Prostitution

[Keef]

What I meant by forcing them to work would be like being late to a normal job. You'd get in trouble. If you were late to your prostitution job or felt like skipping a day it would be indirectly forcing them to work. The girls might slang some lawsuits at their employer for not being "sensitive" enough. I can't think of what category it would fit into right now. It could be some sort of tort. Maybe Conversion, the body is the ho's personal property, maybe Negligence, the girl could say that the employer violated the Duty of Care or Breach of Duty sections of Negligence. Negligence is the failure to exercise the degree of care that a "reasonable" person would have, after all.
I don't know if owners would think about letting the hos of work whenever they felt like it, for personal reasons.

 

[a6m5]

If you see where they're coming from, how can you say "no". How have you decided that it's your place to decide whether others are allowed to engage in conseuntual sex?

I don't know if it's "my" place to decide, I think it's more like "our" place to decide. Prostitution is not widely accepted in our society for obvious reasons. I have absolutely nothing against people engaging in consensual sex. People selling/buying bodies for sex is whole another matter. I hope that industry such as this stays small, and in the dark. If you are worried about getting STDs, maybe you shouldn't be sleeping with prostitues.

 

[Danoff]

I don't know if it's "my" place to decide, I think it's more like "our" place to decide. Prostitution is not widely accepted in our society for obvious reasons. I have absolutely nothing against people engaging in consensual sex. People selling/buying bodies for sex is whole another matter. I hope that industry such as this stays small, and in the dark. If you are worried about getting STDs, maybe you shouldn't be sleeping with prostitues.

Prostitution IS consentual sex. So how can you say that it's a different matter than consentual sex? And what are these obvious reasons that our society has not generally accepted prostitution? And why do you think it's society's place to say whether or not people can engage in consentual sex?

What I meant by forcing them to work would be like being late to a normal job. You'd get in trouble. If you were late to your prostitution job or felt like skipping a day it would be indirectly forcing them to work.

If that was important to the girls, the employer that offers flexible schedules is the one that's going to get the best girls / most business. No problem there.

 

[Appie]

look you guys
i live in Amsterdam, The Netherlands

and the whore suck and i never ever been to one and never will be:tup:

 

[h0ss]

Prostitution IS consentual sex. So how can you say that it's a different matter than consentual sex? And what are these obvious reasons that our society has not generally accepted prostitution? And why do you think it's society's place to say whether or not people can engage in consentual sex?

In some cases it's consentual.

Most troubling to me about the issue is the level of human slave trafficing that goes into feeding the prostitution 'industry' in many countries. Even in the US, many women are unable to break off a 'business relationship' because of fear for their safety.

Hopefully, legalization would provide a way to prevent these abusive forms from taking hold.

 

[Danoff]

In some cases it's consentual.

Most troubling to me about the issue is the level of human slave trafficing that goes into feeding the prostitution 'industry' in many countries. Even in the US, many women are unable to break off a 'business relationship' because of fear for their safety.

Hopefully, legalization would provide a way to prevent these abusive forms from taking hold.

If it isn't consentual then it's rape and it's already illegal. It's a terrible thing if there are women out there who work as prostitutes because they fear for their safety if they chose not stop - but that kind of thing is and always will be illegal. The examples you give I wouldn't even consider prostution. Here's how I'd define it:

1) Woman is forced to have sex = Rape (not prostitution)
2) Woman agrees to have sex because she fears for her safety = Rape (not prostitution)
3) Woman (or man) freely agrees to have sex because she's getting paid = Prostitution

 

[a6m5]

Prostitution IS consentual sex. So how can you say that it's a different matter than consentual sex?

I hit it off with a girl I like, eventually sleeping with her. That's consensual(I think it's spelled this way.....) sex. Prostitues making a living, sleeping with men to put food on the table is little more than that.

And what are these obvious reasons that our society has not generally accepted prostitution?

Oh, man. I'm just gonna list a couple of my personal reasons:

1)You don't want your kids, siblings, etc. to become one.

2)Many people are poor. Legalization of prostitution will drive some of these poor, struggling people to sell their bodies for sex. I don't want some kids' mom selling her body, so she can make ends meet, payoff bad debt.

