Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 130

Thread: Should prostitution be legalised?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Should prostitution be legalised?

    Well someone brought this up in the pot thread so I figured what the heck lets go for it? I think it should be legal. Isnt the main argument for abortion that the state has no right to tell a woman what to do with her body? So its legal for her to kill an unborn human but not to charge a human to have sex with her? Isnt all work really prostitution. Arent you selling your body or brain when you work for someoone else. How is it legal for them to give it away but ilegal if they charge. Besides that we all know it costs money in most instances to get a woman to have sex with you the first time one way or another like taking them to diner. Lets just skip the dinner give ,her the money it would have cost and get down to the real nitty gritty.
    I have nothing against the womens movement. Especially when Im walking behind it.


  2. #2

    Default

    Yup, let it be legal.

  3. #3

    Default

    If the government regulated and limited prostitution, and stamped down on illegal prostitution, it would be better for everybody. Cleaner environment, etc., and you don't have pimps selling fourteen year old girls...

    So I'll go against my conservative principles here and say

    Even though I would never employ their "services"...

    Patron of Felixion, Ulyaoth, Reidy, Ran Taro and Darth Red
    Co-Founder of the House of Caesars


  4. #4

    Default

    I just want prostitution legalized like in Germany
    and the Netherlands. American women have the highest
    divorce rate in the world; they use child support
    and alimony as income. (ex. California divorce laws)
    Might as well legalize it, tax it,
    and use that revenue towards school tax, etc.

  5. #5

    Default

    Well this threas was started just for you TIGERCAT

    So I'll go against my conservative principles here and say
    You know this is something i just dont understand. Your not going to find too many people more conservative than I. I dont see how other conservatives can say their for smaller and less intrusive government and support things like making drugs and prostitution illegal. What ever happpened to thier stance on more personal resopsibilty as well. The legalization of these things should be a matter of conservative principles not making them illegal. None other tham my idol the honorable William F Buckley agrees.
    Heres an interesting article

    Crime and the Drug War
    by Kirby R. Cundiff, Ph.D.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Appeared in: Claustrophobia, August 1994
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1907, when Georgia and Oklahoma made the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors illegal state wide, the homicide rate in the United States was 1 person per 100,000 per year.[2] Before the end of the decade, 13 states plus Alaska, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia had gone dry.[6] By 1919--when the 18th amendment was passed, making alcohol use illegal nationwide--the homicide rate had grown to 8 per 100,000. The murder rate climbed steadily until it peaked at 10 per 100,000 around 1933, when our nation admitted its mistake, and repealed the 18th amendment. By 1943 the homicide rate had drastically shrunk to 5 per 100,000 and stayed near that level until 1964 when the United States made the same mistake all over again (see graphic).[2]

    In December of 1964, having been ratified by 40 countries, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 went into effect restricting narcotic drug use to medical and scientific purposes. It also internationally banned narcotic drug trade outside of government monopolies.[8] History was about to repeat itself. From 1964 to 1970 in the United States, the number of state prisoners incarcerated for drug offenses more than doubled from 3,079 to 6,596 (it was 90,000 in 1989)[9], and the new concentration on enforcing victimless crimes caused the homicide rate to skyrocket. Between 1964 and 1970 the homicide rate doubled from 5 per 100,000 to 10 per 100,000, where it has remained, with minor fluctuations, until today.[2] Lyndon Johnson had declared war on drugs, to be followed by Richard Nixon declaring War on Drugs in 1969, Ronald Reagan declaring War on Drugs in 1982, and George Bush declaring War on Drugs in 1989.[4]

    At the turn of the century, both heroin and aspirin were legally available and sold for approximately the same amount. Today aspirin can be purchased at the corner drug store for 20 cents per gram; heroin costs $50 per gram. [p. 33, 3] The price of heroin rose drastically after it was made illegal due to the dangers involved in its sale. Dealers are willing to kill each other for profits obtained from such a lucrative market; junkies are willing to rob and kill for money to support their habit--money, if drugs were legal and cheap, that they could easily obtain by working at McDonald's. You and I, through high crime rates caused by the War on Drugs and high tax rates used to support the War on Drugs, pay the price. During prohibition "liquor store" owners murdered each other to protect their turf just as drug dealers do today. Today, liquor store owners are generally peaceful. Eliminating the enormous profits involved in black-market businesses eliminates the motive for violent crime, and therefore the violent crime.

    More law enforcement is commonly touted as the answer to America's violent crime problem. Since 1970 the percentage of the American population in prison has tripled with no noticeable effect on the homicide rate.[2] More than 1.3 million citizens are now in jail.[p. 24, 3] The United States has a larger percentage of its population in prison than any other nation[2], and still maintains the highest homicide rate in the industralized world. [1] We have even thrown away parts of our constitution in the name of fighting crime. Asset forfeiture laws allow law enforcement officers to seize the property of American citizens without even charging them with a crime, even though the 5th amendment to the constitution clearly states "No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." Of course if you want your property back you do have the right to post a bond and try to prove yourself innocent, of a crime you have not even been charged with, in a court of law. No attorney will be provided for you if you cannot afford one. Over $2.4 billion worth of assets have been seized since 1985, $664 million in 1991 alone--and in 80% of the cases no charges were ever filed.[7]

    Disparities between the poor and the rich are often considered causes of our high crime rate, but the United States has not only one of the world's highest crime rates, but also one of the world's largest middle classes. The religious right claims America's huge crime rate is caused by a break-down of family values. This would require family values breaking down suddenly in 1907, returning in 1933, and suddenly breaking down again in 1964. Many liberals believe that America's large crime rate is due to our lack of gun-control laws, but America's gun-control policy has changed little throughout this century. There is no way gun control can explain the enormous fluctuations in America's homicide rate. The United States government's substance control policies are the only answer. The only way to lower America's violent crime rate, short of turning the United States into a totalitarian state, is through ending the War on Drugs.

    The growing list of people who support decriminalization of drugs in America include: William F. Buckley, George Carlin, George Crockett, Alan Dershowitz, Phil Donahue, Hugh Downs, Milton Friedman, Ira Glasser, Michael Kinsley, David Letterman, John McLaughlin, Andy Rooney, Carl Sagan, Kurt Schmoke, Tom Selleck, George Shultz, George Silver, Tom Snyder, Robert Sweet, Thomas Szasz, Garry Trudeau, and Donald Trump.[5]
    Last edited by Rush Limbaugh; December 14, 2005 at 12:29 PM.
    I have nothing against the womens movement. Especially when Im walking behind it.


  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rush Limbaugh
    You know this is something i just dont understand.
    Because a lot of conservatives have ideas about morality that say what prostitutes do is "sinful" :wink:

    Patron of Felixion, Ulyaoth, Reidy, Ran Taro and Darth Red
    Co-Founder of the House of Caesars


  7. #7
    Bwaho's Avatar Puppeteer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    From the kingdom of heaven by the powah of the holy spirit
    Posts
    5,790

    Default

    Should prostitution be legalised?
    Only if there will be group discount

  8. #8

    Default

    I just had a great idea. Listen, legalize prostitution,
    sanctified and coordinated by the U.S. govt. They
    all get "checked out" and carry a union card -
    so we know they're "clean". The U.S. govt.
    can use the tax revenue ("Ho" tax) to pay-off
    the national debt, social security, school taxes,
    college tuition fees, etc. Think about all the ****
    there are in Hollywood, Florida or New York City.
    Like in the movie Caligula, we could use the Senator's
    wives and daughters - they screwed up the budget;
    let them help fix it.

  9. #9

    Default

    Actually Id argue legalizing prostitution and 'recreational' drugs are TRUE conserative beliefs in the US Problem is the religious conseratives hijack this. Legalizing prostitution would be a good thing, protect women who for whatever reason engage in that job and keep it as safe as possible and generate tax revenue from it. Only thing Id want is all tax income from it be diverted to ONE particular issue education (no not sex ed general education) or health care and not some pork spending.


    Quote:
    @Rush: conservatives don't want to reduce government involvement, they want to increase it, especially the the bedroom.




    No RELIGIOUS conseratives who arent true conseratives are the ones that want that.
    A man after my own heart who gets it.

    Have you changed somehow? You sound more... liberal...
    Again remember Im a libertarian not a republican.

    But again to me these are conservative principles not liberal ones.

    Because a lot of conservatives have ideas about morality that say what prostitutes do is "sinful"
    Although I claim there is no seperation of church and state in the US laws cannot and should not be made on religious grounds. Lusting for a women is sinful but should it be illegal? Besides that if they do it for free is it any less sinful if their not married? Should all unmarried sex be ilegal?

    A conservative in american terms (usually) means someone who is pro strict government control,
    Are you serious? Their for more law and order but not more government control in our everyday lives. The thing most conservative I know want is less government interferrence in almost all aspects of life. The way it used to be remember?
    I have nothing against the womens movement. Especially when Im walking behind it.


  10. #10
    God-Emperor of Mankind's Avatar Apperently I protect
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    21,640

    Default

    I'm been a supporter of state brothels.
    I just wished the femi-nazis in this country would realise that their law(it is illegal to purchase sex) is actually making it worse for women involved since they are now in the hands of pimps and force to work in miserable conditions.
    I wouldn't be surprised if most of them are forced to work in this area which I find terrible.
    If women want to do this then they should be able to do so in nice conditions and only the state can provide that.

  11. #11

    Default

    Yeap. If people do it even if it's illegal why not legalize it and enforce health checks and taxation?
    浪人 - 二天一

  12. #12
    Scar Face's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Oshawa, Ont, Canada
    Posts
    5,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Manji
    Yeap. If people do it even if it's illegal why not legalize it and enforce health checks and taxation?
    Yes Daily health checks. Um and perhaps you have to ''enlist'' to the local services near u a week ahead of time so they can test you as well so the prostetutes have an even lower chance of getting diseases. Oh and make sure that 13 year old's can have the ''services'' of them as well

  13. #13
    Darth Wong's Avatar Pit Bull
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    The idea of throwing two people in prison for consenting activity between adults is absurd, so yes, Legalize it.

    Yes, I have a life outside the Internet and Rome Total War
    "Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions" - Stephen Colbert
    Under the kind patronage of Seleukos

  14. #14

    Default

    It should be legalized.
    (\__/)
    (O.o )
    (> < ) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination!

    "attack the argument, not the person saying it" -lee1026
    Sig by Manji

  15. #15
    Erik's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    15,653

    Default

    Here in the Netherland we have legalized prostitution a few years ago.
    It's impats aren't clear yet, but I think life has gotten a little better for most prostitudes.

    Sadly most prostitudes only complain about the taxes they now have to pay, and the rules they have to follow to avoid STD's like AIDS.

    @Rush: conservatives don't want to reduce government involvement, they want to increase it, especially the the bedroom.
    You are a liberal (or "Liberaritiariarian" or whatever you call it in the States)



  16. #16
    Hamelkart's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sibenik, Croatia
    Posts
    1,359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rush Limbaugh
    Well someone brought this up in the pot thread so I figured what the heck lets go for it? I think it should be legal. Isnt the main argument for abortion that the state has no right to tell a woman what to do with her body? So its legal for her to kill an unborn human but not to charge a human to have sex with her? Isnt all work really prostitution. Arent you selling your body or brain when you work for someoone else. How is it legal for them to give it away but ilegal if they charge. Besides that we all know it costs money in most instances to get a woman to have sex with you the first time one way or another like taking them to diner. Lets just skip the dinner give ,her the money it would have cost and get down to the real nitty gritty.
    Have you changed somehow? You sound more... liberal... Hmmm...
    Yeah, I think it should be liberal because it's their choice if they're gonna prostitute (in most of the cases it is, anyway). Plus, if legalized, prostitutes would get every single type of insurance that is given to other people with different jobs. It could slightly reduce the percentage of AIDS infected people.
    PADAJ SILO I NEPRAVDO!

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamelkart
    Have you changed somehow? You sound more... liberal... Hmmm...
    Yeah, I think it should be liberal because it's their choice if they're gonna prostitute (in most of the cases it is, anyway). Plus, if legalized, prostitutes would get every single type of insurance that is given to other people with different jobs. It could slightly reduce the percentage of AIDS infected people.
    Actually Id argue legalizing prostitution and 'recreational' drugs are TRUE conserative beliefs in the US Problem is the religious conseratives hijack this. Legalizing prostitution would be a good thing, protect women who for whatever reason engage in that job and keep it as safe as possible and generate tax revenue from it. Only thing Id want is all tax income from it be diverted to ONE particular issue education (no not sex ed general education) or health care and not some pork spending.

    @Rush: conservatives don't want to reduce government involvement, they want to increase it, especially the the bedroom.
    No RELIGIOUS conseratives who arent true conseratives are the ones that want that.

  18. #18

    Default

    Actually "conservatives" means a different thing if it's spoken in a European context or a American one.
    A conservative in american terms (usually) means someone who is pro strict government control, strong military and less investments in social/welfare programs (and usually conservative = republican) while a conservative in european terms is a umbrella term for all the gamut of right wing/traditionalists who support "moralistic" or "conservative" measures in detriment of "liberal" or "amoral" measures.
    It's hard to pinpoint the exact notions but this is, overall, the standard definition.
    浪人 - 二天一

  19. #19
    Denny Crane!'s Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    24,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Manji
    Actually "conservatives" means a different thing if it's spoken in a European context or a American one.
    A conservative in american terms (usually) means someone who is pro strict government control, strong military and less investments in social/welfare programs (and usually conservative = republican) while a conservative in european terms is a umbrella term for all the gamut of right wing/traditionalists who support "moralistic" or "conservative" measures in detriment of "liberal" or "amoral" measures.
    It's hard to pinpoint the exact notions but this is, overall, the standard definition.
    Are you european? Curious this might be different in countries other than England but I must disagree with your analysis. Morals don't come into politics so much over in England, we are more about Civics and business. The reason cannabis is coming dangerously close to decriminalisation? Money and police power.

    Abortion is an issue, but a relativley minor one. Over in England the archbishop of England tried to raise it to the podium in the election and failed miserably.

    In fact the only moral dilemmas at the minute which figure on the political radar are stem cells and I hesitate to say GM because I don't really class that as moral although some would.

    Differences in political parties over here are generally based on attitudes to Europe, and the role of the government:

    Labour (socialist) favours heavy regulation and the nanny state. Target driven and tax and spend or as some would call it tax and waste, they are very divided over europe and favour the welfare state.

    Conservative is and always has been about business. They favour a complete lack of leadership j/k they do not favour europe particularly, or a burdened civil state. They accept the welfar state but do not support it, they accept the human rights laws but do not support it.

    Liberal Democrats (far left) are pro europe, pro civil liberty and totally against getting into power

    Peter

  20. #20
    Civitate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,965

    Default

    What is this pork spending every keeps refering to?

    Prostitution should be legalized.
    "In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality." - Karl Marx on Capitalism
    Under the patronage of the venerable Marshal Qin. Proud member of the house of Sybian.

    Proud member of the Australian-New Zealand Beer Appreciation Society (ANZBAS)

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •