Prostitution - Immoral means Illegal?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I have, what I am sure will be an unpopular opinion-Gee thats new for me-lol.

A man can meet a woman; spend the day with her, buying her goodies of different sorts, lunch, dinner, drinks. If he is lucky, he MAY end up having sex with her. This is ok-in a legal sense- at least.

More often than not, it takes days, weeks or months of wining and dinning to have sex with a woman.

Now, when having sex with this woman, he risks all sorts of STD's and such, but this is normal and accepted as part of modern society.

Why is it then wrong-in a legal sense-to find a woman, spend what would amount to a nice date or two and be guaranteed sex.

Of course the other examples assumed-after weeks or months a relationship. But not everyone wants a relation every time; sometimes they just want sex for the pleasure of having sex.

Many women complain lots of guys are only out for one night stands. Legalizing prostitution would solve that problem. Guys who only want sex for the night could get it and guys who want relationships could go after them.

It would tend to limit men picking up women to more or less- those who want relationships.

I am sure to be flamed for this post, I assume a lot by women.

I will make you a deal, first provide calm, logical-NON-Religious- argument against what I said, and then feel free to flame away.




posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
It should not be illegal to sell one's body. It is a personal decision. The 10 commandments don't cover this issue. Wasn't Mary Mag a hooker?



Actually the catholic church started the rumor because they just couldn't fathom a woman being an apostle and being jesus' right hand man....

The legend goes that they ended up getting married and that is one's theory on what the holy grail is...

They did a dig in one of the old knight's templar's castle in france, the mayor allowed the dig to find evidence, and as soon as they hit something, the mayor stopped the dig, so the mystery continues, but as far as I know, the holy grail isn't the chalace...

ps: I agree with you on the hooker's mental problems, ect, however, whatever profession your in you come across people who have drug problems, and mental issues, such as carpenter's...

Then you have power tripper's in big paying postions, who have drug and personality disorders...

Prositution profession is just an easier example to give to people when you talk about mental and drug problems...

Also i'd like to know christian positions on incest... You think it's morally wrong to prostitute yourself (which I agree) but incest was in the bible and on top of it, it didn't mention one thing about that being morally wrong..

whats up with this?



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I don't think there is anything wrong with picking up a woman for nothing other then sex if she's willing to participate for a price... After all there are some women out there who use men for money and will sleep with them and marry them to reep the benefits...

I can think of two people i know right off the bat..

Call it what you want but if your going to use the term prostitution, you could easily apply that term to women in mainstream society...

Not all of course, I don't want to generalize, but they exist, and there are many of them.

It may not be as straightforward and obvious as a man and a prostitute making a deal through money, but in mainstream society it's a slower process and involves more obstabcles, the obstacles are mostly for men to go through so that the steps lead to whatever the women wants..

I think it's called manipulation.


[edit on 8-11-2004 by TrueLies]



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:22 AM
link   

I was just thinking..prostitution is illegal because of STDs right? Instead of spending so many of our tax dollars trying to round up hookers and their customers, why not just legalize it, and after testing them for STDs, issue licenses to the hookers?


As stated, in many nations, it IS legal.

It is also legal in the US! (it's state laws, not national) As you may or may not know, the state of Nevada has legalized prostitution.


It's illegal status in most states is due to two main reasons, Christian majority passing legislation based on morality, and the statistical link between prostitution and crime.

However, the statistical link is actually a moot point, as it's ILLEGAL prostitution that increases other crimes...not LEGAL prostitution. You would think that the decades of legality in Nevada would show this, but hey, guess not.


Personally, if two adults enter into a consensual agreement, I don't see the point against it.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The reality remains the same - morality is defined by the majority.


Well, yes and no. Morals are ultimately a personal choice which are based upon by each individual and their beliefs/opinions/etc. For example: The majority of people may feel it is morally wrong to eat meat. But for the people who do not feel it is morally wrong, it's not.

Now, Law is based upon the majority. But law is a structure of society, while morality is a structure of personal belief and not all laws are based upon morality.

The proof of this is that people create a set of moral beliefs for themselves even if they are not told to do so by some majority.



They are treated as criminals because the law says they are criminals. The majority defines morality, which is the basis of law. If they want out of the environment, they need to take the first step, because society is not going to mold itself to accomodate their world.

See the merry-go-round ride we are on?


Yes, I understand that. But like you said, Prostitutes are the Victims of Prostitution. So which is it, Victim or Criminal or Both???



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:28 AM
link   
If the woman have the same rights like a man= no prostitution--you are

going in wrong direction. chapo



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by chapo
If the woman have the same rights like a man= no prostitution--you are

going in wrong direction. chapo


I'm not exactly sure what you meant by that but as far as Men and Women having the same Rights, it would be YES. That is the whole meaning of the term "Equal Rights". Those "Equal Rights" are supposed to be for All People, meaning simply that the only requirement is that you are one of the People. (BTW, I'm speaking from the perspective of an American and of the Constitution of the U.S. just in case that wasn't already assumed.)

That being said I don't see what you were getting at and what it had to do with the Rights of Men & Women. Could you clearify?



