toldailytopic: Now that homosexuality has become socially and legally acceptable what

[bybee]

What about the freedom to exploit your own weakness?



Yes. Then again, I'm an NFL fan, so you're probably asking the wrong guy.



One man's torture is another man's tryst. How are we defining consensual torture? Vanilla S&M? Hardcore BDSM?



When there's consent involved, and when such actions don't threaten the public welfare, I find it hard to object in good conscience.



Illegal prostitution certainly is and can be. Legalized prostitution is not, as far as I can see. It's a transaction, ideally with some pleasure involved.



Legalization prevents both of these outcomes. Try walking out of a Nevada brothel without paying up. I doubt you'd make it very far.

I recommend not walking in there at all!

 

[Granite]

What about it? Do you think there is ever a point at which other people must step in? Is the self-destructive insanity of an addiction or an obsession really a 'choice'?

No, which is why I'd support intervention in such a situation.

Is schizophrenia?

See above.

If I am allowed to drink myself to death with alcohol, should I be allowed to drink myself to death with Drano? Would I be any less insane in doing that than the people we institutionalize for other forms of insanity?

Good questions but not quite what I was going for. On alcohol and Drano: one's a product that is perfectly safe (and even healthy) in moderation, while Drano obviously is not. So barring a nanny state that monitors all consumption, the risk of citizens drinking themselves to death through legal means is an unfortunate side effect of a free society.

I'm asking because I think we do need to make distinctions, here, based on some reasonable propositions. I believe strongly in individual freedom, but I do not believe that such freedom is absolute.

Clearly. Where we differ is on the limitations of such freedom. I'm willing to step forward two or three extra steps, you're not. That's not insurmountable, per se, and I'd even venture to say that a society that doesn't need, ask for, or want prostitution may be healthier than one that does.

One obvious limitation is when our freedom effects others. But what about when we endanger, hurt, and permanently harm ourselves? Good questions. But don't you think there must be SOME sort of limitation to the abuse of other human beings we could coerce?

Absolutely. But consent is not the same as coercion.

So it is a matter of conscience, then? But if defending personal freedom (for ourselves and others) is a matter of conscience, and protecting other human beings from abuse and exploitation is also a matter of conscience, how do you/we weight the one against the other?

For me, yet again, as always, it comes down to consent. Would you consider indulging an extreme body modificationist abuse or exploitation? What of a masochist?

I don't understand why you differentiate between legal and illegal prostitution. Why is one any different from another when both are consensual?

PureX, I don't think you're so dull as to not recognize the difference between a well-regulated, sanitized, and health-conscious industry and a butch of hookers getting beat on by a pimp. Come on. Be an adult here.

 

[IMJerusha]

I recommend not walking in there at all!

:chuckle: Nevada, as a whole, gives me the heebie-jeebies! (no offense Brother Vegas!)

 

[bybee]

No, which is why I'd support intervention in such a situation.



See above.



Good questions but not quite what I was going for. On alcohol and Drano: one's a product that is perfectly safe (and even healthy) in moderation, while Drano obviously is not. So barring a nanny state that monitors all consumption, the risk of citizens drinking themselves to death through legal means is an unfortunate side effect of a free society.



Clearly. Where we differ is on the limitations of such freedom. I'm willing to step forward two or three extra steps, you're not. That's not insurmountable, per se, and I'd even venture to say that a society that doesn't need, ask for, or want prostitution may be healthier than one that does.



Absolutely. But consent is not the same as coercion.



For me, yet again, as always, it comes down to consent. Would you consider indulging an extreme body modificationist abuse or exploitation? What of a masochist?



PureX, I don't think you're so dull as to not recognize the difference between a well-regulated, sanitized, and health-conscious industry and a butch of hookers getting beat on by a pimp. Come on. Be an adult here.

Or a bunch of Johns lined up to get service.... :vomit:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Or a bunch of Johns lined up to get service.... :vomit:

yes, and that certainly isnt harmful to more than just the chosen lifestyle hooker and the john. What about the hookers who service the married "johns" - they harm the family of that man too.

There is no such thing as sin that hurts no one.

 

[PureX]

But consent is not the same as coercion.

I think that this is where we disagree. I believe that our consent is very often being coerced in one way or another. Meaning that we very often consent to do things that we don't want to do, and that are not in our best interest, against our own will and in favor of the will of others. We also very often don't know what's in our own best interest and so consent to things that are not in our own best interest thinking that they are. Which is why human behavior needs to be regulated, to some degree. This is why I can't accept consent, alone, as the deciding factor in whether we as a society should allow certain behaviors or not.

For me, yet again, as always, it comes down to consent. Would you consider indulging an extreme body modificationist abuse or exploitation? What of a masochist?

The line is probably not going to be found in the type of behavior but in the degree of damage it does to individuals and/or society. And I agree that this is often difficult to assess. And even more difficult to quantify in a collective way. But I don't find the alternative, of doing nothing, any more reasonable or palatable.

PureX, I don't think you're so dull as to not recognize the difference between a well-regulated, sanitized, and health-conscious industry and a butch of hookers getting beat on by a pimp. Come on. Be an adult here.

But legalizing prostitution and setting up a "well-regulated, sanitized, and health-conscious industry" are not exactly the same thing. You're talking about making it provisionally legal with lots of restrictions to minimize the damage and coercion. But at that point, why legalize it at all? Is it that crucial to society? Is it that crucial an individual choice? I guess maybe it is for some people.

The vast majority of prostitution is not of the type you envision. And the type you envision will not address the problem of the more common version of prostitution. Yet when we legalize and envision the "Disney" version of prostitution like they have in Nevada, we give people an invitation to ignore and even legitimize in their minds that other version of prostitution, that deadly version that is terrible for almost everyone involved, and is clearly harmful to individuals and to society. And I just don't believe that the Disney version is so necessary that it's worth encouraging the other.

 

[Granite]

I think that this is where we disagree. I believe that our consent is very often being coerced in one way or another. Meaning that we very often consent to do things that we don't want to do, and that are not in our best interest, against our own will and in favor of the will of others.

Then I wouldn't consider that "true" consent, i.e., consent given of true free will. If coercion's applied there's not much (if any choice) involved, which is really what this boils down to. You can "consent" to paying the Mob protection in return for them not trashing your store, but I wouldn't consider that bona fide consent--it's coercion, plain and simple.

We also very often don't know what's in our own best interest and so consent to things that are not in our own best interest thinking that they are.

Well, sure. Such is the human condition. We're full of folly.

Which is why human behavior needs to be regulated, to some degree. This is why I can't accept consent, alone, as the deciding factor in whether we as a society should allow certain behaviors or not.

The bottomline is that you're less willing than myself to trust people to make their own choices, even if they are personally self-destructive. If a decision is made freely, and even if it doesn't benefit society at large or even the individual, I'd be reluctant to prohibit, or restrict it--unless it endangers the public.

The line is probably not going to be found in the type of behavior but in the degree of damage it does to individuals and/or society. And I agree that this is often difficult to assess. And even more difficult to quantify in a collective way. But I don't find the alternative, of doing nothing, any more reasonable or palatable.

I don't necessarily propose doing nothing; when it comes to prostitution, I think following the Reno model, or what we see in Europe (or even Israel), is probably the best way to go about it. There is a time and place for regulations, if only to ensure the safety and health of the public. I wouldn't, for example, feel comfortable with any old yahoo hanging a shingle advertising plastic surgery or tattooing because of the public health risks involved, which ultimately could lead to an increased burden for the public at large.

But legalizing prostitution and setting up a "well-regulated, sanitized, and health-conscious industry" are not exactly the same thing. You're talking about making it provisionally legal with lots of restrictions to minimize the damage and coercion.

Correct. And ideally, to eliminate damages and coercion.

But at that point, why legalize it at all? Is it that crucial to society? Is it that crucial an individual choice? I guess maybe it is for some people.

No vice is crucial for the survival of a society, although they certainly help take the edge off. Cherrypicking this particular indulgence strikes me as arbitrary and even a little prudish.