It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Two Consenting Adults" and More

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 08:32 PM
This thread is not about what you might think. I have heard the argument that I shouldn't be concerned with what happens between two consenting adults. In fact this has been argued by liberals in Government time and time again regarding the relations between homosexuals. I have been thinking that this might be a good argument to be used in many other activities between individuals.

This argument could be used if "two consenting adults" agree to gamble and exchange their money in a game of chance. Why should this be illegal or against the law?

The argument could be used in euthanasia where as one adult is willing to be euthanised and another adult is willing to assist them in their suicide.

How about two consenting adults agreeing to exchange money for sexual gratification? Why is THIS against the law? After all...two consenting adults.

So, I am meandering a little bit and I am basically a natural-law proponent and don't believe a crime has been committed unless it is against a person or property. There must be a 'victim' for a crime to have occurred. Now, I do allow for some measure of criminal code for reckless endangerment of people or property, but for the most part you could say that speeding is legal because one assumes the risk of driving on a public road (much as a sports participant 'assumes the risk' of being injured while playing a sport or a fan assumes the risk of being hit by a ball or bat that flies into the stands at a baseball game as a normal part of the game (not if some angry player flings his bat into the stands and injures someone through his own carelessness).

Anyway, I am no legal scholar by any means, but I find myself becoming angry with all the laws and regulations where there are no victims. Gambling, prostitution and illicit substances are not my cup of tea, but I can't see a valid reason for them to be illegal in and of themselves. People should be able to do what they want on their own property unless it somehow affects someone other than themselves (like damming a stream and thus depriving those downstream of water).

Well, I am hoping to stimulate discussion of some of these ideas by the more learned and wise among the ATS partisans. I would like to find a simpler way of doing things that decriminalizes and repeals foolish and unneeded rules and regulations.

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 08:37 PM
reply to post by Metallicus

I pay a woman for sex: it is illegal.

I pay a woman to have sex on camera: legal.

Moral: Pay prostitutes to make porn, stay out of jail.

Seriously....i agree. Everything outside of the euthanasia argument.

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 08:40 PM
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

Hmmm, good point. So IF I were interested in that sort of thing I should be sure to film it, lol.

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 08:56 PM
Couldn't agree more (had to figure out what your rant was about at first
) In fact, I believe limiting people's choices has effectively castrated their decision making process and probably aiding or encouraging criminality.

If people had the freedom to experience consequences of their actions they would be more prone to life lessons. And just so we are clear, when a swat team has sub machine guns pointed at you, for a non-violent-non-victim-crime, and they are shouting "YOU DID THIS TO YOURSELF ***HOLE!" People don't really see it as consequence for their actions…

They see it like they are getting kidnapped for making choices, one's our forefathers made time and time again throughout 5-10,000 years.

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 09:00 PM
I am a christian and I say this in the nicest way.

It comes down to money / power / religion

If they cannot tax you for it it is illegal.
If they cannot control how you do it they will try to make it illegal.
If they believe it is a sin they will try to make it illegal

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 10:37 PM
reply to post by Metallicus

Homosexuals are sinners in the eyes of god. And religious people hate sinners.

We all know what Jesus said about gamblers. And religious people hate gamblers.

Euthanasia is not your choice, god tells you when to die. And religios people love the word of god.

Prostitution makes the woman a slut. And religious people hate sluts.

I have no idea what the common theme is, but I feel it is on the tip of my tongue.......

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 11:07 PM
reply to post by winofiend

I thought Jesus married a hooker, so that means hookers are good.

posted on Nov, 2 2013 @ 12:30 AM
reply to post by Metallicus

Suppose the reasons vary from country to country ... social order, exploitation, morality, religious reasons etc etc etc ...

The main comparison I can think of is perhaps slavery. Why can't I sell myself as a slave in Western countries? It's guarding my freedom via taking my freedom away I suppose. Prostitution is often seen as a form of slavery in many places.

posted on Nov, 2 2013 @ 05:17 AM
reply to post by Metallicus

you make sense...

that one person has it right though, things are legal or illegal according to the ability of the government to tax and control it...

homosexuality will never be able to be taxed so they said " two consenting adults"

gambling and prostitution, much different stories.

new topics

top topics


log in