield to legislate on what can and can't be done to a prostitute. So it's all banned (sort of, although IIRC it's not totally banned in the states, is it?)


So if drugs were legal and there was no need to steal to get them, the collateral effects would be less.

As for prostitution spreading VD, you can't contract said VD without intimate contact with said infected prostitute, so really the only person at risk is the risk taker. I guess you could say "Well what about when he goes home to his wife and she contracts XYZ VD". .... I'm not really sure where I'm going with this.

i'm talking about treating people as property at all. this is fundamentally a mistake and morally perilous. the opening of a justification for slavery is a part of the danger, though not all of it.

As your signature suggests, we should break these baseless moral rules.

No, it isn't.

Empirical evidence to support your hypothesis?

So if drugs were legal and there was no need to steal to get them, the collateral effects would be less.
I don't see why legalising drugs would lead to them becoming less addictive, which is what gets people spending all of their money on them, and then spending other peoples' money on them after theirs has run out...
As for prostitution spreading VD, you can't contract said VD without intimate contact with said infected prostitute, so really the only person at risk is the risk taker. I guess you could say "Well what about when he goes home to his wife and she contracts XYZ VD". .... I'm not really sure where I'm going with this.
Both the prostitute and the client are at risk, STIs are not a one way street.

Empirical evidence to support your hypothesis?
Empirical evidence to a purely theological event? Faith neither provides nor demands answers...

Empirical evidence to a purely theological event? Faith neither provides nor demands answers...

Damn! I only have faith in empiricism. I'm comfortable with the answer, "I don't know."

So if drugs were legal and there was no need to steal to get them, the collateral effects would be less.

Well, you'd still have negative externalities, which affect even people aside from those who are taking the drugs. So if drugs were legalized, and more people start using drugs as a result, more people would also be exposed to the drugs' negative externalities unwillingly and so collateral effects would be larger.

By Negative Externalities, I mean things like smoke, detriments to health, to the more mundane such as lot depreciation, etc.

It's like the big Spa (or mostly any other brand of popular water/soda) bottles, it says it stays property of the manufactor :\ Imagine condoms having that claim =p

Where I live, it's legal to do soft drugs when you're old enough, and same for prostitution. Gay marriage has the exact same rules as straight marriage. When you're 21, you can pretty much do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt people^^

I love my country <3

You make me think you live in the Netherlands....Am I right?

You make me think you live in the Netherlands....Am I right?

...Are we the only country that has all that then? 0_o I...I thought that was just a lie the government wants us to believe... >.> <.<

Well, we have those laws because neocon idiots are into regulating sin and say that gawd owns our bodies.

Hey, smart guy, those laws predated the word 'neocon' by quite a few decades or even centuries. There have always been those that think they know what's best for the rest of us and there always will be...

...Are we the only country that has all that then? 0_o I...I thought that was just a lie the government wants us to believe... >.> <.<

As far as I know...*is unsure*

As far as I know...*is unsure*

...mommy 0_o And I actually wanted to move to another country!

On the other hand, I have a relationshp with someone of the opposite sex, I don't do drugs, nor am I a protitute (or feel the need to sleep with one) :rolleyes:

I'm reasonably sure Knights of Liberty is right and Yootopia is wrong. I dimly recall an excellent article in the New Law Journal (UK) which showed that the abolition of drugs came about owing to the activities of religiously inspired temperance crusaders in the US.

Hold on a mo, I'll see if I can dig it up...

That's not neo-conservatives, or at least, that's not just neo-conservatives. Neocons only came into existence following the liberalism of the mid-20th century, and there have been plenty of morality regulators before then. Prohibition, for instance.

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution). With that being said, do you actually own your own body?

If your answer is yes then how is it that a government agency can tell you what you can and can't do with it?

If no, then I don't remember selling it to anyone.

This also makes me think of ticket scalping laws. I can buy the ticket, but I'm not allowed to resell it? Is there anything else that you can purchase but then after purchasing your still told what you can and can't do with it....

.....

Hmm...well I don't know about all that, but I totally pwned myself when I tripped over my own flip flops in the mall the other day....

Other than that, I pwned your mom yesterday. She came in for her dentist appointment and I made her open her mouth wide.

No, you don't own yourself unless you can sell yourself and thus become a slave. Human beings are not property in today's economy, at least not on the legal market.

I'm not sure what motives those who wrote the laws about recreational drugs here had but about the motives for banning prostitution over here... We have 2 kinds of prostitution here and laws target the more ugly of them. Organized criminals promise women in poor countries to make them models and porn stars if they immigrate illegally. Once here they don't exist in the system and have no rights, they are entirely at the mercy of the criminals who proceed to pimp them out. Pimping is illegal because what they do is pretty much importing slaves to rent them out. Buying sex is illegal because you are not paying the prostitute for sex, you are paying the pimp to rent their slave. The prostitute however is the victim and does not commit any crime.

The other kind of prostitution is natives with normal life pimping themselves out over the net to make a little (well, a lot) extra tax free. This is pretty much one night stand dating but for money, they are even picky about their customers. But the law doesn't discriminate, the buyer still commits a crime and the prostitute is still the innocent victim.

So if drugs were legal and there was no need to steal to get them, the collateral effects would be less.



Hell, yes! Just imagine how many "criminals" would not be in jail if drug possession was legal.

Also imagine what the reduction in violence would amount to if gangs didn't have drug sales and distribution to fight over.

I don't OWN myself, but I have occasionally PWND myself.

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Clark County, Nevada OUTSIDE the city limits of Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution). With that being said, do you actually own your own body?

Fixed (not that you'd have automatically known, but folks from Vegas can get tetchy about that point).

Hey, smart guy, those laws predated the word 'neocon' by quite a few decades or even centuries. There have always been those that think they know what's best for the rest of us and there always will be...

So long as you realize that those nannies can come from both sides of the aisle, I agree completely.

That's not neo-conservatives, or at least, that's not just neo-conservatives. Neocons only came into existence following the liberalism of the mid-20th century, and there have been plenty of morality regulators before then. Prohibition, for instance.

The Temperance Movement, McCarthyism, Environmentalism (especially the bullshit Endangered Species Act, which has saved, of 1800 listings, a total of 15 species at horrendous cost -- should have known it was a bust when it was Nixon who signed the bill).

:rolleyes:


Fine. Neocons and their predecessors who are also moralist nannies and want to stop people from doing sinful acts that offend gawd, cause only he owns our bodies.

The idiot "progressives" who started prohibition are no better, but at least they stopped things like Child Labor. Better than most other moralist nanny group can say.

:rolleyes:


Fine. Neocons and their predecessors who are also moralist nannies and want to stop people from doing sinful acts that offend gawd, cause only he owns our bodies.

The idiot "progressives" who started prohibition are no better, but at least they stopped things like Child Labor. Better than most other moralist nanny group can say.
You realise that saying "moralist nannies" twice doesn't actually make it a better argument, right?

Yes, I do own myself, but my body is inalienable property along with my will. As such, no one, including the government, can make a just claim against it, as I could not have transferred its title to them.

You realise that saying "moralist nannies" twice doesn't actually make it a better argument, right?

Thats my arguement. Thats what they are. People who are imposing their morality on everyone else.


If you hire a hooker, you know the risks. If you do drugs, you know the risks. In fact, the risks involved in both cases would decrease if they were legalized.

The reason they are illegal is because they are "sin" and even in secular countries, thats why they were illegal initially, and it is hard to change public perception, espcially on things like hookers.

No, you don't.

The reason that drugs are banned is due to their extremely harmful effect on a lot of those who take them, and the fact that a lot of people get into theft to pay for the more addictive and expensive end of drugs.
So why is alcohol still legal? look at the effect of alcohol on it users and then compared it to another mild drug, such as pot. Both can cause damage to the mind, in those already subsetable. Alcohol has been link to varous mouth cancers, as well as liver damage etc while pot has no link to cancer (when used without tobacco) and little body damage. As for getting into theft to pay for it, that only extreme case and the same is true for alcoholics, who will steal for there next hit.

