Why is Prostitution Illegal?
- Thread starter demoman_chaos
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Whew, this is quite the wall of text. I'm going to break it down and analyze it piece by piece due to size, though usually this bothers me as some people will quote things out of context. So just bear with me here, and keep in mind none of this is personal.
Most cities operate by something called "zoning" where only certain types of establishments can only be built in certain areas. Most neighborhoods, for example, are zoned as "residential" and thus no business can come in, buy up all the property, and plunk down a Walmart or something. As this is the case, it would be safe to say there is no way in hell a brothel would be allowed to be built in a residential district.
Thus, most brothels would wind up being built either outside city limits or in heavy commercial districts which are more commonly known as "down town." Certainly some people live here, but it is a crowd of people who are either living in groups for college or singles, as most families and home makers try to move out a little.
It will still result in a scum magnet as you would call it, but that already occurs. One of the major thoroughfares in my city has the same reputation you described. This could be isolated down to about two buildings rather than a few dozen blocks, if we had properly run brothels.
And a male owner would, most likely, wind up failing if only because he wanted to sample what he sold, which could easily be classified as sexual harassment. Is all this a legal mess? Sure. But it's a cleaner mess than locking up hookers while pimps go free, because we can't even prove the pimp's involved. It's a cleaner mess than the drug rings that make profit off of pimps who hook their hookers onto the nastiest drugs we have.
Also, kinks just cost more, and if, say, a prostitute is unwilling to perform that particular kink there is no reason for a transaction to be performed. Communication would be a necessity, yes, but that can simply be resolved by creating contracts a customer must sign before any services are rendered.
And if that sounds odd, you already do this every time you use a credit card, buy from any company online, ever, or even go to a doctor.
Why should governments not rule on particular sex practices? Why should laws that apply to only one particular profession apply to others? I know doctors follow a Hippocratic oath, but that oath is never even considered to apply to cooks or interior decorators.
Also, I think you're wrong about divorce cases. if a man is going out to have a hooker every week, and the wife is unhappy, I think the wife would be perfectly within her rights to file for divorce. I can't see a logical reason for the legalization of prostitution to affect cases of infidelity, as marriage is only legally binding when it comes to taxes and medical; the infidelity thing is entirely based upon morals.
-
Well, I guess not known, but certainly not unheard of.
You see, we already have the technology to check for STDs. Planned Parenthood, a nonprofit organization, does this often for free. A doctor who is certified to license prostitutes would easily make some massive cash without really having to do any extra work.
Nor would the government have to make some random tax that joe schmoe is hit with just to make this work. All the government has to do is make the system self sufficient. If doctors have to get re-certified to offer prostitution licenses every so often (say, once a year) and the government charges the doctor a fee for it, this issue is no longer tax necessary. If you consider that hundreds of doctors are going to be doing this across the United States because each one sees the potential for profit, and the government, say, charges a thousand dollars to be properly certified, you've just made upwards of $100,000, not counting the taxes you would impose upon brothels as you would any institution. Every business pays taxes.
And now you have all the money you need to run just a few bureaucrats, which is all you need to certify the doctors.
[/sarcasm]
Society already has to handle the burden. We sit here and act like if we just ignore this little problem it will go away, stay hidden and not bother us in our cushioned lives. Fact is, every one of those beaten, broken women who feel like they have no where else to go could instead be empowered individuals if we just took a little time to take them from the fringe and give them a chance.
Literally every other society has, at one point or another, or even now, allowed Prostitution. Only America, foolish, Puritan America, doesn't except for one state that everyone agrees is fucked up. But then we wonder why people will go to such great lengths to satiate carnal desires.
Seriously, most people who attend strip clubs are older males, and I would assume the ones attending the brothels would be as well. sure, the urgency leaves, and your outlook does change. However, not everyone's outlook changes to the opinion that it is unnecessary. Some want it even more. Yes, young men will take advantage of it too, and so will middle aged men.
I've already dealt with your opinion of crime: force it into buildings, and arguments over payment won't happen. And if they do, well, that customer simply isn't going to be able to come back. It's exactly what happens when someone tries to steal from a restaurant.
Of course I don't want any future children I have exposed to it, at least not until I can talk to them about it. The rest of your argument here seems to be the classic NIMBY (Not in My BackYard) position. However there is a really simple solution to this.Therumancer said:
Most cities operate by something called "zoning" where only certain types of establishments can only be built in certain areas. Most neighborhoods, for example, are zoned as "residential" and thus no business can come in, buy up all the property, and plunk down a Walmart or something. As this is the case, it would be safe to say there is no way in hell a brothel would be allowed to be built in a residential district.
Thus, most brothels would wind up being built either outside city limits or in heavy commercial districts which are more commonly known as "down town." Certainly some people live here, but it is a crowd of people who are either living in groups for college or singles, as most families and home makers try to move out a little.
And here is the key to solve that: all prostitution should be enforced to occur within a brothel. Street walkers should still be illegal. This ensures that the women (and possibly men) involved are licensed properly, that they are out of view of the general population, and that both customers and the whores are following a simple code of conduct. if its a legal place of business, it's a lot less likely that someone will come in and cut some poor woman up.