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Look around you chapo



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Moral or immoral ? the bible says that " thou shall not wear a coat made of two kinds of cloth", but do we throw TV evangelists in jail for wearing a suit with silk lining?

What is illegal is a reflection of what politicians make up as they go along, it is not a function of reality, good practice or common sense, the law just is what it is, on a particular day at a particular moment.

In regards to prostitution, I once heard a quote, "a prostitute is a woman who finds the crime of poverty more repugnant than the sins of the flesh". Anyhow is anyone really that naive that they believe prostitution is going to go away just cause it's illegal, if so there's a pig outside feulled up and ready to go, don't miss your flight.

Prostitution is legal where I come from, and was hotly debated when legalised, the clear losers being an ex state premier who owned half the existing brothels and the CIB who were collecting big kickbacks to turn a blind eye. Make no mistake, wittingly or unwittingly, those who oppose reforms of prostitution work hand in glove with corruption and organised crime.

In any case, speaking from a mans piont of view, most men who use prostitutes don't pay for the sex, they can get sex in they want it. What men pay for is to not have to give them their phone number and not to have to put up with their crap.

[edit on 8-11-2004 by Flange Gasket]



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by mOjOm
The proof of this is that people create a set of moral beliefs for themselves even if they are not told to do so by some majority.


So true. I know of people who have never willingly stepped inside a church, and do not belong to any organized religion, who have a moral compass that I envy.

I also know a church-going preacher's son, who I would not trust at all.

This is why I said previously that hypocrisy is a thing that some of us are born with.


Yes, I understand that. But like you said, Prostitutes are the Victims of Prostitution. So which is it, Victim or Criminal or Both???

They are both. Criminal because they chose that path, victims because of how they are treated.




posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Hello, Europe calling.

In places where prostitution has been legalised and regulated the criminal connection reduces very significantly.

It's not perfect and you can find flaws but nevertheless the end result is far far superior IMHO.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
This is why I said previously that hypocrisy is a thing that some of us are born with.


Hopefully you also would agree that we are also born with Self Awarenss/Conscience, some degree of Objective Reasoning and the Ability to Learn and Mold ourselves into who we are on a personal level, again to atleast some degree. Not that everyone uses such abilities or even if they do that they do so in the best way, of course, but it is atleast some probability that things can change.


They are both. Criminal because they chose that path, victims because of how they are treated.


Ok, now here is the problem I am having with this though. Also, it's not like I don't understand the functional side of it, it's the logic behind that function that I am unable to understand as Valid. For example, using your posts from this topic:

1. They are treated as criminals because the law says they are criminals &

2. victims because of how they are treated.

3. Criminal because they chose that path.


So using 1. & 2., wouldn't that mean that their Victim status results from the Law which is Criminal in it's design???

Or is it that they are, using quote 3., the Criminal by their own choosing who is guilty of the Criminal Treatment of themselves???

Also, exactly what is included in the idea that they Choose to be Criminals??? Are you trying to imply that they chose the lifestyle of a Prostitute versus the lifestyle of a Hollywood Actress or Successful Business Woman???

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to sell anyone into believing the 'Hooker with the Heart of Gold' story or anything. However, I am trying to establish the fact that 'Their Choice' in many or most cases is one that is heavily Coerced' by factors which are overwhelming to a point which is beyond their control. Many times it is simply a forced desicion of accepting the lesser of two evils in order for their own survival. For example, I'm sure many of them figure that atleast Consentual Sexual Services is better than Selling Weapons & Drugs, Theft or Robbery since atleast the Intent is not one which is directed toward the Victimizing of some other person.

One last point which I would like to point out because I think it fits here and is something for others to think about. I know a woman who worked as a Dominatrix which is legal. One of her customers, a young military soldier, paid her very well for providing the service of tying him up and beating him in the testicles in various ways. She of course would pause now and then allowing him to recover between rounds of what was obviously Painful, yet Knowingly Requested and Repeatedly Purchased Physical Abuse.

Now, if it is not considered Criminal to mash this guys balls as a service which he requested because, for some reason of which I will never know or understand, he found pleasure from it. How the hell can anyone justify the notion that it is Criminal to be a Prostitute??? In both cases we have a payment which is agreed upon by both parties for services rendered involving those two parties who consentually entered into the transaction of their own accord.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Isn't it the same thing as the gay fight? Some people fing it immoral, so they make it illegal!?



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soulterashaun
George Carlin once said something like .....

"If selling is legal...and sex is legal, why isn't selling sex legal?"

[edit on 7-11-2004 by Soulterashaun]



Well I don't know. Why do you park in a driveway and drive on a parkway? Why do they call them 'apartments' when they are all together?

Prostitution is illegal ( a sick bird ) because of morals. Should it be? Not in my opinion. Go to Europe and women lay on the beach topless. In the U.S. it is indecent exposure. How absurd is that?



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
Isn't it the same thing as the gay fight? Some people fing it immoral, so they make it illegal!?


That is exactly what I'm trying to figure out myself. In many respects I'd say you're correct. In fact it's not as if I don't understand the obvious technical answers behind the question of 'Why is Prostitution Illegal'. I realize without any trouble that it is Illegal because their has been a document drawn up by Legislation, then Recorded, Distributed and Enforced that sais Prostitution is Illegal and is a Crime that is Punishable by Authority of State & Government Officials. (Or something to that effect.) That is technically how Laws work. We scribe some rule defining the rules of conduct, whatever they may be, then force others to comply by Threat and Punishment.

Now, whether or not Prostitution specifically is solely based upon Morality is not quite clear. It may include reasons other than that as well, including reasons which are of an agenda that is hidden yet still influences the reason behind such a law. Such hidden reasons should their be some certainly would help explain the logic behind the law IMO, since it is The Logic and Reasoning behind it which I do not understand.

People have Problems about the Morality of others for countless reasons of various degrees, yet in order for a Law to be established there usually has to be a Sound, Logical Reasoning as well that can be used to validate the purpose of the law instead of it being based simply on the Bias Nature and Constantly Changing Moral Opinions of People. (Although I realize it's becoming more common now that Morality seems good enough on it's own for most people.)

I just don't understand nor have I heard a good arguement backing up just How and Why we have it being illegal. Nor any reasoning that is not extremely flawed and hypocritical when compared with other rules of society. If it has been proved beneficial and if so in what way and who it ultimately benefits. So on and so forth...

Does that make sense???



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by just_a_pilot



Well I don't know. Why do you park in a driveway and drive on a parkway? Why do they call them 'apartments' when they are all together?


Watching a lot of the Comedy Channel stand up are we?



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Heehehehe sorry couldn't help myself



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
I'm all for nationwide legalized prostitution. I know in some areas of Nevada there is licensed brothels... licensed by the state. They are clean and cause very few problems.

Screw bush and his "book of morals" he expects us all to follow.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mOjOm
Hopefully you also would agree that we are also born with Self Awarenss/Conscience, some degree of Objective Reasoning and the Ability to Learn and Mold ourselves into who we are on a personal level, .... but it is atleast some probability that things can change.

Yes, I do believe that people can change. It's tough, but possible.



Ok, now here is the problem I am having with this though. Also, it's not like I don't understand the functional side of it, it's the logic behind that function that I am unable to understand as Valid. For example, using your posts from this topic:

1. They are treated as criminals because the law says they are criminals &

2. victims because of how they are treated.

3. Criminal because they chose that path.


So using 1. & 2., wouldn't that mean that their Victim status results from the Law which is Criminal in it's design???

Or is it that they are, using quote 3., the Criminal by their own choosing who is guilty of the Criminal Treatment of themselves???

Yes, the existence of the law makes them criminal, which oftens results in them being treated badly, which is the definition of victim I am using.

Is the law itself unjust? Possibly. Probably. But as the cop that arrests you is fond of saying, it's not his job to interpret the law, only to enforce it.

You can apply the same thinking to marijuana laws. Criminal? Yes. Moral? No. Supported by the majority? Yes. That's what makes them "enforceable".


Also, exactly what is included in the idea that they Choose to be Criminals??? Are you trying to imply that they chose the lifestyle of a Prostitute versus the lifestyle of a Hollywood Actress or Successful Business Woman???

They choose to be criminal because they did something they knew was illegal. Yes, they did choose the life of a prostitute. It's not illegal to be a Hollywood actress, and the prostitute didn't make that choice.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to sell anyone into believing the 'Hooker with the Heart of Gold' story or anything. However, I am trying to establish the fact that 'Their Choice' in many or most cases is one that is heavily Coerced' by factors which are overwhelming to a point which is beyond their control.

I disagree that it is beyond their control to make that choice. Once they have made it, circumstances may occur to make it impossible to reverse it (abusive/homicidal pimp).


One last point which I would like to point out because I think it fits here and is something for others to think about. I know a woman who worked as a Dominatrix which is legal.
:

I said early on that it's none of my business what two consenting adults (or more than two, who cares?) do with each other.




posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 11:36 PM
link   


It is also legal in the US! (it's state laws, not national) As you may or may not know, the state of Nevada has legalized prostitution.


That's true Gazrok, but not all of Nevada. Las Vegas does not have legal prostitution believe it or not. The legal Brothels are in Nye County, like the "Chicken Ranch". The prostitution that goes on in Las Vegas is illegal activity and the cops are constantly doing sting operations to arrest prostitutes there. Many do have STD's and their main intentions are to possibly drug and rob tourists.
The legal Brothels in Nye country are strictly regulated. The girls are checked by the health department atleast once a week. The Brothels pay huge taxes and most of those funds goes towards buying ambulances for the county. The crime rate in Nye county is almost nil compared to Las Vegas. No girls work there against their will and all are of age. You don't see prostitues on the streets here either. I'm not advocating legalizing prostitution, but it's worked here for a long time. The only problem I remember is when some hoods tried to rob a Brothel in Crystal. They shot up the place, but no one was killed. They didn't get very far as that's a long stretch of road and the cops know every inch of it! Many of the girls are not even from Nevada. Some are school teachers, lawyers, and college students. They do so many weeks on and so many off. The Brothels hire maids, landscapers and have special cooks for the girls. They also hire security guards to prevent what happened in Crystal and that was many years ago.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join