If your answer is yes then how is it that a government agency can tell you what you can and can’t do with it?

If no, then I don’t remember selling it to anyone.
False dilemma.

You’re assuming property rights are the only way of understanding the relationship between our bodyminds, the community and the state.

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution).

There is no legal prostitution in Las Vegas.

There is no legal prostitution in Las Vegas.

Already addressed (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13595325&postcount=48).

So why is alcohol still legal? look at the effect of alcohol on it users and then compared it to another mild drug, such as pot. Both can cause damage to the mind, in those already subsetable. Alcohol has been link to varous mouth cancers, as well as liver damage etc while pot has no link to cancer (when used without tobacco) and little body damage. As for getting into theft to pay for it, that only extreme case and the same is true for alcoholics, who will steal for there next hit.
Because alcohol is so common in society that it is impossible for the nanny state to make it illegal. If it had been invented today and had no previous entrenchment in society then it would be illegal. If pot had been as common as alcohol for as long as alcohol then it would have been legal.

And yes alcohol is worse than pot, LSD and ecstasy.

While posting, I just recalled a leftist argument against prostitution. Using economical power to make someone have sex with you is just as bad as using other kinds of power for that purpose. Asking for sex in exchange for money is no different than asking for sex in exchange for giving a student good grades, promoting a subordinate or prescribing more pills to a patient. Prostitution is an injustice that should not be allowed, yet another way for the rich to exploit their fellow humans.

:rolleyes:


Fine. Neocons and their predecessors who are also moralist nannies...

You realise that saying "moralist nannies" twice doesn't actually make it a better argument, right?

Because alcohol is so common in society that it is impossible for the nanny state to make it illegal...

What do people here have against nannies? My idea of a nanny state is one that feeds you, plays with you, burps you when you're little...a nanny state sounds great.

In the united states using illegal drugs and prostitution are both illegal (excluding Las Vegas and a few other places that allow prostitution). With that being said, do you actually own your own body?
Yes, you own your body

If your answer is yes then how is it that a government agency can tell you what you can and can't do with it?

No government agency can make you obey what it says but if you want to gain the benefits from the government you should be seen to obey the rules.


This also makes me think of ticket scalping laws. I can buy the ticket, but I'm not allowed to resell it? Is there anything else that you can purchase but then after purchasing your still told what you can and can't do with it....

Have you ever read the licensing agreement in the cover of a book, or on a video tape? there speed limits on cars, doseage limits on drugs and now loss of health care if you smoke (at least in England) pretty much everything you buy come with some rule or limitation.

(especially the bullshit Endangered Species Act, which has saved, of 1800 listings, a total of 15 species at horrendous cost -- should have known it was a bust when it was Nixon who signed the bill)

that is just the ones that have been entirely delisted due to recovery. others have improved in listed status, and something on the order of 90% of species have had their populations increase or at least remain stable since listing, while only like 2 species have gone extinct after being listed (some further ones were already extinct when they got listed).

Fixed (not that you'd have automatically known, but folks from Vegas can get tetchy about that point).
You're still a bit off, It would be better to say that prositution is legal in the state of Nevada, excluding Clark and Washoe Counties (Las Vegas and Reno respectively) and Carson City (State capital) with three other counties currently neither permitting or prohibiting.

And yes, we Nevadans can indeed get very touchy about it. :D:p

Do you own your car? You're not allowed to drive above the speed limit in it and you have to have a license to actually use it, not to mention the fact that it has to get certain gas mileage.

Do your own your land? If you can't pay your property taxes they kick you out and in many states, the lawbooks on what you can and can not do with it are 1000 pages long.

Do you own your business? The government can regulate, reregulate, change the tax codes and nationalize you pretty much any time they want, and all you are entitled to is the cost of your assets.

