Should prostitution be legalized?

Should prostitution be illegal?

  • Yes, it is an offense against God and man.

    Votes: 2 1.2%
  • Yes, it is a gateway to other bad behaviors.

    Votes: 5 2.9%
  • No, it should be legalized and regulated for disease control.

    Votes: 127 74.3%
  • No, it should be decriminalized and unregulated.

    Votes: 24 14.0%
  • On Planet X, we have pleasure-bots and don't need prostitutes.

    Votes: 13 7.6%

  • Total voters
    171
  • Poll closed .
Rufo, yes I want a list of what values they are trying to protect. What values should really come ahead of individual freedom and personal privacy? Under what doctrine does society get to control my body?
 
gstan wrote:
Those who are arguing against legal prostitution are essentially seeking to require everyone to subscribe to their particular value system, which tells them that prostitution is wrong.

Not necessarily. That is not what I have been arguing. I have been arguing basically that it is far more complicated a subject than just A or B, legalize or don't. And that unless and until someone can provide real information, real research, real studies that shows some evidence that legalization of prostitution actually improves the situation for prostitutes, I am not inclined to think there is a reason to legalize prostitution. Anecdotes, hearsay, and idealogicial babble about individual freedoms are irrelevant.

Those arguing in favor of legal prostitution are not requiring anyone to subscribe to a particular value system.

Sure they are. Do you think law enforcement, regulation programs, medical testing programs, and educational programs are free? They are asking everyone in society to pay for it.

Just one guy's opinion: I find prostitution objectionable. I can't imagine any circumstances under which I would ever visit one. However, it is not right for me to impose my values upon the rest of my community/society based on my personal beliefs (even when a large majority of the population may share my viewpoint). I see no harm in others, who do not find it objectionable, freely engaging in that activity.

How much are you willing to pay to support the freedom of people to do something you yourself find objectionable? How much of your taxes is an acceptable amount for you to pay for prostitution regulation? If you are unwilling to pay more taxes to fund prostitution programs, are you willing to let funding be cut from other social programs, like education or health care, in order to pay for other peoples desire to do something you find objectionable?

One side of this argument is putting personal moral or idealogical bias ahead of freedom and personal privacy. The other side is not.

I would say both of the two sides you see are based entirely on moral and idealogical preference. One side values "individual freedom" of higher importance. The other side considers the "greater good".

My own position is somewhere in between.
 
Point conceded. I suppose in a truly free society, one is as free to be 'anti-freedom' as one is to be 'pro-freedom', and I can see now that my side is ideologically biased in the argument in favor of freedom.
It's not a matter of anti- and pro-freedom, and I'm disappointed if you actually thought that was what I meant. However, your side is ideologically biased in favor of one kind of freedom. Favoring it over other kinds of freedom, or the freedom of other people, or other important values (surely freedom is not the only thing you value?) does not make you right.

Rufo, yes I want a list of what values they are trying to protect. What values should really come ahead of individual freedom and personal privacy? Under what doctrine does society get to control my body?
I can't possibly speak for everyone - there are certainly those who would respond with God, purity and decency, but they'll have to speak for themselves, because I understand them no better than you do. What I am trying to protect is, among other things, equality, sex as a display of affection rather than dominance and the right not to be exploited to an unlimited extent.

It's strange that you ask this right after complaining that all you got from us was ideology. If you want better answers, you may have to ask better questions.
 
Not necessarily. That is not what I have been arguing. I have been arguing basically that it is far more complicated a subject than just A or B, legalize or don't. And that unless and until someone can provide real information, real research, real studies that shows some evidence that legalization of prostitution actually improves the situation for prostitutes, I am not inclined to think there is a reason to legalize prostitution. Anecdotes, hearsay, and idealogicial babble about individual freedoms are irrelevant.



Sure they are. Do you think law enforcement, regulation programs, medical testing programs, and educational programs are free? They are asking everyone in society to pay for it.



How much are you willing to pay to support the freedom of people to do something you yourself find objectionable? How much of your taxes is an acceptable amount for you to pay for prostitution regulation? If you are unwilling to pay more taxes to fund prostitution programs, are you willing to let funding be cut from other social programs, like education or health care, in order to pay for other peoples desire to do something you find objectionable?



