16 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyI think I could accept some civil (rather than criminal) sanctions against street prostitution, as long as prostitution generally was legal.
I guess my biggest question for those who wish to legalize prostitution is, for what benefit? I think the reasons are to make it safer and/or reduce the burden on our criminal justice system.
Consider this, however, prostitution for the most part is overlooked, or at least in the US. You have "escort services" rampant throughout the US and a porn industr ...[text shortened]... of prostitution should be outlawed whether it be legalized overall or not. What am I missing?
There are a number of reasons why I think prostitution should be legal. The one which springs to mind most immediately is that it sets a really ugly precedent for the government to intrude on private business between consenting adults where there are no substantive externalities to anyone else. (Being "offended" by the knowledge of what others are doing in private is not a valid externality. I personally dislike macaroni cheese and I'd rather not have to watch someone eat it right in front of my face, but it would be absurd to say that I'm offended by other people eating macaroni cheese in my absence and therefore they should be banned from doing it.)
The use of force by the government in the form of criminal law needs to be restricted to those activities which pose a risk of harm // rights violations to others. If two or more consenting adults engage in prostitution willingly then none of them are being "harmed" in the sense that I mean it, because each of them has the right to determine whether it's in their own best interests. No-one's rights are being violated.
In short, I don't believe in victimless crimes and I think they're a dangerous expansion of government powers. Victimless crimes are a step towards the govt saying that it can create any law it likes on an arbitrary basis, just because it happens to suit the values of those with the power to define the law and cultural mores.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by Hand of HecateExposing oneself in public causes potential harm to non-consenting witnesses, especially if there are children around. This means there's a valid externality involved, whereas this is not the case for sex between consenting adults in private.
Careful now, you have rights up to the point they don't impact the rights of others. Rights must be looked at as a playground see-saw with the balance always shifting. Regardless of how fat y'all are, both sides can't touch the ground at the same time.
For example, you may feel that your pursuit of freedom entitles you to wander around free and n ...[text shortened]... Ultimately, you'll find that as part of society, our rights shift at the whim of society.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyMuch of the problem here, I'd say, is when people are coerced into prostitution due to economic hardship. This is one of the various reasons why I believe that an intact welfare state is part of that makes a truly free and fair and just society.
Really? So on a personal level you have no issues with it as being "seedy"? In other words, if you saw your mamma or sister up in one of those store front windows it would be just fine with you so long as they were "OK" with it? If so, I respect your personal view on the matter, although I do not agree with it. If not, however, why is it good for others b ...[text shortened]... . No doubt children are being exploited in this laissez faire prostitution environment.
16 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by karnachzAre you suggesting that the Netherlands do not have an intact welfare state to help make its citizens free? In fact, I don't see how much more socialistic they can become yet they continue to have issues with people being coerced into prostitution.
Much of the problem here, I'd say, is when people are coerced into prostitution due to economic hardship. This is one of the various reasons why I believe that an intact welfare state is part of that makes a truly free and fair and just society.
16 Sep 08
2 edits
Originally posted by karnachzThen really, your system is not much different than the one currently in place in the US. The only difference is that as a society the US has said that they look down on prostitution by having it be illegal across the board on the books even though it is not enforced other than for activity such as this. Why then should they change?
[b]I think I could accept some civil (rather than criminal) sanctions against street prostitution, as long as prostitution generally was legal.
16 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI'd say that the vast majority of the victims of human trafficking and coerced prostitution are not Dutch citizens. Some must be, as no system is perfect.
Are you suggesting that the Netherlands do not have an intact welfare state to help make its citizens free? In fact, I don't see how much more socialistic they can become yet they continue to have issues with people being coerced into prostitution.
The question is: Does outlawing it eliminate all prostitution? Obviously not, so why do ask that of other possible solutions?
17 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyThis argument is flawed.
It seems you have two issues at hand. The first issue is that women are being forced to prostitute themselves. In Amserdam, Netherlands, 80% of prostitutes are foreigners, and 70% have no immigration papers, suggesting that they were trafficked. In fact, since 1990 in the Netherlands, the number of trafficked women from Central and Eastern Europe Countries well. No doubt children are being exploited in this laissez faire prostitution environment.
By the same rationale you'd want to ban the manufacture of shoes if somewhere someone is forced to make a shoe.
The same can be said for underage prostitution.
It is the element of force that needs to be policed, not prostitution itself.
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by PalynkaThen why outlaw anything? After all, laws are made to be broken otherwise why have them at all?
I'd say that the vast majority of the victims of human trafficking and coerced prostitution are not Dutch citizens. Some must be, as no system is perfect.
The question is: Does outlawing it eliminate all prostitution? Obviously not, so why do ask that of other possible solutions?
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by WajomaMy point is that legalizing prostitution is designed to make it "better". I have argued that legalizing it does not seem to have made it so, in fact, how does one make better what is already "bad"?
This argument is flawed.
By the same rationale you'd want to ban the manufacture of shoes if somewhere someone is forced to make a shoe.
The same can be said for underage prostitution.
It is the element of force that needs to be policed, not prostitution itself.
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodey'Better' for who? Better for busybodies that can't mind their own business? Better for prostitutes so that they will have some protection? That's a debate that will never be decided. I argue for the legalisation of prostitution because it is right. It is right that the voluntary exchange of value for value is no-ones business but those that are doing the trading.
My point is that legalizing prostitution is designed to make it "better". I have argued that legalizing it does not seem to have made it so, in fact, how does one make better what is already "bad"?
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyNo, I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with the Dutch welfare state. Rather, it's mostly people from other countries without an intact welfare state that are being exploited.
Are you suggesting that the Netherlands do not have an intact welfare state to help make its citizens free? In fact, I don't see how much more socialistic they can become yet they continue to have issues with people being coerced into prostitution.
17 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by WajomaSpeaking of busybodies not minding their own business, I wonder how much prostitutes will end up paying the federal government if Uncle Sam gives it the "OK"? No doubt, this would be the prime motive for legalizing it. I just wonder if they would later rue the day it was legalized. After all, its all about the money, no?
'Better' for who? Better for busybodies that can't mind their own business? Better for prostitutes so that they will have some protection? That's a debate that will never be decided. I argue for the legalisation of prostitution because it is right. It is right that the voluntary exchange of value for value is no-ones business but those that are doing the trading.
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyThe difference is that there's a valid reason for acts which infringe the rights of others (e.g. violence, stealing, harassment) to be made illegal, whereas prostitution between consenting adults does not cause a substantive harm to anyone by way of a rights violation.
Then why outlaw anything? After all, laws are made to be broken otherwise why have them at all?
17 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by karnachzAs I have already pointed out, the government in the US seems unconcerned with prostitution for the most part except for high risk prostitution such as street walkers and such which everyone here seems to be against anyway. Really, the only difference I can see seems to be that the state endorses it in the Netherlands while the US does not.
The difference is that there's a valid reason for acts which infringe the rights of others (e.g. violence, stealing, harassment) to be made illegal, whereas prostitution between consenting adults does not cause a substantive harm to anyone by way of a rights violation.