3)It will destroy families. Just like reason #2, legalization will drive people on the purchasing end also. Husband, wife having sex on the side with prostitues will not be good for marriage/relationship.

I know that you are going to say something along lines of "Nobody's putting a gun to their head". People are not perfect. We shouldn't over eat, but we do. We shouldn't smoke, do drugs.... Sex is very addictive. Mentally and phsically. Not everyone's going to be able to keep their discipline in check, once it is perfectly OK by law to go buy sex.

And why do you think it's society's place to say whether or not people can engage in consentual sex?

Democracy.

 

[Danoff]

I hit it off with a girl I like, eventually sleeping with her. That's consensual(I think it's spelled this way.....) sex. Prostitues making a living, sleeping with men to put food on the table is little more than that.

Nope. It isn't really any more than that. It's probably less than that actually. What about the exchange of money fundamentally changes the situation (other than the fact that it makes it clear there isn't any emotional attachment)?

Oh, man. I'm just gonna list a couple of my personal reasons:

1)You don't want your kids, siblings, etc. to become one.

I don't want my kids/siblings to become a race car driver, football player, or sky diver either. I wouldn't want them to become janitors or hold any number of ****ty jobs. That doesn't justify making those things illegal.

2)Many people are poor. Legalization of prostitution will drive some of these poor, struggling people to sell their bodies for sex. I don't want some kids' mom selling her body, so she can make ends meet, payoff bad debt.

So you'd just rather they didn't have the option? If they have the option and decide it's worth it, who are you to tell them it isn't? It isn't your body, your life, or your debt.

3)It will destroy families. Just like reason #2, legalization will drive people on the purchasing end also. Husband, wife having sex on the side with prostitues will not be good for marriage/relationship.

So?

I know that you are going to say something along lines of "Nobody's putting a gun to their head".

People are not perfect. We shouldn't over eat, but we do. We shouldn't smoke, do drugs.... Sex is very addictive. Mentally and phsically. Not everyone's going to be able to keep their discipline in check, once it is perfectly OK by law to go buy sex.

So should we make over eating and smoking illegal as well? Who are you that you think you get to dictate how people live? Oh, I guess you answered that below.

Democracy.

Tyranny of the majority eh? So if tomorrow everyone voted in favor of a law declaring jewish people to be a problem to society and dictating that they be put into forced labor camps and/or systematically slaughtered - you'd think that it was right? If everyone votes for something awful does that make it ok? In America we have rights, rights that no majority of voters can take away. That's a fundamental building block of American society and one that it seems you know nothing about.

 

[Poverty]

Prostitutes call for ban on GTA

Sex workers cry foul, say game "accrues points to players for the depiction of rape and murder of prostitutes."
The Grand Theft Auto franchise is getting attacked from all angles. Joining the ranks of politicians, policemen, and attorneys in their crusade to see the game lifted from shelves are the nation's sex workers. On its Web site, the Sex Workers Outreach Project USA is asking parents to assist them in calling for a ban of Take-Two Interactive's controversial game.

Citing a 2001 document from the National Institute on Media and the Family's David Walsh, SWOP is calling "on all parents and all gamers to boycott Grand Theft Auto."

The organization quotes various points from Walsh's paper, including, "Children are more likely to imitate a character with whom they identify with. In violent video games the player is often required to take the point of view of the shooter or perpetrator."

Though the organization admits to being "adamantly opposed to any and all forms of censorship," as concerned parents themselves, they "wish to inform other parents of the potential danger extremely violent video games pose to children." Likewise, in the interest of promoting the rights of sex workers, the organization is opposed to the depiction of the rape and murder of prostitutes.

In the games, players can solicit "services" from prostitutes by driving their cars slowly near them. No sexual acts are in clear visible view, but during the "transaction," the player regains health and loses money. Though the player cannot actively rape prostitutes in the game, a possible rape is alluded to once during the storyline of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. The prostitutes, like every other character, are also subject to homicide at the hands of the protagonist.

According to its Web site, SWOP USA is an organization dedicated to improving the lives of sex-industry workers and to the promotion of a safe working environment for the industry.

By Tim Surette -- GameSpot
Posted Feb 14, 2006 3:48 pm PT

The prozzies have a union. I think they just shot themselves in the foot. I just think they want some respect for what they do and for their trade

 

[Keef]

I hit it off with a girl I like, eventually sleeping with her. That's consensual(I think it's spelled this way.....) sex. Prostitues making a living, sleeping with men to put food on the table is little more than that.

Say you have sex with your girlfriend or wife or gay lover. "Hey babe, ya wanna do it?"
"I'd love to, honey"
You know the bit. Anyway, that's consensual, and I'm sure you'd agree. Now, to mix it up a little, say you throw a few bucks down on your girlfriend's stomach when you're "done with her." Does that automatically make her a prostitute? What if she keeps that money and spends it later? Is she now a whore because she made money off the act? Imagine prostitution, not rape, like Danoff said, as being a dude and his girl doing it and then him throwing some money at her, just for the hell of it. I really don't see a difference. She wants sex, she gets a load on her face, she deserves a little compensation.
You should try it with your wife/girlfriend, I think she'd dig it. It would be something different.

Many people are poor. Legalization of prostitution will drive some of these poor, struggling people to sell their bodies for sex. I don't want some kids' mom selling her body, so she can make ends meet, payoff bad debt.

I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but I figure that about 99.9% of people that really want to be prostitutes will do it wether it's legal or not. Conversly, around 99% of people who are poor and aren't already prostitutes aren't going to resort to prostitution no matter how low they get in life, for moral reasons.
A whore is a whore, wether it's legal or not. There aren't many girls waiting until the government legalizes it to become a prostitute.
I know a few chicks that sleep around and don't get paid for it, because they know whoring it up is illegal, but why can't they get paid and just say "He's my boyfriend, we were just spicing things up a little." Does the government have a set number of guys a woman can role play with before she becomes a prostitute? I find that unlikely.
Like I said before, she wants one thing, she gets something a little different, she deserves an apology. In money form. She asked for it, she got it, Toyota. Now give her a BMW.

 

[a6m5]

Nope. It isn't really any more than that. It's probably less than that actually. What about the exchange of money fundamentally changes the situation (other than the fact that it makes it clear there isn't any emotional attachment)?

That's your opinion.

I don't want my kids/siblings to become a race car driver, football player, or sky diver either. I wouldn't want them to become janitors or hold any number of ****ty jobs. That doesn't justify making those things illegal.

You are comparing race car drivers with prostitues? Working crappy job is one thing, sleeping with people for money is another, and seems this is where we disagree.

So you'd just rather they didn't have the option? If they have the option and decide it's worth it, who are you to tell them it isn't? It isn't your body, your life, or your debt.

Problem is, so many people will be forced(in their minds) to take that option. It will be disastrous to many families.

So should we make over eating and smoking illegal as well? Who are you that you think you get to dictate how people live? Oh, I guess you answered that below.

I was just making a point, but I do see your point.

Tyranny of the majority eh? So if tomorrow everyone voted in favor of a law declaring jewish people to be a problem to society and dictating that they be put into forced labor camps and/or systematically slaughtered - you'd think that it was right? If everyone votes for something awful does that make it ok? In America we have rights, rights that no majority of voters can take away. That's a fundamental building block of American society and one that it seems you know nothing about.

Be realistic for second. Do you see the U.S. government putting Jewish people in camps? You are attempting to compare something horrible, like democracy putting group of people in concentration camps, to a ban on prostitution.

You do make some good points, but we are just too far apart on this. You believe in total freedom, I don't. I know that many people, if not the majority of people, don't have enough discipline or ethics to handle total, complete freedom. This is where we differ.

 

[Danoff]

I know that many people, if not the majority of people, don't have enough discipline or ethics to handle total, complete freedom. This is where we differ.

Wow! That was unusually honest coming from someone taking your position. Many people arguing your point would stick with the "I'm trying to help the less fortunate" angle - but you're straight up admiting that you're doing it for their own good .

Who made you their parent? Why is it that you get to tell other people where they need more "discipline" and what (between consenting adults) is "ethical"? You just fundamentally don't see that it's wrong to prevent people who aren't doing anything to you, from doing what they want.

You'd dictate how they live their lives (through law of course), based on what you think is best for them . Who are you to decide what is best for them ? Let them live their own lives, make their own choices, that's the essense of America. Leave other people alone until they start infringing on your own personal rights. Until other people are trying to dictate to you how to live your life, or are trying to take your property or your labor, just mind your own business.

