toldailytopic: Should prostitution be universally legalized?

[Charity]

hehe the goverments reputation treads carefull while missing out on tax money!!
Running things healthy is better than being at risk of being infected on the spare of the moment.....

there are positives an negitives an personal freedom on both sides, rules were made to protect...safty in morals.

 

[Quincy]

I say no it shouldn't be but then again I'd make alot of things illegal given the opportunity.

 

[Nick M]

why doesn't the supreme court rule all laws against prostitution unconstitutional?

Because the court has a Republican appointed majority.

 

[Nick M]

I don't necessarily disagree on all points, but you do realize going to the movies was once considered a chief among vices in America, right?

That doesn't make movies immoral, nor does having prostituion illegal make it immoral. Being immoral is what makes it immoral.

 

[Traditio]

1. Lol at Lighthouse.

2. I find myself divided on the matter:

On the one hand, I find myself wondering whether or not a woman should be imprisoned for prostitution. Does the prostitute infringe against anyone's life, liberty, or property? Well, it doesn't seem like it. Therefore, it ought not be illegal.

On the other hand, suppose that it were legal. Many problems follow:

a. If prostitution is legal, then either it will be taxed or exempt from taxation. If prostitution is tax exempt, then the government gives the appearance of endorsing prostitution. If prostitution is taxed, then that's even worse, because that means that public funds are coming from prostitution.

b. If prostitution is legal, then that means that there can be a prostitution business contract, precisely in the same way that I can enter into a contract with someone to buy his car. That means that courts would have to compel buyers of prostitutes to pay up, and likewise, to compel prostitutes either to make good on their offers or give a refund. The thought of a prostitution-related civil action being heard in court strikes me as ridiculous.

c. Related to b, if prostitution is legal, then that means that sexuality becomes a viable part of a business relationship. We see something like this in the case of abortion. Since abortion is legal, health care providers (except in certain cases) are expected to provide them at least in certain cases. Thus, if a nurse refuses to aid in performing an abortion, there's a good chance that she can be fired. Well...if sex becomes an acceptable part of a business contract, then that means that employers can require it as a condition of employment. This means that if hot secretary x refuses to give into her employer's sexual advances, she can be fired. This also means that some very serious hiring discrimination could occur. If the employer is a single man who, in addition to wanting a secretary, wants some sex on the side...I'm not getting that job.

d. I'm seeing problems with respect to offspring. If I were to buy a prostitute, have sex with her, and get her pregnant...well...what would be the legal ramifications? Would I have to pay child support? Would I be responsible for the well being of the child? When you add the fact that, not only I, but several other men (and possibly women) bought that prostitute in the same time frame that the prostitute conceived the child, things become even more legally bizarre.

There are, I am sure, many, many other legal problems, but these are the ones that immediately come to mind.

 

[Rusha]

Sure. Above eighteen, and keep everyone healthy.

Legalize it, regulate it, tax the ever-loving snot out of it.

That about covers it.

 

[nicholsmom]

1. Lol at Lighthouse.

2. I find myself divided on the matter:

On the one hand, I find myself wondering whether or not a woman should be imprisoned for prostitution. Does the prostitute infringe against anyone's life, liberty, or property? Well, it doesn't seem like it. Therefore, it ought not be illegal.

On the other hand, suppose that it were legal. Many problems follow:

a. If prostitution is legal, then either it will be taxed or exempt from taxation. If prostitution is tax exempt, then the government gives the appearance of endorsing prostitution. If prostitution is taxed, then that's even worse, because that means that public funds are coming from prostitution.

b. If prostitution is legal, then that means that there can be a prostitution business contract, precisely in the same way that I can enter into a contract with someone to buy his car. That means that courts would have to compel buyers of prostitutes to pay up, and likewise, to compel prostitutes either to make good on their offers or give a refund. The thought of a prostitution-related civil action being heard in court strikes me as ridiculous.