It seems that ownership may be a relative term in any realistic sense. As for prostitution, even if it was legal (which I personally do not think is a bad idea) it would have to be thoroughly regulated to prevent the spread of disease, although one wonders if the prostitution industry might do that voluntarily to increase it's customer base.

Methinks prostitution would quickly become very unionized if it was suddenly made legal. And that would be a good thing.

I rent. *nod*

While posting, I just recalled a leftist argument against prostitution. Using economical power to make someone have sex with you is just as bad as using other kinds of power for that purpose. Asking for sex in exchange for money is no different than asking for sex in exchange for giving a student good grades, promoting a subordinate or prescribing more pills to a patient. Prostitution is an injustice that should not be allowed, yet another way for the rich to exploit their fellow humans.

That's actually a sound argument... not that up until now I had much against Prostitution. But I kind of have something against the plutocratic principle.
Legalizing Prostitution is a slippery slope without actually actively changing our whole society.

But on the other hand making people clean up a dozen people's poo on the toilet for a joke of a payment kind of is following the same principle of plutocratic exploit.

So I conclude that not prostitution is the problem. It is the system of dependency on money and those who can give and deny it to you directly or indirectly.

That's actually a sound argument... not that up until now I had much against Prostitution. But I kind of have something against the plutocratic principle.
Legalizing Prostitution is a slippery slope without actually actively changing our whole society.

But on the other hand making people clean up a dozen people's poo on the toilet for a joke of a payment kind of is following the same principle of plutocratic exploit.

So I conclude that not prostitution is the problem. It is the system of dependency on money and those who can give and deny it to you directly or indirectly.

The prostitute asks for money in exchange for a service (sex). The customer probably does not know her and wouldn't have much reason to give her money aside from the fact that he is paying her for something, that something being sex.

When I was a janitor, I was paid to clean shit from toilets. I would not say that was the same as say, a professor demanding that I clean her/his toilets for good grades. Cleaning shit from toilets is fairly demeaning. But there weren't many jobs out there. I applied at dozens of places for dozens of different positions. The janitorial work one was the only place that even gave me an interview. I got money in exchange for a service (cleaning toilets and picking up garbage). The service rendered was gross, extremely distasteful and degrading. But having money was better than having no money.

I don't view prostitution as much different.

In some places attempted suicide is indeed illegal.

Which is silly.

The prostitute asks for money in exchange for a service (sex). The customer probably does not know her and wouldn't have much reason to give her money aside from the fact that he is paying her for something, that something being sex.

When I was a janitor, I was paid to clean shit from toilets. I would not say that was the same as say, a professor demanding that I clean her/his toilets for good grades. Cleaning shit from toilets is fairly demeaning. But there weren't many jobs out there. I applied at dozens of places for dozens of different positions. The janitorial work one was the only place that even gave me an interview. I got money in exchange for a service (cleaning toilets and picking up garbage). The service rendered was gross, extremely distasteful and degrading. But having money was better than having no money.

I don't view prostitution as much different.

You just admitted that only the plutocratic imperative has forced you to take that job. It's not much different for prostitution.
It's the fact that those with money can dictate those who don't have money, for the mere reason that without that those without money taking any job for any condition, they would starve.

It is not much different than any other situation in which someone holds the power of granting or withdrawing something substantial from you.

You just admitted that only the plutocratic imperative has forced you to take that job. It's not much different for prostitution.
It's the fact that those with money can dictate those who don't have money, for the mere reason that without that those without money taking any job for any condition, they would starve.

It is not much different than any other situation in which someone holds the power of granting or withdrawing something substantial from you.

So you're agreeing with me then?

........ That depends on what exactly you're saying <.< >.>

........ That depends on what exactly you're saying <.< >.>

Basically I don't think prostitution should be illegal. Perhaps it is degrading. But so are a lot of other shitty jobs that in essence it isn't really any different from. When you're doing work that you don't really give a shit about, you're basically renting out parts of yourself, the use of your body. In my friend's case, KFC pays him for the use of his hands and a small portion of his brain. In a prostitute's case, customers pay her (or sometimes him), for the use of the genitalia and erogenous zones and general exterior. In both cases, the working person has a shitty job that isn't fulfilling and that they only took because it would get them m and oftentimes there weren't many opportunities in other lines of workoney when they had none, and in both cases, there may not have been many options available to them to get money that they could then use to put food on the table/put themselves through school/etc. The choice given to both may have been basically "do this unrewarding work or have no money."

Basically I don't think prostitution should be illegal. Perhaps it is degrading. But so are a lot of other shitty jobs that in essence it isn't really any different from. When you're doing work that you don't really give a shit about, you're basically renting out parts of yourself, the use of your body. In my friend's case, KFC pays him for the use of his hands and a small portion of his brain. In a prostitute's case, customers pay her (or sometimes him), for the use of the genitalia and erogenous zones and general exterior. In both cases, the working person has a shitty job that isn't fulfilling and that they only took because it would get them m and oftentimes there weren't many opportunities in other lines of workoney when they had none, and in both cases, there may not have been many options available to them to get money that they could then use to put food on the table/put themselves through school/etc. The choice given to both may have been basically "do this unrewarding work or have no money."

Hm, I kind of agree with you, prostitution shouldn't be illegal.
But on the other end, I think the circumstances which force people to give up their dignity like that are unbearable and need urgent fixation.
Without the capitalistic pressure it would be much easier to find either decent jobs or decent compensation and circumstances.

I own my brain, my body is made up of the food and liquids i take in, therefore my body is owned by the food companies, my brain is owned by me, just another little fish in the stinking pond of life, where the scum float to the surface.

I own my brain, my body is made up of the food and liquids i take in, therefore my body is owned by the food companies, my brain is owned by me, just another little fish in the stinking pond of life, where the scum float to the surface.

Your body is only owned by food companies of you didn't pay for what you ate. Unless you're just kidding, which it seems I can't distinguish anymore. In which case, ignore this.

I own my brain, my body is made up of the food and liquids i take in, therefore my body is owned by the food companies, my brain is owned by me, just another little fish in the stinking pond of life, where the scum float to the surface.

Bullshit! You're a squatter! Get the hell out of that body before I have you evicted! :mad:

Your body is only owned by food companies of you didn't pay for what you ate. Unless you're just kidding, which it seems I can't distinguish anymore. In which case, ignore this.
Actually, my body would be more under my control if i didn't pay for what i ate.
I reality i do pay for what i eat, typically from big companies, therefore they own my body.
(I tend to load my statements with a sensible part, and a part nonsensical, you were right to judge it as a true statement from me.)
Bullshit! You're a squatter! Get the hell out of that body before I have you evicted! :mad:
i ain't going nowhere buddy.
*sits in body, looking malevolent*

i ain't going nowhere buddy.
*sits in body, looking malevolent*

Sit eh? Pretty roomy body you got over there

Sit eh? Pretty roomy body you got over there

eh?
My brain is alot smaller than my body, so if it decides to sit in my body then it can do so with ease, as should most folks heads (in their own bodies).
God get your facts straight.:rolleyes:
:p

Methinks prostitution would quickly become very unionized if it was suddenly made legal. And that would be a good thing.

True, here in The Netherlands there's a union for it, and it sure helps a lot. And the prostitutes themselves want the age limit to go from 18 to 21.

I'm not entirely sure wether it's really perfectly legal, or the government turns a blind eye... I do know that they do their best to find any and all illigal girls and boys, and give them a better life. Most of those are from other, poorer countries, btw.

...

Why do I know so much about that anyway? >.>"

Why do I know so much about that anyway? >.>"

Are you inviting us to take guesses?


If so, then I'm going to go with:

You're a prostitute.

If not, then I'm going to go with:

You frequent brothels a lot.

;)