- Jan 12, 2006
- 5,454
- 441
- 37
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
No some people have different morals. Simply because one has different morals from yours does not mean they have none at all.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Prostitution
- Thread starter Washington
- Start date
No some people have different morals. Simply because one has different morals from yours does not mean they have none at all.
I guess respectful is a subjective term because it depends on who you talk to christian or non christian. I think I am going to disengage here as the posts are going from debate to just nasty attacks and thats not really fun debate.
Upvote
0
Maynard Keenan
Well-Known Member
- Aug 21, 2004
- 8,470
- 789
- 39
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Regardless of if it is good for people or not, or moral or not, it is not government's role to ban it. Personal behavior should only be regulated when it directly causes damage to non-consenting parties.
Upvote
0
NeverClever
Active Member
- Nov 4, 2007
- 330
- 30
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Rebekka
meow meow meow meow meow meow
Well, lots of prostitutes didn't freely choose their profession (even over here, where prostitution is a legal career choice), so I wouldn't call that consenting. Also, you could argue that in case of a married man visiting a prostitute, the wife is likely not consenting to her husband committing adultery, either. And it can damage marriages.
Upvote
0
TooCurious
Kitten with a ball of string
- Aug 10, 2003
- 1,665
- 233
- 42
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Then there should be avenues for people who are forced into prostitution (or any other activity) without their consent to receive help; presumably, things like kidnapping, slavery, blackmail, etc. are already illegal? Not to mention rape, which would presumably include any act of forcing sexual contact upon a person without his/her consent. There are already laws against these things; these laws need to be enforced more rigorously, if things are as you say (I'm not claiming they aren't; I'm merely saying that I have to take your word for it, since I do not have firsthand knowledge).
RebekkaH said:
That's between the man and his wife--just as it would be if the man cheated on her in a fashion that did not involve a financial transaction. Unless one thinks that the government should make infidelity a crime, this has nothing to do with whether or not prostitution should be legal.
Upvote
0
Rebekka
meow meow meow meow meow meow
There are laws against those things, but it's more difficult to enforce them when prostitution is legal. And prostitution is a complex thing that has a lot to do with poverty. Over here, most prostitutes are foreign women from eastern European or Asian countries, who need the money to support their families. Even when they are not directly forced (though many are, a sort of slavery), still they don't have enough other options, or don't know other options, to support themselves or their families. Most prostitutes would have chosen a different career if they had had the choice. Most people don't want their daughters to choose that career - which is telling. If a certain profession is legal, why would you object to your daughter choosing it?
So there are a lot of problems that need to be solved. I think legalization is not the best way to solve it - from the prostitute's point of view. Perhaps it is a good solution from a government point of view (although my government would disagree, looking at the state we're in now).
I know - I was only remarking on Maynard's comment on causing damage on non-consenting parties. There is damage.
Upvote
0
- Jan 12, 2006
- 5,454
- 441
- 37
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
On the other hand, its not unheard of for women to allow their husbands to visit prostitutes for whatever reason and its also not unheard of for couples to hire a prostitute for a night for threesomes. I'm not sure how to be more subtle about the point I'm trying to make, simply that not all wives are against their husbands visiting prostitutes.
Upvote
0
Maynard Keenan
Well-Known Member
- Aug 21, 2004
- 8,470
- 789
- 39
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Even if prostitution were legal, forced prostitution would still be illegal.
The issue with the second point has nothing to do with prostitution. If you were going to make something illegal, it would be adultery. But I'd still oppose that.
Upvote
0
Rebekka
meow meow meow meow meow meow
There's a huge grey area between voluntary and forced prostitution. Legal prostitution doesn't really solve problems, at least not over here. So why make it legal?
As for adultery becoming illegal - well, that's for another thread. I think adultery is immoral as well as prostitution, but if you think prostitution isn't, then by all means vote for a political party that wants to legalise prostitution. That's how we legalized it here, even if I was against it personally.
Is there a party that wants to legalize it in the US?
Upvote
0
NeverClever
Active Member
- Nov 4, 2007
- 330
- 30
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
poohgirl
It's Great to be a Championship FLORIDA GATOR!
Most wouldn't! I don't support prostitution or buying women or men for an hour or a night. It does far more damage than just between those having sex together and expands way beyond the families involved as well. It effects all of us in one way or another.
Gosh where are all the other morally conservative people I use to see around here awhile back? Were they eaten alive or what? Sorry, I had to ask.
Upvote
0
- Jan 12, 2006
- 5,454
- 441
- 37
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Yes, we had a party for it a while back, didn't you get the memo? They tasted mighty good with ketchup if I do say so myself.
Upvote
0
March 11, 2008
Research and data on prostitution, punishment and shaming sanctions [in Chicago]
We estimate that prostitutes are officially arrested only once per 450 tricks, with johns arrested even less frequently. Punishment conditional on arrest is limited — roughly 1 in 10 prostitute arrests leads to a prison sentence, with a mean sentence length of 1.2 years among that group. For many johns, perhaps the greatest risk is the stigma that comes with having a mug shot posted on the Chicago Police Department web page.
In 1999 there were 5,651 prostitution-related arrests in the City of Chicago.
So if 10% of the prostitution arrests leads to imprisonment, then our prisons had to make room and support 565 women for 1.2 years. This is not only a burden on our prison system but on our tax revenue. And this is just one city in the USA.In 1998
Currently one in three women in jails today were arrested for prostitution
As of mid-1998, there were 83,000 women in prison throughout the country, accounting for 6.4 percent of the total prison population, and 63,000 women in jails,
So if there were 146,000 women incarcerated in 1998, and one third of them were there for prostitution, that means almost 49,000 women were in jail/prison that year for selling sex. THAT, is a lot of prison facility and tax money usage. And I would bet it's well over 50,000 women today. And all because we have decided that the exchange of money for consensual sex is a crime. And, I have to ask, Why are pimps even gone after? Is it a crime to be a pimp?
Upvote
0
I'm all for decriminalising prostitution, I think it's ridiculous that prostitutes who have been attacked or raped by a punter feel they can't go to the police because then they themselves would face criminal charges and considering it is poverty which generally drives women (and men) down that route, to give that person a criminal record is counter-productive because it greatly reduces their chances of finding a job thus forcing them to stay working on the streets.
Upvote
0
I would like to ask the question a bit differently:
Why is it that with some things that come with problems people hold the problems against the thing itself (i.e. advocating to do with it altogether or making it illegal), whilst with others they advocate regulations that help freeing the thing from the problems?
Like:
Drug abuse is overproportional in prostitution, sports and the showbusiness. With the latter two I never hear the frequent drug abuse mentioned as an argument in favour of criminalizing sports or pop music.
There are thousands of transmittable diseases. These are never brought up as an argument for criminalizing the behaviours by which they are transmitted or the professions in the context of which they are transmitted overproportionally - unless it´s sex-related.
There are many businesses in which exploitation and "objectification" occur. However, I don´t hear that brought forth as an argument against the sort of business per se - instead people advocate regulations that prevent exploitation. Unless it´s the sex business.
That, to me, suggests that these reasons that are commonly brought forth against prostitution are not the actual reasons, but mere a posteriori rationalizations of something else: The feeling that there is something "inherently" wrong with it.
Why is it that with some things that come with problems people hold the problems against the thing itself (i.e. advocating to do with it altogether or making it illegal), whilst with others they advocate regulations that help freeing the thing from the problems?
Like:
Drug abuse is overproportional in prostitution, sports and the showbusiness. With the latter two I never hear the frequent drug abuse mentioned as an argument in favour of criminalizing sports or pop music.
There are thousands of transmittable diseases. These are never brought up as an argument for criminalizing the behaviours by which they are transmitted or the professions in the context of which they are transmitted overproportionally - unless it´s sex-related.
There are many businesses in which exploitation and "objectification" occur. However, I don´t hear that brought forth as an argument against the sort of business per se - instead people advocate regulations that prevent exploitation. Unless it´s the sex business.
That, to me, suggests that these reasons that are commonly brought forth against prostitution are not the actual reasons, but mere a posteriori rationalizations of something else: The feeling that there is something "inherently" wrong with it.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