Seems fair doesn't it? You don't tell other people what to do, they don't tell you what to do - and as long as you don't mess with each other you'll be fine.

Be realistic for second. Do you see the U.S. government putting Jewish people in camps? You are attempting to compare something horrible, like democracy putting group of people in concentration camps, to a ban on prostitution.

I'm making a point about fundamental theory here. Democracy is not the end-all be-all of American government. Our government gives people rights that no voters can take away, that prevents them (to the extent that those rights are upheld) from being oppressed by a majority rule. If we did not have rights, the scenario that I laid out would be a possible one - and I wouldn't believe in any system that would allow that kind of action to be legal. I was merely pointing out that there is a limit to majority rule in this country - and you can't rationalize an outcome as proper simply by saying most people agreed. There has to be some fundamental reason some sort of philosophical or logical reasoning that shows that such-and-such must be illegal.

That simply doesn't exist for prostitution - because prostitution at its core is two consenting adults coming to an agreement, and it makes no sense for the government to prevent that from occuring.

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual). - Ayn Rand

In fact, that quote is so good I'm going to replace the spaghetti monster in my signature with it.

 

[a6m5]

Say you have sex with your girlfriend or wife or gay lover. "Hey babe, ya wanna do it?"
"I'd love to, honey"
You know the bit. Anyway, that's consensual, and I'm sure you'd agree. Now, to mix it up a little, say you throw a few bucks down on your girlfriend's stomach when you're "done with her." Does that automatically make her a prostitute? What if she keeps that money and spends it later? Is she now a whore because she made money off the act? Imagine prostitution, not rape, like Danoff said, as being a dude and his girl doing it and then him throwing some money at her, just for the hell of it. I really don't see a difference.

But I do. How about you quit your job, have sex with strangers all day. That will be your source of income. You are going to feed yourself, your wife and kids thru this income. You need some money for the holiday season? Better step your game up a notch! Maybe another client or two on your shift. Do you see the difference?

You should try it with your wife/girlfriend, I think she'd dig it. It would be something different.

I would have your girl tested for STDs.

I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but I figure that about 99.9% of people that really want to be prostitutes will do it wether it's legal or not.

In your opinion, which I totally disagree.

Conversly, around 99% of people who are poor and aren't already prostitutes aren't going to resort to prostitution no matter how low they get in life, for moral reasons.

Again, in your opinion. I disagree 100%.

A whore is a whore, wether it's legal or not. There aren't many girls waiting until the government legalizes it to become a prostitute.

I don't think they are waiting either. Only ones waiting already are working prostitues. But there will be many who'll end up in a jam, feel that they have no other choice. See it as a way out.

I know a few chicks that sleep around and don't get paid for it, because they know whoring it up is illegal, but why can't they get paid and just say "He's my boyfriend, we were just spicing things up a little." Does the government have a set number of guys a woman can role play with before she becomes a prostitute? I find that unlikely.
Like I said before, she wants one thing, she gets something a little different, she deserves an apology. In money form. She asked for it, she got it, Toyota. Now give her a BMW.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If you sleep with one of your girlfriends, how are Police supposed to catch you? Unless your girlfriend really is a prostitute, Police wouldn't know where to look for you.

 

[Poverty]

Im planning on visiting a brothel in the summer. I have a beautiful GF (and im not just saying that she is hott) so why do I want to go? I just want to do it with a older woman with fake boobs n stuff thats real dirty in da sheets. Hell I could go a year without sex 2morrow if I wanted to. I suppose its just a experience and million of men do it. They even make holidays out of it and some woman belive that its an ok thing for a man to do on his stag night.

 

[a6m5]

Wow! That was unusually honest coming from someone taking your position. Many people arguing your point would stick with the "I'm trying to help the less fortunate" angle - but you're straight up admiting that you're doing it for their own good .

Not just their own good, is it? It affects the whole society.

Who made you their parent? Why is it that you get to tell other people where they need more "discipline" and what (between consenting adults) is "ethical"? You just fundamentally don't see that it's wrong to prevent people who aren't doing anything to you, from doing what they want.

You keep on saying "you", like it's me making the rules here. If we had a nationwide vote to legalize prostitution today, how badly do you think it will lose? It's not "me" being the parent, how about majority of the U.S.?

You'd dictate how they live their lives (through law of course), based on what you think is best for them . Who are you to decide what is best for them ? Let them live their own lives, make their own choices, that's the essense of America. Leave other people alone until they start infringing on your own personal rights. Until other people are trying to dictate to you how to live your life, or are trying to take your property or your labor, just mind your own business.

Seems fair doesn't it? You don't tell other people what to do, they don't tell you what to do - and as long as you don't mess with each other you'll be fine.

In theory, that sounds wonderful. Put that in action on every "rights" related agenda, it will destroy this country more effectively than nukes(IMO).

I'm making a point about fundamental theory here. Democracy is not the end-all be-all of American government. Our government gives people rights that no voters can take away, that prevents them (to the extent that those rights are upheld) from being oppressed by a majority rule. If we did not have rights, the scenario that I laid out would be a possible one - and I wouldn't believe in any system that would allow that kind of action to be legal. I was merely pointing out that there is a limit to majority rule in this country - and you can't rationalize an outcome as proper simply by saying most people agreed. There has to be some fundamental reason some sort of philosophical or logical reasoning that shows that such-and-such must be illegal.

That simply doesn't exist for prostitution - because prostitution at its core is two consenting adults coming to an agreement, and it makes no sense for the government to prevent that from occuring.

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual). - Ayn Rand

I see. I, however, think it's case by case. IMO, negative impact and effects to this country from legalized prostitution is just too big. Small sacrifice.

In fact, that quote is so good I'm going to replace the spaghetti monster in my signature with it.

About frickin' time!

Edit:

Im planning on visiting a brothel in the summer. I have a beautiful GF (and im not just saying that she is hott) so why do I want to go? I just want to do it with a older woman with fake boobs n stuff thats real dirty in da sheets.

You, you feel that you need to to a brothel to do that? Where do you live, man?

 

[Danoff]

Not just their own good, is it? It affects the whole society.

How?

You keep on saying "you", like it's me making the rules here. If we had a nationwide vote to legalize prostitution today, how badly do you think it will lose? It's not "me" being the parent, how about majority of the U.S.?

See my previous post about the number of people voting not sanctioning the result.

In theory, that sounds wonderful. Put that in action on every "rights" related agenda, it will destroy this country more effectively than nukes(IMO).

Why?

I see. I, however, think it's case by case. IMO, negative impact and effects to this country from legalized prostitution is just too big. Small sacrifice.

Small scrifice for you maybe - you weren't considering going to a prostitute or becoming one. You're in no position to judge the size of the sacrifice others have to make as a result of your imposed ethical standards.

 

[Keef]

I believe Poverty lives in der Nederland.

I know a few chicks that sleep around and don't get paid for it, because they know whoring it up is illegal, but why can't they get paid and just say "He's my boyfriend, we were just spicing things up a little." Does the government have a set number of guys a woman can role play with before she becomes a prostitute? I find that unlikely.
Like I said before, she wants one thing, she gets something a little different, she deserves an apology. In money form. She asked for it, she got it, Toyota. Now give her a BMW.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If you sleep with one of your girlfriends, how are Police supposed to catch you?

What I'm trying to ask is this: Where does the law draw the line between a girl with lots of "boyfriends" that role play with money and a real prostitute? Where so you draw that line? Personally I think there isn't much difference.

 

[a6m5]

How?

2)Many people are poor. Legalization of prostitution will drive some of these poor, struggling people to sell their bodies for sex. I don't want some kids' mom selling her body, so she can make ends meet, payoff bad debt.

3)It will destroy families. Just like reason #2, legalization will drive people on the purchasing end also. Husband, wife having sex on the side with prostitues will not be good for marriage/relationship.

Why?

Maybe I shouldn't have said nukes(or even country). Structure of the United States Government will so different, it will no longer be able to function the way it is today. I suppose good for some, but bad if you like the current system of this country.

Small scrifice for you maybe - you weren't considering going to a prostitute or becoming one. You're in no position to judge the size of the sacrifice others have to make as a result of your imposed ethical standards.

Again, it's not up to "my" ethical standard. I think the set speedlimit on freeway is dangerous, but most people don't see it my way. Big or small, we all make our sacrifices.

Added:

I believe Poverty lives in der Nederland.

Cool. Thanks!

What I'm trying to ask is this: Where does the law draw the line between a girl with lots of "boyfriends" that role play with money and a real prostitute? Where so you draw that line? Personally I think there isn't much difference.

This reminds me of a Poker night or something. Is it legal? But it's just between friends, officer! I'd use a common sense there. If you do get busted by some astronomical chance, what can you do?

 

[fasj6418]

just saw this thread now...

look, i'm from brazil, 23 years old. last year i decided i was not going to keep waiting to have sex.

so i used a prostitute...

it was very good, she treated me well and she was hot. very expensive, but i liked. after that i went to another.

there are 2 types of sluts here, the poor ones, who do it for living, and the ones that are expensive, and do it because they say its a cheap way to make good money.

i am a loser, i know. i don't know when i'll be able to get "'normal sex"' so i'm thankful that there are hot sluts out there ready to "'rent"' their bodies for losers like myself. i would still be a virgin if it wasn't for that.

point is, for those who never did it with a slut, its like bussiness. you want somthing, they sell something. works for both sides. they don't kiss, they always use comdoms, they are clean, and they will treat you right.

for me, they are regular people and i respect those ladies. of course it should be legal. there will always be guys wanting to do that, so there's market for that kind of job. i'm sorry, i'm not catholic or whatever, so i think this is all normal and should be legalized because we are free to do whatever we want without disturbing others.

 

[Keef]

This reminds me of a Poker night or something. Is it legal? But it's just between friends, officer! I'd use a common sense there. If you do get busted by some astronomical chance, what can you do

?

The way our system works, it doesn't matter if it's between friends or not. In the gambling case, anyhow, the answer is: you're busted. No form of gambling is legal, in my state, Ohio, unless it's a government run thing, like the lottery. I think thats true in just about all the states in this country except Nevada, not sure, though.
I think the only way police officers catch prostitutes is when they go out on stings and pick them up. I really don't know of any other way they do it without invading the girls' privacy. So maybe the girlfriend thing was a bad example now that I think about it, because you wouldn't get in the car with a guy you didn't know, like the cop, unless he was your "boyfriend. So, hmm...
I guess the bottom line is that if you are a prostitute but don't stand on the corner and only go to your customers' houses there isn't anything the cops can do to catch you. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. But that kind of contradicts the "illegal" part of prostitution if you can't get caught. Imagine how many people are already doing this underground stuff.
Which brings me to another point, an old one. I still think that if it was more organized than it is now it would be less damaging to society. It might not be accepted any better, but at least the hos would be a little less nasty and grimy, as they would probably be required to take showers and was their box out every now and then Less disease, too, because they'd have to get tested. Right now, if they don't have the money, they don't get tested.

 

[Danoff]

Again, it's not up to "my" ethical standard. I think the set speedlimit on freeway is dangerous, but most people don't see it my way. Big or small, we all make our sacrifices.

It is your ethical standard - even if others share it.

2)Many people are poor. Legalization of prostitution will drive some of these poor, struggling people to sell their bodies for sex. I don't want some kids' mom selling her body, so she can make ends meet, payoff bad debt.

3)It will destroy families. Just like reason #2, legalization will drive people on the purchasing end also. Husband, wife having sex on the side with prostitues will not be good for marriage/relationship.

Neither of these affect you or me - or society in general.

 

[a6m5]

The way our system works, it doesn't matter if it's between friends or not. In the gambling case, anyhow, the answer is: you're busted. No form of gambling is legal, in my state, Ohio, unless it's a government run thing, like the lottery. I think thats true in just about all the states in this country except Nevada, not sure, though.

Oh, come on! How about Super Bowl Pool? I'd say the police is out of line, if they arrest you and your buddies, playing poker.

I guess the bottom line is that if you are a prostitute but don't stand on the corner and only go to your customers' houses there isn't anything the cops can do to catch you. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. But that kind of contradicts the "illegal" part of prostitution if you can't get caught. Imagine how many people are already doing this underground stuff.

Isn't there a saying that Prostitution is the oldest occupation or something? It does go on, it will never go away. Like I said in my post last week, I want it to stay a small and illegal operation. Not legal, wide open.

Which brings me to another point, an old one. I still think that if it was more organized than it is now it would be less damaging to society. It might not be accepted any better, but at least the hos would be a little less nasty and grimy, as they would probably be required to take showers and was their box out every now and then Less disease, too, because they'd have to get tested. Right now, if they don't have the money, they don't get tested.

You certainly have way with words. I'm glad that they are yucky. I don't want people going "Prostitutes are great! I love sleeping with them. They are cleaner than my own girlfriend, plus some of the stuff they let me do to them!".

 

[Danoff]

Oh, come on! How about Super Bowl Pool? I'd say the police is out of line, if they arrest you and your buddies, playing poker.

There is a dollar limit, after which you're a criminal. This is the law a6. These aren't guidelines we're talking about, this is criminal activity. Laws prescribe what people get put behind bars for - that's serious ****, worthy of some serious thought and explanation.

Isn't there a saying that Prostitution is the oldest occupation or something? It does go on, it will never go away. Like I said in my post last week, I want it to stay a small and illegal operation. Not legal, wide open.

There was a story recently about a lady who was offering sexual favors for money over craigslist. Do you think she deserves to go to jail for 5 years for that? Do you think that her being willing to accept money for sex means that she needs to be locked away from society, family, and friends? Do you think we should be giving murderers parole to make room for her? Because that's what actually happens.

You certainly have way with words. I'm glad that they are yucky. I don't want people going "Prostitutes are great! I love sleeping with them. They are cleaner than my own girlfriend, plus some of the stuff they let me do to them!".

What's wrong with people saying that? What business of yours is it if that happens?

 

[a6m5]

It is your ethical standard - even if others share it.

This is going nowhere. We are going in loops.

Neither of these affect you or me - or society in general.

I beg to differ.

Question: Not counting Vegas, which states has allowed prostitution before? Has it always been banned, or is this something new(er)? Just curious.

Added:

There is a dollar limit, after which you're a criminal. This is the law a6. These aren't guidelines we're talking about, this is criminal activity. Laws prescribe what people get put behind bars for - that's serious ****, worthy of some serious thought and explanation.

I understand. As long as the dollar limit is set reasonably, I don't see a problem.

There was a story recently about a lady who was offering sexual favors for money over craigslist. Do you think she deserves to go to jail for 5 years for that? Do you think that her being willing to accept money for sex means that she needs to be locked away from society, family, and friends?

Makes total sense to me. Five years sounds little harsh, but she broke the law. What if you were selling drugs on the craigslist? I wouldn't expect anything less.

Do you think we should be giving murderers parole to make room for her? Because that's what actually happens.

You must be kidding! Correctional system is a absolute joke in this country, but it has nothing to do with subject at hand.

What's wrong with people saying that? What business of yours is it if that happens?

I was just being a smarta$$.

 

[Danoff]

This is going nowhere. We are going in loops.

Trace it back, it makes sense.

I beg to differ.

Explain to me then how prostitution directly impacts your life.

Question: Not counting Vegas, which states has allowed prostitution before? Has it always been banned, or is this something new(er)? Just curious.

It's a state-by-state deal. It isn't illegal federally, which is why Nevada is able to have legal prostitution. Most of the prostitution laws showed up right around the same time our country was doing everything wrong - 1910-1940ish, though police didn't start enforcing those laws until the 1960-1970 (probably because they had more important things to do).

So prostitution has only been effectively illegal in this country for about 40 years. This is why whenever you see a movie about the old west, there is a brothel in the town - because it was perfectly legal back then.

Bottom line - prostitution is a victimless crime. I think it was george carlin that said "why is it illegal to sell something that it's perfectly legal to give away?"

 

[Danoff]

I understand. As long as the dollar limit is set reasonably, I don't see a problem.

...except that people are going to jail for doing nothing wrong. Who gets hurt when a few guys are sitting around a poker table voluntarily gambling??

Makes total sense to me. Five years sounds little harsh, but she broke the law. What if you were selling drugs on the craigslist? I wouldn't expect anything less.

I think people should be allowed to sell (and more importantly, purchase) drugs. She may have broken the law, but she hasn't hurt anyone.

You must be kidding! Correctional system is a absolute joke in this country, but it has nothing to do with subject at hand.

It has everything to do with the subject at hand. There is a limited amount of room in our jails and a limited number of police that taxpayers are currently paying for. The more things we make criminal, the more criminals we have to find, arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate. I think we should be making d*mn sure we're being efficient about that and concentrating on the people who pose an actual threat to society.

I was just being a smarta$$.

I don't believe you. I think you meant every word.

 

[Keef]

Bottom line - prostitution is a victimless crime. I think it was george carlin that said "why is it illegal to sell something that it's perfectly legal to give away?"

Exactly. If you don't want it, don't take it, and if you don't want to give it away, don't offer it. It's all up to an individual's choice, and if they choose the wrong thing, well, that's their problem.
That makes me think of a few problems with our civil law system, but that's neither here nor there.

Hey, that's another way for the gonvernment to make money. Sell crack and heroine at ridiculously high prices. If the crackheads need it bad enough, they'll run out of money, starve, die, and we'll be rid of druggies in no time!
I think the way to fix our correctional system is to go back to the old punishment system for select inmates.

"Prostitutes are great! I love sleeping with them. They are cleaner than my own girlfriend, plus some of the stuff they let me do to them!".

As long as she's cool with it I could get all I ever wanted. And I wouldn't get tired of the same old meat all the time. OK, disregard that comment, I just remembered that most hos are infected with a bad case of what I like to call "roast beef *****."

And, about the gambling, I had no idea of this "Super Bowl Pool."

 

[a6m5]

...except that people are going to jail for doing nothing wrong. Who gets hurt when a few guys are sitting around a poker table voluntarily gambling??

How high are the limits though? It's one of those things. You are playing poker with your friends in your house. You guys win/lose few bucks. No police is coming to your house, and they won't arrest you over few bucks. We all play office Super Bowl Pool. Few winners win $50 or something. Call the cops, nobody cares. Chances are, your local authorities had same thing going.

I think people should be allowed to sell (and more importantly, purchase) drugs. She may have broken the law, but she hasn't hurt anyone.

That's your opinion, it's against the law.

It has everything to do with the subject at hand. There is a limited amount of room in our jails and a limited number of police that taxpayers are currently paying for. The more things we make criminal, the more criminals we have to find, arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate. I think we should be making d*mn sure we're being efficient about that and concentrating on the people who pose an actual threat to society.

Absolutely not. I'm one of those guys who are sick of prisoners having more than we do. Gym facility, basketball court, library, free meal, Cable TV(replacing them with plasma TVs here), free healthcare, education, etc. Other than possibly dropping the soap in the shower room, sounds pretty ideal. Solution is not to imprison less. It's to run prisons more efficiently.

I don't believe you. I think you meant every word.

I was kidding, but I guess I did mean it.

 

[Keef]

Did you catch my thing about getting rid of the "correctional" part and replacing it with the good ol' "punishment" system? I think felonists, if that's what they're called, shouldn't get out of prison. Well, except to get out of prison as soon as possible. You get the idea?
So I guess the solution is not only to run them more efficiently, but also empty them more efficiently and appropriately. Pull a Ron White.

Uh oh, Famine just came in...

 

[a6m5]

Trace it back, it makes sense.

It's one of those arguments that we should just agree to disagree. It has become an pointless discussion few posts back.

Explain to me then how prostitution directly impacts your life.

I was thinking more along lines of impacts on "society", in the original post. Prostitutes and patrons multiplying. How could that not have an impact in our society?

It's a state-by-state deal. It isn't illegal federally, which is why Nevada is able to have legal prostitution. Most of the prostitution laws showed up right around the same time our country was doing everything wrong - 1910-1940ish, though police didn't start enforcing those laws until the 1960-1970 (probably because they had more important things to do).

So prostitution has only been effectively illegal in this country for about 40 years. This is why whenever you see a movie about the old west, there is a brothel in the town - because it was perfectly legal back then.

Yeah, I was thinking about the Western movies as well. Thank you for the explanation. 👍

Bottom line - prostitution is a victimless crime. I think it was george carlin that said "why is it illegal to sell something that it's perfectly legal to give away?"

Sometimes, Carlin says the wittiest things. Perhaps he is over-simplifying it a little?