It will still result in a scum magnet as you would call it, but that already occurs. One of the major thoroughfares in my city has the same reputation you described. This could be isolated down to about two buildings rather than a few dozen blocks, if we had properly run brothels.
No, no it's not. If prostitution is a legal occupation, it's suddenly subject to all laws that apply to legal occupations. Anything involving worker's rights, minimum wage, and even sexual harassment suddenly comes into play. Pimps won't have the option to beat hookers, or far more often than I think you might realize, get them hooked on drugs. Honestly, I would bet a greater majority of the brothels would wind up being run by women, as they will be able to attract better employees then men simply due to being able to talk to them on the level.
And a male owner would, most likely, wind up failing if only because he wanted to sample what he sold, which could easily be classified as sexual harassment. Is all this a legal mess? Sure. But it's a cleaner mess than locking up hookers while pimps go free, because we can't even prove the pimp's involved. It's a cleaner mess than the drug rings that make profit off of pimps who hook their hookers onto the nastiest drugs we have.
Also, kinks just cost more, and if, say, a prostitute is unwilling to perform that particular kink there is no reason for a transaction to be performed. Communication would be a necessity, yes, but that can simply be resolved by creating contracts a customer must sign before any services are rendered.
And if that sounds odd, you already do this every time you use a credit card, buy from any company online, ever, or even go to a doctor.
All of the other laws we have now wouldn't even have to be modified. I don't understand this argument, and I think you'll need to explain further.
Why should governments not rule on particular sex practices? Why should laws that apply to only one particular profession apply to others? I know doctors follow a Hippocratic oath, but that oath is never even considered to apply to cooks or interior decorators.
Also, I think you're wrong about divorce cases. if a man is going out to have a hooker every week, and the wife is unhappy, I think the wife would be perfectly within her rights to file for divorce. I can't see a logical reason for the legalization of prostitution to affect cases of infidelity, as marriage is only legally binding when it comes to taxes and medical; the infidelity thing is entirely based upon morals.
-
Yes, states should have the right to veto it, however have national law that states, "if you're going to allow prostitution, here are the rules you must follow," can in no way be a negative. And while I can understand the insane laws Nevada must have, you have to also realize that those casino owners can pull some insane, law breaking stuff. To say they have an army of hitmen would most likely be an understatement. This isn't as a joke, as it is a known phenomenon for them to knock off people whom they suspect of winning a little too big not being completely honest about it.
Well, I guess not known, but certainly not unheard of.
Someone once said, "the best lies and the best jokes start with a kernel of truth," though I can't remember who. To be entirely frank, I'd trust a comedian's opinion of the situation more than I would trust a priest's, or a preacher's.
No, no it doesn't. You seem to think the government would have to hire it's own army of bureaucrats and doctors to make this work. At most, we have some of those representatives in congress do something I'd like to call, "their jobs," and formulate the paperwork and basic law structure that will make this work. Now all you do is require that various doctors become licensed to evaluate prostitutes for STDs and thus, license the prostitutes. Then you charge whatever costs are incurred from licensing to the doctors, who in turn charge the prostitutes a charge for the service, and a charge for the license, who in turn charge their customers. Then you tax the brothels a portion of their profit, and if the government isn't at least breaking even at this point, something is wrong.
You see, we already have the technology to check for STDs. Planned Parenthood, a nonprofit organization, does this often for free. A doctor who is certified to license prostitutes would easily make some massive cash without really having to do any extra work.
Nor would the government have to make some random tax that joe schmoe is hit with just to make this work. All the government has to do is make the system self sufficient. If doctors have to get re-certified to offer prostitution licenses every so often (say, once a year) and the government charges the doctor a fee for it, this issue is no longer tax necessary. If you consider that hundreds of doctors are going to be doing this across the United States because each one sees the potential for profit, and the government, say, charges a thousand dollars to be properly certified, you've just made upwards of $100,000, not counting the taxes you would impose upon brothels as you would any institution. Every business pays taxes.
And now you have all the money you need to run just a few bureaucrats, which is all you need to certify the doctors.
Because letting Mongo solve the issue is so morally correct, and just dumping a hooker's body in the river when she gets a little uppity is so fantastic to let happen.
[/sarcasm]
Society already has to handle the burden. We sit here and act like if we just ignore this little problem it will go away, stay hidden and not bother us in our cushioned lives. Fact is, every one of those beaten, broken women who feel like they have no where else to go could instead be empowered individuals if we just took a little time to take them from the fringe and give them a chance.
Literally every other society has, at one point or another, or even now, allowed Prostitution. Only America, foolish, Puritan America, doesn't except for one state that everyone agrees is fucked up. But then we wonder why people will go to such great lengths to satiate carnal desires.
Seriously, most people who attend strip clubs are older males, and I would assume the ones attending the brothels would be as well. sure, the urgency leaves, and your outlook does change. However, not everyone's outlook changes to the opinion that it is unnecessary. Some want it even more. Yes, young men will take advantage of it too, and so will middle aged men.