c. Related to b, if prostitution is legal, then that means that sexuality becomes a viable part of a business relationship. We see something like this in the case of abortion. Since abortion is legal, health care providers (except in certain cases) are expected to provide them at least in certain cases. Thus, if a nurse refuses to aid in performing an abortion, there's a good chance that she can be fired. Well...if sex becomes an acceptable part of a business contract, then that means that employers can require it as a condition of employment. This means that if hot secretary x refuses to give into her employer's sexual advances, she can be fired. This also means that some very serious hiring discrimination could occur. If the employer is a single man who, in addition to wanting a secretary, wants some sex on the side...I'm not getting that job.

d. I'm seeing problems with respect to offspring. If I were to buy a prostitute, have sex with her, and get her pregnant...well...what would be the legal ramifications? Would I have to pay child support? Would I be responsible for the well being of the child? When you add the fact that, not only I, but several other men (and possibly women) bought that prostitute in the same time frame that the prostitute conceived the child, things become even more legally bizarre.

There are, I am sure, many, many other legal problems, but these are the ones that immediately come to mind.

:rotfl:
No knee-jerk reaction there - lotsa thought in this one :chuckle:

 

[Newman]

1. Lol at Lighthouse.

2. I find myself divided on the matter:

On the one hand, I find myself wondering whether or not a woman should be imprisoned for prostitution. Does the prostitute infringe against anyone's life, liberty, or property? Well, it doesn't seem like it. Therefore, it ought not be illegal.

On the other hand, suppose that it were legal. Many problems follow:

a. If prostitution is legal, then either it will be taxed or exempt from taxation. If prostitution is tax exempt, then the government gives the appearance of endorsing prostitution. If prostitution is taxed, then that's even worse, because that means that public funds are coming from prostitution.

b. If prostitution is legal, then that means that there can be a prostitution business contract, precisely in the same way that I can enter into a contract with someone to buy his car. That means that courts would have to compel buyers of prostitutes to pay up, and likewise, to compel prostitutes either to make good on their offers or give a refund. The thought of a prostitution-related civil action being heard in court strikes me as ridiculous.

c. Related to b, if prostitution is legal, then that means that sexuality becomes a viable part of a business relationship. We see something like this in the case of abortion. Since abortion is legal, health care providers (except in certain cases) are expected to provide them at least in certain cases. Thus, if a nurse refuses to aid in performing an abortion, there's a good chance that she can be fired. Well...if sex becomes an acceptable part of a business contract, then that means that employers can require it as a condition of employment. This means that if hot secretary x refuses to give into her employer's sexual advances, she can be fired. This also means that some very serious hiring discrimination could occur. If the employer is a single man who, in addition to wanting a secretary, wants some sex on the side...I'm not getting that job.

d. I'm seeing problems with respect to offspring. If I were to buy a prostitute, have sex with her, and get her pregnant...well...what would be the legal ramifications? Would I have to pay child support? Would I be responsible for the well being of the child? When you add the fact that, not only I, but several other men (and possibly women) bought that prostitute in the same time frame that the prostitute conceived the child, things become even more legally bizarre.

There are, I am sure, many, many other legal problems, but these are the ones that immediately come to mind.

Those legal issues are easily resolved through contracts upon which two parties voluntarily agree.

On tax exemption as endorsement: it's sad that in today's word, when something isn't taxed, it's viewed as a special endorsement for whatever good or service. I dream of a world in which even a minimal tax on something is viewed just as special, if not more preposterous than, the way we view non-taxed items today.

 

[Traditio]

Those legal issues are easily resolved through contracts upon which two parties voluntarily agree.

If they're easily resolved, then resolve them for me. Because, this is how I'm envisioning it. Prostitution becomes legal. The government says: "Yes, yes. You can sell your body for money." Well...ok. I'm now envisioning a whole bunch of bosses saying to their employees (especially secretaries, married or not): "Weeeeeeeeell. It's time to renegotiate the conditions of your employment!"

 

[Newman]

If they're easily resolved, then resolve them for me. Because, this is how I'm envisioning it. Prostitution becomes legal. The government says: "Yes, yes. You can sell your body for money." Well...ok. I'm now envisioning a whole bunch of bosses saying to their employees (especially secretaries, married or not): "Weeeeeeeeell. It's time to renegotiate the conditions of your employment!"

First of all, I don't think that this would happen.

Secondly, if it did, those poor helpless secretaries could just quit upon the instance of a "renegotiation" of their employment.

 

[Traditio]

First of all, I don't think that this would happen.

Yes, because employers have never used their position to gain a sexual advantage over their employees.

Secondly, if it did, those poor helpless secretaries could just quit upon the instance of a "renegotiation" of their employment.

If prostitution is legal, then all positions of employment carry the risk of "renogotiation."

I mean, suppose we were talking about minimum wage laws. I argue: "If you take away minimum wage laws, then a whole bunch of people are going to have their conditions of employment renegotiated." Of course, you could say: "Yeah, I don't think that would happen, and even if it did, they could just quit." But if there are no minimum wage laws...

Again, suppose we were talking about child labor laws. I argue: "If you take away child labor laws, then a whole bunch of people are going to get replaced by cheap, cheap child labor." Would you answer: "Oh, that'd never happen, and even if it did, they could just get a job elsewhere"? Well...no...as a matter of fact, that did happen in America (before child labor laws), and it happens all over the world.

 

[aSeattleConserv]

When pondering what the state should do, I think about whether or not individuals should do it. The state is made up of people (individuals), and just having a name tag that says "government" doesn't give anyone authority to do anything to anyone unless they could also legitimately do it without the name tag, i.e., as a private citizen.

So, to those that answered "no, prostitution should not be legalized", may I ask if you would personally beat down the doors of a firm that sells sex that refuses to shut down and either shoot or jail the people you think are committing the "criminal" act?

If you answered my question affirmatively, I would ask yet another question: on what grounds or what authority can you legitimately trespass, murder, cage, and steal from people that are doing something you don't like?

Ah, the Libertarian comes out of the woodwork to defend one of his Party's pet projects (we're not talking about the legalization of drugs this time, it's the legalization of prostitution).

So tell me Mr. "Christian" Libertarian, where does the Bible stand on out of wedlock sex?

From a secular viewpoint, tell us about the amount of criminal activity (drugs, assault, robbery) that goes with the prostitution lifestyle. How about the dissolution of the family unit? How many broken homes are due to prostitution? How many women (and children) are forced into the immoral lifestyle? How about those that aren't satisfied with government run prostitution and want some "illegal action"?

Stick with the laws of God as seen in Scripture. They're 100% reliable and a lot less complicated.

 

[Granite]

Awwww, Granite ... you make me sound so unreasonable, so controlling...

No, sweet of heart. But you do! All by yourself! (I still like you anyway though.)

I could draw a line in the sand for you, if you like: this far and no farther - legally. But I'm thinking that that line is one for communities to decide, rather than personal preference. So I figure, let the states decide individually, and if a state allows it by omitting it from the crimes listed in its code, then let individual communities decide within that state.

Ahhhh. So whoring, if decided state-wide, would be cool in your book. Why do I suspect you'd be up in the face of everyone to overturn the state referendum that just legalized prostitution???

As for me, I will always vote in my state and community the way I did with the lottery in Indiana - NO! Heck no! Do not legalize it. I will vote my conscience, and you vote yours. We will affect only our own communities where we really ought to have influence, don't you think?

No lotteries in Indy? What do you people doooooooo in that state, anyway? No lottery, no baseball?:hammer:

 

[Newman]

If prostitution is legal, then all positions of employment carry the risk of "renogotiation."

Exactly. Even while prostitution is illegal, all labor/wage agreements have renegotiation potential.

Back massages are legal. You don't see those in employer-employee contracts. I mean, it would be preposterous for back massages to be included in those types of hiring situations! Nobody would work for somebody that would include something like that. It'd be too weird. So they'd find employment somewhere else or wait til the employer realizes how few employees he's getting with the current back massage contract and takes the stipulation out.

 

[Traditio]

Exactly. Even while prostitution is illegal, all labor/wage agreements have renegotiation potential.

Unless there are laws in place. This is why I'm not a libertarian.

Back massages are legal. You don't see those in employer-employee contracts. I mean, it would be preposterous for back massages to be included in those types of hiring situations!

That falls under "sexual harrassment." As a matter of fact, there are laws against that.

Nobody would work for somebody that would include something like that. It'd be too weird. So they'd find employment somewhere else or wait til the employer realizes how few employees he's getting with the current back massage contract and takes the stipulation out.

Unless the demand among employers were so widespread that it were hard to find a job without the stipulation. This is why I like regulations/laws.

 

[Newman]

Ah, the Libertarian comes out of the woodwork

I posted on this thread (multiple times) before you did. I believe you are the one coming out of the "woodwork".

to defend one of his Party's pet projects

I don't belong to a political party. I'm not associated with a political party. I don't like political parties. I've never voted for anyone because of their political party. I've never even voted for anybody in the Libertarian Party.

(we're not talking about the legalization of drugs this time, it's the legalization of prostitution).

No kidding, Sherlock.

So tell me Mr. "Christian" Libertarian, where does the Bible stand on out of wedlock sex?

It's sinful. Abominable. People who do it deserve death, along with any other sin they have committed in their actions or thoughts.

From a secular viewpoint, tell us about the amount of criminal activity (drugs, assault, robbery) that goes with the prostitution lifestyle.

I'm not much of an expert on it. All I really know about it is what I saw in Taken. Oh, what a great movie. It seems like the government was a huge hindrance to the cause of justice in that movie, too.

I don't think I've ever even seen a prostitute before in my life, though, so I can't say.

How about the dissolution of the family unit?

I'm sure it hurts families big time.

How many broken homes are due to prostitution?
How many women (and children) are forced into the immoral lifestyle?
How about those that aren't satisfied with government run prostitution and want some "illegal action"?

I give up. How many?

Stick with the laws of God as seen in Scripture. They're 100% reliable and a lot less complicated.

Amen.


Uh, Seattle, would you do me a favor and respond to what I wrote? As in actually answering the questions? That is how these things usually work.

 

[OMEGA]

Granite,

It is obvious that you are not STRIVING to Purify your Mind.

----------------------------------------
Titus 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

James 4:8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.
---------------------------------

1 Timothy 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Revelation 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

 

[Dena]

I am opposed to this on the same grounds that I am opposed to any vise being legalized - it validates and legitimizes the act, making it no longer a vice, but a simple activity like going to the movies or bowling. Which visiting a prostitute is not :nono:

No, it doesn't. And yes, I say legalize.

 

[nicholsmom]

No, sweet of heart. But you do! All by yourself! (I still like you anyway though.)

Ah well... I am a mother after all

Ahhhh. So whoring, if decided state-wide, would be cool in your book. Why do I suspect you'd be up in the face of everyone to overturn the state referendum that just legalized prostitution???

Yep. It's my right, right?

No lotteries in Indy? What do you people doooooooo in that state, anyway? No lottery, no baseball?:hammer:

Oh no. I was among the few who voted against it :sigh: So we do have a lottery and a casino and riverboat casinos and a horse track (or working toward it). So I was right to vote against an innocent lottery on the premise that it opens the gate for the horses to trot right on in with all the rest.

But no, I'm not in everyone's face working on a repeal. I'm just grumbling here at home, raising my kids the best I can, getting to the ballot box every opportunity - that sort of thing

 

[Lighthouse]

There is a lottery in Indiana. And a horse track/casino [right here in my hometown]. There is also a riverboat casino.