I would say both of the two sides you see are based entirely on moral and idealogical preference. One side values "individual freedom" of higher importance. The other side considers the "greater good".

My own position is somewhere in between.

This argument is total strawman crap. First off I'm not suggesting regulation, I'm suggesting legalization. Legalization would be far cheaper than the current situation where we spend money on enforcement. It's not clear what regulation would bring to the table here at all.

If you want to create an agency or something to regulate it, that's YOU not me. Either way if you do regulate it the cost could easily be covered with taxes on it. To be clear I'm not suggesting this, I'm just showing that your argument doesn't hold any water.

Also what is the HUMAN COST of throwing people in jail when they aren't actively hurting someone else? How does a woman renting her vagina hurt anyone and why should they or their client be put in jail? IMHO the human cost of doing this is higher than any amount of money.

Why do people want to control others bodies so much? I really don't get it, it just seems like another form of power control to me (can't have the peasants controlling their own bodies they might get uppity). Note that the "higher classes" like our ruling politicians break these rules as well (I'm talking about you Spitzer). What a total crock these laws are.
 
You're not thinking very hard, Newton.

Legalize what? Streetwalkers? Brothels? Pimps? Call girls? Human traffickers? They all are a part of the entity that is presently called "prostitution" Legalize all of it? Where? In front of schools? In your kid's daycare? At the office? At Home Depot? Do people that don't wish to participate have to be involved? Will your wife or gf have to walk through a new "red light district" on her way to work or home? Does she have a right to *not* have to do that?

There's no such thing as "just legalize it". You have to declare what will be legal, and under what conditions.

I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that not one person has advocated throwing prostitutes in jail. It is you who is creating a strawman.
 
You're not thinking very hard, Newton.

Legalize what? Streetwalkers? Brothels? Pimps? Call girls? Human traffickers? They all are a part of the entity that is presently called "prostitution" Legalize all of it? Where? In front of schools? In your kid's daycare? At the office? At Home Depot? Do people that don't wish to participate have to be involved? Will your wife or gf have to walk through a new "red light district" on her way to work or home? Does she have a right to *not* have to do that?

There's no such thing as "just legalize it". You have to declare what will be legal, and under what conditions.

I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that not one person has advocated throwing prostitutes in jail. It is you who is creating a strawman.
For 'throwing the prostitutes in jail' I'd suggest you check the legal code of the United States of America, and the variety of state and local codes contained within. That's whats advocating it currently (though mostly the police favor the fine and release system - indirect taxation).

As for legalization as opposed to making new laws, here's my plan - drop any and all laws pertaining to it, then make new laws. Create registration, which would give them an ID card, access to free/reduced cost STD costs, healthcare, etc., as well as certify when they had their last STD exam. Allow brothels, etc., if they want to form, but do NOT force the creation of Brothels. The registration would be a database inaccessible to any non-governmental agency. Offer rehab to anyone who wants it, make it attractive, and make sure it is not tied to any ID system accessible to anyone. There would be an 800 number where you could call with a prostitutes ID number, and get the date of their last STD exam and the results. Their ID card would not have their legal name on it, but it would have a number and a picture.

Now you have full legalization, and improved protection. Now we can land like a ton of bricks on the actual evils in the system - the pimps and the pushers. Coercion is against the law, and it is wrong. Currently there's a large problem with prostitutes testifying, because they are breaking the law, and because they are unsure of their income and status after their pimp is gone. This removes that fear. Crush the pimps, make the concept as out of date and foreign as speakeasies or the people who brewed bathtub gin in their basement.

Full, unrestricted legalization. Of course normal laws would apply - sex with a minor is rape, exposing yourself in public is indecent exposure, and businesses have the right to regulate what goes on in their establishment, as does any property owner (do you see people selling video games, haircuts, or beanie babies in Home Depot?).
 
Not necessarily. That is not what I have been arguing. I have been arguing basically that it is far more complicated a subject than just A or B, legalize or don't.

It is not a complicated argument, you are simply making it more complicated to rationalize your side of the argument.