I've already dealt with your opinion of crime: force it into buildings, and arguments over payment won't happen. And if they do, well, that customer simply isn't going to be able to come back. It's exactly what happens when someone tries to steal from a restaurant.
Your not likely to find a prostitute in the center of a shopping mall offering her trade to any passerby.Dags90 said:
True, but the house always takes a percentage of the take. Some don't care for the amount the house decides is "fair."demoman_chaos said:
This might be one of the more difficult issues to deal with. I live in Vancouver, and the Pickton murders having been the center of attention in the downtown Eastside for just over 2 decades was enough for people to realize that prostitutes are prime suspects for violent crimes. There are no paper trails, there's little medical information, and there aren't a lot of documented trails to follow in general. This could be rectified with the legalization of prostitution, and authorities could be a lot more effective when it came to violent crimes perpetrated against them. However, the lines are blurred. There is the question of ethics: Should we allow these people to sell their bodies?, and then there is the question of social repercussions: How is society going to utilize the services of these people, and will they be abusive?MONSTERheart said:
Keep in mind, prostitution laws are also heavily influenced by the danger of child prostitution, and many of the laws are created with the intention of protecting those not deemed legally capable of making sexually oriented decisions on their own. Not two years ago, the legal age for consent was 14, there was a mass increase in 14 year old prostitutes, and the limitation has since been raised.
However, I don't fell that prostitution will ever be legalized, or, at least, not in the near future. No one wants to be the person trying to legalize such a controversial thing since the societal views of prostitution are, for the most part, negative.
To an extent it is many wars were fought because the attackers wanted to loot the defenders. In the end, it is still a battle.Insanum said:
Same reason you know US prostitutes do it unwillingly
Have you met a prostitute?
And how is it less degrading than being a clown for kids birthday parties. Dressing up in a stupid outfit for the amusement of a group of spoiled youngster isn't very dignifying either.
Yes, but legalized on a larger scale would allowed the girls to be a bit more picky. Criminals wouldn't go to a brothel that was fully legal because they know they are very likely to run into trouble. Most criminals like you are referring to aren't the kind of people to go into public places.
Actually the reason child labor is illegal came out of the industrial revolution when all of the kids were working in the factories, and not getting an education, the government realized that there would be an entire generation of uneducated working class, with no one reliable to lead or make progress.midget_roxx said:
If you ask me, religion is one of the main reasons we have so many problems. Everyone is afraid that it defies some magical being that no one has ever seen, nor has any proof even exists. It's all an act of believing in something so you don't feel like there's nothing in this world that's worth living for.
As for it being a criminal act, I say with crime comes punishment, and not jail-time either. I'm talking execution, and even having them chopped off if you abuse it. The only way people will learn is through fear. Fear that the same fate will befall them if they abuse their new found right. No one wants to get tickets, because then they can't drive their car, or worse yet, get it taken away.
As for it being a criminal act, I say with crime comes punishment, and not jail-time either. I'm talking execution, and even having them chopped off if you abuse it. The only way people will learn is through fear. Fear that the same fate will befall them if they abuse their new found right. No one wants to get tickets, because then they can't drive their car, or worse yet, get it taken away.
So you are fine by selling it, but break the law by buying it. So in the end, you make a profit and he goes to jail....sounds like win to me!xDQueen Michael said:
PROBLEM! Alcohol is sold and alcoholism is a disease. Tobacco's sold in various manors and it can be extremely harmful in various ways depending on consumption type.Aylaine said:
Also, to the point of sex being an addiction, so are each of those, yet they're sold just fine.
Drugs are only a problem because the population is too stupid not to abuse it. For every child born, the world's IQ drops. Most of this planet is filled with nothing but bafoons who only like to shoot each other, or get so drugged up they die from overdose, which only does us all a favor.
A weekly STD is improbably as AIDS testing takes upwards of 6 weeks. Plus, even if you have one, it is possible not to show signs until much further along.
Yes, but that's only a problem for those who forget to "silence the rifle" if you will. With your supressor, you should avoid any of that.warprincenataku said:
It isn't where I live (Netherlands), so yeah I never understood.
Prime reason why we're keeping it legal here from what I know is that since it's legal now the governement can easier keep an eye on things.
That way it's less of a (horrible) criminal world. It's still filled with people forced to do it ofcourse and stuff, but less.
I'm no expert btw, just saying what I heard and read sometimes. So what I say might be 100% incorrect;p
Prime reason why we're keeping it legal here from what I know is that since it's legal now the governement can easier keep an eye on things.
That way it's less of a (horrible) criminal world. It's still filled with people forced to do it ofcourse and stuff, but less.
I'm no expert btw, just saying what I heard and read sometimes. So what I say might be 100% incorrect;p
Essentually, the first person in this thread to get it right. America is founded on religious practices, and makes no secret of establishing policies based on those practices. Prostitution is an immoral crime, based on moral standards established by religious morality. In fact, you'll find lots of laws based on religious morality, if you looked hard enough.midget_roxx said: