Legal prostitution?

[Drakim]

Doesn't most pro-gun arguments also apply for prostitution?

There is no point in banning guns. It's not like it will prevent criminals from getting guns anyway. If you ban something, all you are doing is creating an underground market for it, which fuels crime and directs money into organized crime.

Doesn't the same argument apply for prostitution? It's hardly a secret that prostitution happens all over the world, including places where it is banned.

[RandomFreak]

I've been saying for years that Prostitution should be legal for several reasons:

1) It doesn't make logical sense that it's illegal. Legally you can go to a bar and pick up a total stranger, take them to a hotel and have sex. But if you do the exact same thing and somebody receives money suddenly it's a fellony. How can it be illegal to sell something that is legal to give away (to paraphrase George Carlin)?

2) Nearly everything that is really bad or dangerous about prostitution is a direct result of it being illegal. Rape, abuse, drugs, disease, none of these would be issues if it was legal. Prostitututes are raped and abused and can't report it because then they get busted for hooking. Pimps hook them on drugs. Because there's no required testing disease is an issue. But you look at the legal brothels in Nevada and none of these are a problem because it's all regulated.

3) We could tax the living hell out of it and help recover the economy.

[AapoJoki]

I don't understand why you get to draw that kind of parallel, as if a gun-supporter would automatically be against prostitution. I get it that you're probably referring to the American conservative Christians, who generally are pro-gun and presumably anti-prostitution, but it looks like you're only attacking a stereotypical, made-up position held by no one in particular instead of refuting an actual argument posed by someone. I don't think you've asked the gun supporters, who made those arguments, about their opinion on prostitution (well maybe you are asking that now).

What are you trying to warn about, anyway?
Banning prostitution leads to banning guns?
Allowing guns leads to allowing prostitution?

Are you advocating a ban on guns or legalization of prostitution?

[Drakim]

At 11/17/08 12:30 PM, AapoJoki wrote: I don't understand why you get to draw that kind of parallel, as if a gun-supporter would automatically be against prostitution. I get it that you're probably referring to the American conservative Christians, who generally are pro-gun and presumably anti-prostitution, but it looks like you're only attacking a stereotypical, made-up position held by no one in particular instead of refuting an actual argument posed by someone. I don't think you've asked the gun supporters, who made those arguments, about their opinion on prostitution (well maybe you are asking that now).

Actually, I'm basing this on the fact that in America, guns are in general allowed, while prostitution in general is not.

I'm sorry if using the law as a basis for a position is stereotyping.

What are you trying to warn about, anyway?
Banning prostitution leads to banning guns?
Allowing guns leads to allowing prostitution?

No, just that the logic that is used for guns can equally well be used for prostitution.

Are you advocating a ban on guns or legalization of prostitution?

Neither. I'm just wishing to reflect upon it, and see what other people have to say about it.

[AapoJoki]

At 11/17/08 12:36 PM, Drakim wrote: I'm sorry if using the law as a basis for a position is stereotyping.

There is no point in banning guns. It's not like it will prevent criminals from getting guns anyway. If you ban something, all you are doing is creating an underground market for it, which fuels crime and directs money into organized crime.

That's not from a law book. You specified reasons why someone might be against banning guns. These are not necessarily the reasons why firearms are legal in USA. For instance, I don't think the US constitution has an amendment that guarantees the legality of prostitution.

[Drakim]

At 11/17/08 12:45 PM, AapoJoki wrote:

At 11/17/08 12:36 PM, Drakim wrote: I'm sorry if using the law as a basis for a position is stereotyping.

There is no point in banning guns. It's not like it will prevent criminals from getting guns anyway. If you ban something, all you are doing is creating an underground market for it, which fuels crime and directs money into organized crime.

That's not from a law book. You specified reasons why someone might be against banning guns.

That's true, although, I still don't think my argument has such a strange setup. I simply used the law for the basic standpoint (guns are legal, prostitution is not), while I got the arguments themselves from my personal experience. These are the things I've "learned". I can argue no other thing, as it would be outside my experience.

These are not necessarily the reasons why firearms are legal in USA. For instance, I don't think the US constitution has an amendment that guarantees the legality of prostitution.

That's a very good point.

But the question comes up, would we have a total ban in the US on guns if not for the second amendment?

[therealsylvos]

You are confusing means with ends.

No one wants to ban guns in order that there should be less gun ownership, they want to ban guns so that there is less crime.

The argument is even if you ban guns, you will still have lots of crime.

However people want to ban prostitution in order that there be less prostitution. As to that it works better than legalizing it.

Personally I am in favor of both legal gun ownership and legal prostitution.

[Conspiracy3]

I'm undecided on gun control laws, but I fully support legalizing prostitution and here is why.

1. Easier for the CDC to control STDs

If prostitution was legal the government could give licenses to be a prostitute and service prostitutes and in order to keep the license you must regularly be tested for various STDs. No prostitute can easily do buisness with lack of or an out of date license.

2. As you said, anti prostitution laws are difficult to enforce

[MortifiedPenguins]

The easiest way to do it would probally involve almost the same laws as the ones that Realtors use.

For example, if prostitution is legalized then it becomes a real and credible job and not an underground job.

And if it becomes a legal and real job, it has to work itself with current tax law and tax codes.

So, it would be interesting to see how they would make current tax laws apply to prostitution. Brothels would be easy enough to do, because you could just use the same laws that apply to companies, but what would you do for freelance prostitues?

[Drakim]

At 11/17/08 03:18 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: So, it would be interesting to see how they would make current tax laws apply to prostitution. Brothels would be easy enough to do, because you could just use the same laws that apply to companies, but what would you do for freelance prostitues?

Wouldn't it be the same as any other job? We tax taxi drivers, but how do we deal with the ones that do shady taxi jobs on the side without paying taxes?

[Sajberhippien]

Here in Sweden, we have a special setup (don't know if it's used anywhere else) where selling sex is legal, while buying it is illegal. That removes part of the reason why hookers can't go to the police; they can't get busted for it. Still, there's problems with the system since the prostitute may very well lose her proffession should she tell the police, and the problem with STD's isn't affected at all. I don't know how much drug problem there is among swedish prostitutes, as they have mainly moved out of the streets and into the camshows.

[SadisticMonkey]

would "free-lance" street corner prostitutes be legal?

[aninjaman]

At 11/17/08 03:21 PM, Drakim wrote: Wouldn't it be the same as any other job? We tax taxi drivers, but how do we deal with the ones that do shady taxi jobs on the side without paying taxes?

I don't think any prostitute would wan't to do free-lance prostitution work.
Free-lance prostitution would be as dangerous as illegal prostitution is now.

[Al6200]

At 11/17/08 11:59 AM, Drakim wrote:

There is no point in banning guns. It's not like it will prevent criminals from getting guns anyway. If you ban something, all you are doing is creating an underground market for it, which fuels crime and directs money into organized crime.

That argument can be used against any sort of government action. Consider:

1. We could ban abortion, but people will still get abortions anyway.

2. We could raise taxes on rich people, but they'll find a way around it

3. We can make drugs illegal, but people will still use them.

4. We can ban prostitution, but there will still be prostitutes.

The argument of "People will get around the government action" can more or less literally apply to every government action - not just guns and prostitution.

And in both of those cases it's a silly argument. Obviously banning guns and banning prostitution will reduce gun ownership and prostitution, simply because they will no longer be considered social norms.

Doesn't the same argument apply for prostitution? It's hardly a secret that prostitution happens all over the world, including places where it is banned.

Obviously in nations with hundreds of millions of people - there will be at least some prostitutes. The relevant question really isn't whether prostitution will still exist after the ban - the question is how much will it be reduced (if at all).

[abluepillorafreemind]

It works just fine for the Dutch

[Buffalow]

Maybe to prevent the degradation of women and to preserve the sanctity of the meaning of sex.

[Ravariel]

At 11/17/08 07:31 PM, Gwarfan wrote: Maybe to prevent the degradation of women and to preserve the sanctity of the meaning of sex.

Says the dude on the internet... lol.

[aninjaman]

At 11/17/08 06:25 PM, Al6200 wrote:

At 11/17/08 11:59 AM, Drakim wrote:

The argument of "People will get around the government action" can more or less literally apply to every government action - not just guns and prostitution.

And in both of those cases it's a silly argument. Obviously banning guns and banning prostitution will reduce gun ownership and prostitution, simply because they will no longer be considered social norms.

There are many more arguements for legalizing prostitution other than "well people are going to do it anyway". Such as
1) Pimps will not be able to take advantage of prostitutes
2) prostitutes can get medical checkups
3) if prostitution is a legit business then companies will not want thier workers getting STDs
4) prostitutes can go to cops if they get attacked or raped

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 11/17/08 03:21 PM, Drakim wrote:

At 11/17/08 03:18 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

Wouldn't it be the same as any other job? We tax taxi drivers, but how do we deal with the ones that do shady taxi jobs on the side without paying taxes?

Taxi Drivers are part of a larger company though, usually invovled with who ever owns the depot. We tax the depots and it's reported profits.

If prostitution was ever legalized, more then likely it would only be legalized in brothel form. Easier to keep track of, easier to get taxes, easier to see evaluate and what not.

Freelance would probally still be illegal. Though the moving demand to a more safe and secure area (Brothels) would probally kill off freelance prostitution.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/17/08 07:31 PM, Gwarfan wrote: Maybe to prevent the degradation of women and to preserve the sanctity of the meaning of sex.

Sex developed as a means of reproduction.

Look in nature, and you'll see animals fuck whoever the hell they can.

Without us arbitrarily giving sex "sanctity", it has none.

god I'm getting sick of that word lately

[therealsylvos]

At 11/18/08 12:56 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

Look in nature, and you'll see animals fuck whoever the hell they can.

I don't follow this argument at all.
Animals are mindless.
Should we do all that lower animals do?

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/18/08 01:23 AM, therealsylvos wrote: I don't follow this argument at all.
Animals are mindless.
Should we do all that lower animals do?

No I'm just saying that humans are animals, and any sort of sentiment that we associate with sex is added unnaturally.

[therealsylvos]

At 11/18/08 02:18 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/18/08 01:23 AM, therealsylvos wrote: I don't follow this argument at all.
Animals are mindless.
Should we do all that lower animals do?

No I'm just saying that humans are animals, and any sort of sentiment that we associate with sex is added unnaturally.

Any sort of sentiments we associate with killing our young in order to eat them, is added unnaturally.

[morefngdbs]

Prostitution is legal.
That is if by definition, engaging in sexual acts for financial &/or personal gain . Is what we're talking about.
Anyone who marry's someone & makes a home for them works & brings home the bacon, that's prostitution.
But its legal, cause you got married or you live somewhere that the local government doesn't support stoning you for not being married AKA common law/live in lovers.

But its still just one person paying for services from the other, sure very often both of them are quite happy & no one feels abused. But by definition above its a form of Prostitution.

Why is it legal in this country to take someone out , go & do dinner, or a movie, a dance or bar scene whatever YOUR SPENDING MONEY & then go back & have mutually consensual SEX .
No Problem !
But
If 2 people meet & decide to consenting sex acts for a certain price & go home , hotel or,where ever & have sex & you then pay the other person its illegal !?!
I do not see a difference.
Semantics is the only possible difference I see.
Payment was str8 cash exchange & not 'spending on STUFF' that evening .

Legalise the whores...they got to make a living too & it keeps the poor bastards who are married & aren't getting any, a place to relieve a little stress :)

[Al6200]

At 11/17/08 08:52 PM, aninjaman wrote:

There are many more arguements for legalizing prostitution other than "well people are going to do it anyway".

Yeah, I was more just responding to what Drakim said.

Such as
1) Pimps will not be able to take advantage of prostitutes
2) prostitutes can get medical checkups
3) if prostitution is a legit business then companies will not want thier workers getting STDs
4) prostitutes can go to cops if they get attacked or raped

Those are all good arguments in favor of legalizing prostitution.

The best con argument I can think of off the top of my head is that prostitution is a morally unhealthy social structure that caters to people who can't get into real long term relationships, and by legalizing prostitution we are enabling people to use prostitution instead of developing real relationships (and solving the fundamental problem).

[Buffalow]

At 11/18/08 12:56 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Sex developed as a means of reproduction.

Look in nature, and you'll see animals fuck whoever the hell they can.

Without us arbitrarily giving sex "sanctity", it has none.

So you are saying that we should act like animals? Should we kill our young or toss our sons or daughters out into the world shortly after they learn to walk?

You can't compare animals to humans because we are the least animalistic species in the world.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/18/08 08:06 AM, therealsylvos wrote: Any sort of sentiments we associate with killing our young in order to eat them, is added unnaturally.

Um no, actually.

the whole point of life is to reproduce and thus pass your genes onto the next generation.

Therefore eating one's children is a rather foolish thing to do.

[aninjaman]

At 11/18/08 04:03 PM, Gwarfan wrote: So you are saying that we should act like animals? Should we kill our young or toss our sons or daughters out into the world shortly after they learn to walk?

You can't compare animals to humans because we are the least animalistic species in the world.

Humans are still animals and we are still animalistic. We do have logic and reasoning but you are still an animal.

[Buffalow]

At 11/18/08 04:49 PM, aninjaman wrote:

Humans are still animals and we are still animalistic. We do have logic and reasoning but you are still an animal.

Yes, we are animals, but does that mean we have to behave like them? Saying that sex is only a means of reproduction has some truth to it, but do you degrade the creation of human life to such basic descriptions? "It's only sex"? Haven't we become civilized enough to respect women and not resort to such barbarian behavior? Sure I'd have sex with a woman in an instant, but I wouldn't pay her.

[Conspiracy3]

At 11/18/08 06:20 PM, Gwarfan wrote:

At 11/18/08 04:49 PM, aninjaman wrote:

Humans are still animals and we are still animalistic. We do have logic and reasoning but you are still an animal.

Yes, we are animals, but does that mean we have to behave like them? Saying that sex is only a means of reproduction has some truth to it, but do you degrade the creation of human life to such basic descriptions? "It's only sex"? Haven't we become civilized enough to respect women and not resort to such barbarian behavior? Sure I'd have sex with a woman in an instant, but I wouldn't pay her.

How is it barbaric? You get something you want, she gets something she wants. It's a good, honorable, trade.

Almost all sex, if not all, is prostitution. Go back 100 years or so before women were in the mainstream workplace. A man would marry a woman, give her food, water, shelter, etc. and she in turn would give him sex. Take a more modern day example. A man takes a woman out on a date. He pays for the dinner. He drives her (paying for the gas and other expenses,) he buys gifts etc. In turn, he gets sex. On a porno set a woman is payed to have sex in front of a camera (yes I know there is another thread about his one.)

I honestly don't see anything immoral about prostitution, and I don't see how it is different from legal practices.