And that unless and until someone can provide real information, real research, real studies that shows some evidence that legalization of prostitution actually improves the situation for prostitutes, I am not inclined to think there is a reason to legalize prostitution. Anecdotes, hearsay, and idealogicial babble about individual freedoms are irrelevant.

Not being harassed by the police and court system and not going to jail, paying fines or being forced to do community service would improve the situation for prostitutes.

And individual freedoms are not irrelevant. What country do you live in?

Sure they are. Do you think law enforcement, regulation programs, medical testing programs, and educational programs are free? They are asking everyone in society to pay for it.

How much are you willing to pay to support the freedom of people to do something you yourself find objectionable?

An amount equal to the amount of new tax revenue generated from legalization plus the amount saved by not having law enforcement wasting time arresting people for having consensual sex.

How much of your taxes is an acceptable amount for you to pay for prostitution regulation?

See previous answer.

If you are unwilling to pay more taxes to fund prostitution programs, are you willing to let funding be cut from other social programs, like education or health care, in order to pay for other peoples desire to do something you find objectionable?

I'm not unwilling, so the fact that I do want to let funding be cut from other social programs is irrelevant.

I would say both of the two sides you see are based entirely on moral and idealogical preference. One side values "individual freedom" of higher importance. The other side considers the "greater good".

My own position is somewhere in between.

Gosh, if only everyone had the 'individual freedom' to decide for themselves which values they believe to be for the 'greater good' and structure their lives accordingly.
 
Last edited:
You're not thinking very hard, Newton.

Legalize what? Streetwalkers? Brothels? Pimps? Call girls? Human traffickers? They all are a part of the entity that is presently called "prostitution" Legalize all of it? Where? In front of schools? In your kid's daycare? At the office? At Home Depot? Do people that don't wish to participate have to be involved? Will your wife or gf have to walk through a new "red light district" on her way to work or home? Does she have a right to *not* have to do that?

There's no such thing as "just legalize it". You have to declare what will be legal, and under what conditions.

I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that not one person has advocated throwing prostitutes in jail. It is you who is creating a strawman.


Just plain old legalize sex for money. Most of the other things you list are strawmans and you are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. The same laws that say you can't open a hotdog stand without a permit would already apply to things like street prostitution.

The current law says to throw them in jail. That is the side you are currently on. If you want to suggest a new plan that doesn't involve jail I'm all ears. I want total legalization but sometimes you do need to compromise for practical reasons. What we have now is total garbage.

Grey's plan seem reasonable to me although I would personally just make it available and if people want to see unlicensed prostitutes then that's their business.

Why the need to control people's lives in such detail?
 
Gosh, if only everyone had the 'individual freedom' to decide for themselves which values they believe to be for the 'greater good' and structure their lives accordingly.

Yes, that would be classed as "anarchy".

Nice thought, but not particularly practical.
 
Why do people want to control others bodies so much? I really don't get it, it just seems like another form of power control to me (can't have the peasants controlling their own bodies they might get uppity).
Are you really stating this without seeing the irony of it? This is one of the exact reasons why I oppose prostitution - it allows buying control of others' bodies. Why? I really don't get it either.

The current law says to throw them in jail. That is the side you are currently on. If you want to suggest a new plan that doesn't involve jail I'm all ears. I want total legalization but sometimes you do need to compromise for practical reasons. What we have now is total garbage.
By 'the current law' you are talking about the current law where you live. Where I live, buying and procuring sex is prohibited, while selling sex is not. That is the law I'm arguing for. I don't think throwing prostitutes in jail is a good idea.

Yes, that would be classed as "anarchy".

Nice thought, but not particularly practical.
If this was actually a suggestion of changing from democracy to anarchy, I don't think I'll take that debate. Anarchist theories have some redeemable qualities, and even though I don't believe in them fully, I wouldn't want to debate against them. However, as long as I live in a democracy I have as much right to restrict people's 'individual freedom' for what I consider a 'greater good' as anyone else.
 
... here's my plan - drop any and all laws pertaining to it, then make new laws. Create registration, which would give them an ID card, access to free/reduced cost STD costs, healthcare, etc., as well as certify when they had their last STD exam. Allow brothels, etc., if they want to form, but do NOT force the creation of Brothels. The registration would be a database inaccessible to any non-governmental agency. Offer rehab to anyone who wants it, make it attractive, and make sure it is not tied to any ID system accessible to anyone. There would be an 800 number where you could call with a prostitutes ID number, and get the date of their last STD exam and the results. Their ID card would not have their legal name on it, but it would have a number and a picture.

I'll be damned if my tax money should go to go into funding any of these programs. Have you any idea how much money all these things would cost? Have you even considered who would foot the bill for it all?

Originally Posted by The Atheist
Isn't raping the women of the vanquished just a means of propagating the DNA of the victors?

You cannot possibly be serious.....
Please tell me you are kidding....

Huh? Where do you get a lack of respect towards women? (Psst: she said MEN) Also respect is really something reserved for individuals. Applying respect towards groups seems kind of silly anyway.

Trino: For as long as i have "known" you, it has become quite clear that you have very little respect for others, and the only positive thing i can say is that at least you are willing to admit it.


~~~~​

As meg said: This issue is far more complex than most of you are willing to take into account.
 
Trino: For as long as i have "known" you, it has become quite clear that you have very little respect for others, and the only positive thing i can say is that at least you are willing to admit it.


On the contrary. It's you who aren't respectful of other people and want to tell them how to live their lives. I have nothing but the highest level of respect for other people. I'm willing to let them choose to do what they want with their lives and their own bodies. You are the one who lacks respect for people and thinks that everyone needs to be protected from themselves. Quit projecting Jaana.
 
Are you really stating this without seeing the irony of it? This is one of the exact reasons why I oppose prostitution - it allows buying control of others' bodies. Why? I really don't get it either.

I see what you are saying but you are simply wrong. It's their CHOICE, nobody is telling them they have to sell themselves. Forced indentured servitude should be and is illegal, what other situation applies to your argument? Or you really telling me that when a prostitute sells sex that they are losing control of their bodies involuntarily? Where do you get the moral authority to tell them they can't do what they want with their own body? Who owns your body? Would you be happy if I told you that you couldn't partake in your job or business because I don't happen to like it even though it doesn't effect me? Your argument is total hypocrisy!

Do you support assisted or non-assisted suicide as a basic human right? Other side of the same coin IMHO.
 
You cannot possibly be serious.....
Please tell me you are kidding....

Even better, come up with a better reason for it.

:)

That's how it works - if you think I'm wrong, present some details to rebut, typing "You cannot be serious..." [twice] doesn't add a lot to the conversation. And yes, broadly speaking, that's exactly what I think.

Trino: For as long as i have "known" you, it has become quite clear that you have very little respect for others, and the only positive thing i can say is that at least you are willing to admit it.

As meg said: This issue is far more complex than most of you are willing to take into account.

Far be it from me to defend Trino, but own your contribution to the thread thus far has been a load of old cobblers and you've left unanswered questions littered through it like dung after a cattle drive.

The biggest problem you haven't yet addressed is precisely how you're going to remove the demand for prostitution, which, given the success the world has had so far in removing demand for alcohol, marijuana, heroin and even child-prostitution, I don't blame you.

If all you're going to do is make silly, impossible suggestions and even sillier sweeping statements like "This issue is far more complex than most of you are willing to take into account" as some kind of attack or defence (I'm really not sure which), you're wasting everyone's time.

Ideology 10/10
Reality 0/10
 
I see what you are saying but you are simply wrong. It's their CHOICE, nobody is telling them they have to sell themselves.
Nobody is? How do you know?

Forced indentured servitude should be and is illegal, what other situation applies to your argument?
Drug addicts whose judgement is warped. Other people who are, for whatever reason, so desperate to get money that they feel forced to prostitute themselves. People who are damaged by, for instance, sexual abuse. For instance.

Or you really telling me that when a prostitute sells sex that they are losing control of their bodies involuntarily?
They are losing control over their bodies in exchange for money. Some voluntarily, some less so.

Where do you get the moral authority to tell them they can't do what they want with their own body?
From that I think prostitution is harmful. Laws are all about controlling what people do because you think certain behaviors are harmful.

Who owns your body?
I do.

Would you be happy if I told you that you couldn't partake in your job or business because I don't happen to like it even though it doesn't effect me?
Do you really think I'm suggesting we outlaw buying sex because "I don't happen to like it"? I don't happen to like unfaithfulness either, but I'm not suggesting we outlaw that. I want to outlaw buying sex because I believe it is bad for people. Whether or not those people are me does not make me think it to be less wrong.

Your argument is total hypocrisy!
You'll have to clarify why you think so.

Do you support assisted or non-assisted suicide as a basic human right? Other side of the same coin IMHO.
No, I don't. You are right that my opinions on there matters may be connected. The reasons are, however, different, so I would not like to debate this further in this thread.
 
Last edited:
I'll be damned if my tax money should go to go into funding any of these programs. Have you any idea how much money all these things would cost? Have you even considered who would foot the bill for it all?
The sex industry's income becomes taxable. I imagine that would more than do the trick (pun intended). At $30-$50 per test, that's not bad. The cost of administering it would probably be around the same as administering the drivers license, possibly a little more, so overall, lets say $100 per prostitute per month, or $1,200 a year. Assuming they pay only 20% of their income in tax (oh do I wish I paid that little) the government would get that back if they only made $6000 per year. More reasonably, the government could expect to easily exceed the cost of administering the program several times over in tax dollars. Even doubling that total, and the cost is less than the revenue. Your objection is irrational.

As for the unlicensed streetwalkers, I normally wouldn't be in opposition, except there seems to be a compelling public interest to arrest the spread of dangerous and deadly diseases. Its similar to the food safety regulations, which I also support - you may be choosing the risky behavior, but you are also making that choice for others, against their will.

As meg said: This issue is far more complex than most of you are willing to take into account.
Not really. Strip it of any moral language (moral is a value-loaded synonym for 'woo') and you have two compelling interests - preventing the spread of disease, and preventing anyone from being coerced. Legalization solves both better than illegality, especially if moves are made to preserve anonymity (a basic right) and helps prevent the coercion, by offering more and better legal recourse.
 
Even better, come up with a better reason for it.

:)

That's how it works - if you think I'm wrong, present some details to rebut, typing "You cannot be serious..." [twice] doesn't add a lot to the conversation. And yes, broadly speaking, that's exactly what I think.
To be honest, I think the original point which meg was trying to make with briging it up is that rape is a display of dominance, perhaps even more so than killing someone (which does not necessarily make it worse). So the rape of enemy women during or after a war is another part of attempting to dominate the enemy. It is also an extreme humiliation, which is in the same vein. Frankly, I believe propagating DNA has little or nothing to do with it.

As for why Jaana and Fiona react with such disgust to your comment, I think it is the use of the word "just". It can give the impression that you are trivializing the matter. Like, since it's "just" about propagating DNA, it doesn't matter as much. Your later statements have convinced me that this is not the case, but please be more understanding when people react like this. The statement quoted does invite misunderstanding, and if you had indeed tried to trivialize rape, disgust would have been a proper response.
 
As for legalization as opposed to making new laws, here's my plan - drop any and all laws pertaining to it, then make new laws. Create registration, which would give them an ID card, access to free/reduced cost STD costs, healthcare, etc., as well as certify when they had their last STD exam. Allow brothels, etc., if they want to form, but do NOT force the creation of Brothels. The registration would be a database inaccessible to any non-governmental agency. Offer rehab to anyone who wants it, make it attractive, and make sure it is not tied to any ID system accessible to anyone. There would be an 800 number where you could call with a prostitutes ID number, and get the date of their last STD exam and the results. Their ID card would not have their legal name on it, but it would have a number and a picture.

Now you have full legalization, and improved protection. Now we can land like a ton of bricks on the actual evils in the system - the pimps and the pushers. Coercion is against the law, and it is wrong. Currently there's a large problem with prostitutes testifying, because they are breaking the law, and because they are unsure of their income and status after their pimp is gone. This removes that fear. Crush the pimps, make the concept as out of date and foreign as speakeasies or the people who brewed bathtub gin in their basement.

Full, unrestricted legalization. Of course normal laws would apply - sex with a minor is rape, exposing yourself in public is indecent exposure, and businesses have the right to regulate what goes on in their establishment, as does any property owner (do you see people selling video games, haircuts, or beanie babies in Home Depot?).

Actually, this sounds like the beginnings of a halfway decent plan to me. I think you've got a ways to go before you're ready to submit it to your town council, though.

What would be the incentive to get prostitutes to register and get an ID card? Would there be any negative reaction for those that choose not to?

Any thoughts as to how the access to free/reduced STD costs, healthcare, etc should be financed?

How would you keep people who aren't prostitutes from accessing the free/reduced cost healthcare?

You mentioned brothels forming, or allowing them to form.. Where? Anywhere in town? Out of town? Any restriction on size or operating hours? Do the neighbors in a community have a right to declare whether they want a brothel on their block or not? Do the people of a town have a right to vote whether they want prostitution in their town or not?

The idea of an 800 number johns could call to find out a prostitute's latest std results is interesting. I suspect that would be in complete violation of current hipaa laws, though. Do you think we need to change those too?

I very much like the idea of this:
Crush the pimps, make the concept as out of date and foreign as speakeasies or the people who brewed bathtub gin in their basement.

and would like to hear what real methods you might suggest to accomplish it, and how this would be financed. This, in my opinion is the only aspect of your plan that seem to be getting close to what would improve protection for prostitutes.

According the DOJ paper I linked to before, ( http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm )
89% of women in prostitution want out.
60-75% of women in prostitution have been raped,
70-95% percent were physically assaulted, and
68% met the criteria for post traumatic stress disorder in the same range as treatment-seeking combat veterans

According to this list of "prostitution facts"
http://www.rapeis.org/activism/prostitution/prostitutionfacts.html

"78% of 55 women who sought help from the Council for Prostitution Alternatives in 1991 reported being raped an average of 16 times a year by pimps, and were raped 33 times a year by johns. (Susan Kay Hunter, Council for Prostitution Alternatives Annual Report, 1991, Portland, Oregon) 85% of prostitutes are raped by pimps. (Council on Prostitution Alternatives, Portland, 1994)"

Girls and women in prostitution have a mortality rate 40 times higher than the national average.

75% of women in escort prostitution had attempted suicide

Prostituted women comprised 15% of all completed suicides reported by hospitals.

ID cards and STD tests are all well and good, but they don't protect prostitutes from their most prevalent danger; assault, rape and murder by their own pimps and johns, and the mental anguish they suffer from living through the ordeal.

There are many many posts championing a prostitute's rights to sell her vagina, yet only a few of us are championing a prostitute's right to work without being raped, assaulted or murdered.

I suspect that the individual liberty that most concerns some here is more about a man's "freedom" to purchase a hooker if he wants one, and that he really couldn't care less what happens to her before or after that.

GreyICE, I like that you are really starting to think seriously about this. And I think you are on to something. I hope you will spend some more thought on the above, though, before you declare "Now you have full legalization, and improved protection."
 
The statement quoted does invite misunderstanding, and if you had indeed tried to trivialize rape, disgust would have been a proper response.

That's why people should not jump to conclusions. :)

... yet only a few of us are championing a prostitute's right to work without being raped, assaulted or murdered.

I hope you're including me in that, because that's the position I've had right from the start. I have said any number of times in this thread that not only must prostitution laws be made to safeguard the prostitutes, they must be enforceable and enforced.
 
As for the unlicensed streetwalkers, I normally wouldn't be in opposition, except there seems to be a compelling public interest to arrest the spread of dangerous and deadly diseases. Its similar to the food safety regulations, which I also support - you may be choosing the risky behavior, but you are also making that choice for others, against their will.

Actually I could go along with this. Another example of the same phenomenon is antibiotics. I'm for full legalization of all drugs except those that you can harm others by using. Antibiotics become useless over time and this can be accelerated by using them when unnecessary. Heroin therefore should be legal but antibiotics should only be available by prescription. Regulating certain sex work could reasonably fall into this same test.

As for the other suggestions about id cards etc. If Meg and others could get on board with something like that then I'm in total agreement. Let's set this up so that we can get rid of the pimps as this is a bad situations (btw drug legalization would make it harder for pimps to keep women by hooking them on drugs).
 

Back
Top Bottom