Supreme Court strikes down Canada's prostitution laws

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
The Supreme Court of Canada has struck down the country's anti-prostitution laws in a unanimous decision, and given Parliament one year to come up with new legislation — should it choose to do so.

In striking down laws prohibiting brothels, living on the avails of prostitution and communicating in public with clients, the top court ruled Friday that the laws were over-broad and "grossly disproportionate."

Take that you American States legalizing herbal substances.

Think of the tourism opportunities.

Link: news.ca.msn.com...




posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Beartracker16
 

You folks will have to start taxing beavers to take advantage of this lack of a law.
You do have a lot of beavers up there.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Beartracker16
 


O Canada!

This more or less confirms the simple human rights fact that people own their own bodies. That could have been the whole ruling, "people own their own bodies". Solves lots of issues very quickly, and then the discussion is around the details (where the Devil is having dessert). In this case, how to license prostitution, the amount of tax to charge, what health laws will be followed or demanded of the people, etc. As long as there's money in the pot, governments will try to get what they consider their share, and in return will make the profession a little safer and hopefully a lot easier to operate. I know where Bill Maher will be taking his vacations now.
edit on 20-12-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
How about Uruguay? they legalized also. Maybe people are starting to see that humans have an expiration date and dont deserve to be limited in any way shape or form?

Just trying to see things from multiple perspectives.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Beartracker16
 


This may lead to the collapse of Canada's participation of online Porn.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Beartracker16
 


I haven't had a chance yet to read the decision but I will when i get back home tonight.

I wanted to post to say though that, just basing off your info, the Conservatives will implement much more focused and most likely harsher laws now.

I don't see Harper taking this smack to his tough on crime image without a reaction.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Well it can only go two ways as i see it. Go for it or I dont think so.

While i dont advocate selling your body per say....it should be an individual choice.

What is life but a bunch of experiences strung together.

Who should tell you what those experiences should be?

The government?

NO WAY.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   

GAOTU789
I don't see Harper taking this smack to his tough on crime image without a reaction.


I believe it was the Conservative(Harper) gov't that challenged these laws when Ontario legalized brothels. The SC rules them down. I don't know what else they can do now that wouldn't turn off a lot of Canadians.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Perhaps they ought to just look hard at Nevada and legalize along those lines. Not Clark County and that mess of teasers and 'look but don't touch' clubs. The real Nevada industry for that. It's not advertised...by law as I understand it. It's limited for location in very extreme ways, even in counties that do allow it, but most importantly, having ..partaken their offers of free showers for the passing trucker (truck stops charge over $10! really!) I came to learn in chat that they are regulated personally as tightly as the business is overall. Medical checks, criminal and more. Frequently.

Not a bad model for out of sight, out of mind and still existing for those interested. It's one path to take, anyway.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I would never pay a woman for her time. That kind of thing should be earned, as far as I am concerned.

That said, I find it disgusting that any authority would attempt to regulate how a woman has sex in one hand, and allow abortion due to "its her body" on the other. Even more disgusting: the difference between being arrested for soliciting a prostitute and cashing a check for making a porn movie is if there is a camera present. Imagine that!



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Gotta disagree with ya on this one Furry one... It's not even a morality issue to me, although that plays into my personal feelings.

It's one of personal and wider public health. Remember the infection/vector pyramid for one infected person spreading on out? Well.. It can't be stopped but open and unregulated? The stats for positive infection rates of HIV in some high prostitution cities around the world (including some close to home) speak volumes for regulatory need where it's an open service.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I have no issue with regulation, if that is what is needed. Or taxation (based on consumption, like beverage taxes in Texas).

But to arrest men because they are lonely and have found someone who is willing to help that loneliness? Some folks just aren't socially adept. Who am I to judge?



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Ahhh... It's my bad on misunderstanding your point then.

I'd say there is no disagreement at all then.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
FINALLY!

I'm VERY glad to have the supreme court come to their damn senses. Sex work should be a legal trade, it's not going away and properly regulated industry can be a safe place for women who WANT to work in the field.

Men too for that matter.

It'll be interesting to see over the next year what legislation comes up.

~Tenth



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Ahhh... It's my bad on misunderstanding your point then.

I'd say there is no disagreement at all then.


Good. Because Monty Python taught me to never mess with a rabbit.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   

bigfatfurrytexan

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Ahhh... It's my bad on misunderstanding your point then.

I'd say there is no disagreement at all then.


Good. Because Monty Python taught me to never mess with a rabbit.


Word.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Beartracker16
 


the anti-prostitution laws that were struck down as 'too broad' must have been an ironic twist-of-the-tongue

because the majority of escorts + prostitutes are females (aka: Broads)...ha har har


but realistically the anti prostitution & escorts mindset is based primarily in the morals prescribed by organized religions (as un scientific as they are)


selling sex is not a slam-dunk as the vacuous Christians portray it... the feminine subcontractors have to maintain a revolving door client list even as they cast-their-bread-upon-the-waters to find replacements for their ever changing product-for-sale.... hell these gals are top notch Entrepreneurs... (and the WH wants to socialize them like he did with health-cate)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Yeah, strip joints around here are....... Erm, hands on type places lol. Surprised the hell out of me the first time I got a real lap dance here. Nothing like crappy NY strip joints





new topics
top topics
 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join