20 Sep 08
Originally posted by relaedgcright is subject to the laws of your governing state.
I think a lot of people are struggling here with rights, so I wish to clarify for you all. A right is subject to the laws of your governing state. A right to walk around naked gets you imprisoned for "indecent exposure" because it infringes on the rights of other people to walk around without seeing naked people and believe it or not, people don't like to s ...[text shortened]... e not stopping it in a million years. It's sex, at the end of the day. You can't
No it's not. That's why they are called inalienable. Nothing can take them away or modify them. They might not be respected by the government in power, but they don't go away.
20 Sep 08
2 edits
A right to walk around naked gets you imprisoned for "indecent exposure" because it infringes on the rights of other people to walk around without seeing naked people
I can't walk naked on my own property because you are afraid you might see something if I invited you in? Ridiculous!
Public property has rules about nudity, but that's because the public - who own the property - have chosen to have those rules. That's not about rights; that's about who's property it is and what they want to allow on it.
You might want to read up on nude beaches.
Nobody has a right to see anything. People have rights to not have others do things to them like kill them, imprison them, take their property, actively deny them the opportunity to pursue happiness (note this doesn't mean anyone's obligated to fund that pursuit - simply that we're obligated to not send the police after people for this).
20 Sep 08
Originally posted by relaedgcYes. "You" can still do it, but you'll be punished for it. That means it's not a right nor a freedom.
I think a lot of people are struggling here with rights, so I wish to clarify for you all. A right is subject to the laws of your governing state. A right to walk around naked gets you imprisoned for "indecent exposure" because it infringes on the rights of other people to walk around without seeing naked people and believe it or not, people don't like to s ...[text shortened]... e not stopping it in a million years. It's sex, at the end of the day. You can't
You have no idea what a right is. A right is justification for breaking the bonds between the People and the Government. It's grounds for rebellion and civil war.
You CAN NOT TAKE IT AWAY with the law! All you can do is immorally repress it.
The state decide your rights and whether they impede on others or not.
Not in 1776 it didn't.
21 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIn short, anything can turn into a witch hunt. In addition, whether you like it or not or whether you recognize it or not, laws reflect a righteousness of some sort. So why have any laws at all?
The bias against the sex trade is so strong that people will go out of their way to find reasons to remove them even if they do nothing wrong.
In other words, these people who are innocent of any crime against anyone's rights are hunted down with fervor by the self-righteous...who you support, though you try to give off a gentle and loving image (k spells that knock off a man's penis. The sexual repression shows itself in both cases.
I think the root of your self righteousness stems from the view that so long as what I am doing does not hurt anyone else then they should be allowed to do it, no? Well that is fine, but you must recognize that this is a "righteous" viewpoint. So what makes your righteous viewpoint any more valid or invalid than anothers?
21 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyIt's the illegality in other countries that leads to the situation in the Netherlands, i.e. sex and drugs tourists.
Well judging from the data from the Netherlands making it "legal" does little in terms of its abuses. Simply put, its a seedy business to say the least no matter how you try to sanitize it.
21 Sep 08
3 edits
Originally posted by whodeyMine is the one on which this nation is based. My argument is a legal argument within the context of the USA as well as a moral one. Therefore it should have more influence over US law.
In short, anything can turn into a witch hunt. In addition, whether you like it or not or whether you recognize it or not, laws reflect a righteousness of some sort. So why have any laws at all?
I think the root of your self righteousness stems from the view that so long as what I am doing does not hurt anyone else then they should be allowed to do it, s" viewpoint. So what makes your righteous viewpoint any more valid or invalid than anothers?
I'm actually a utilitarian, but I recognize that it's not a practical basis for law or a good legal argument.
22 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeySo does making shoes, want to criminalise that too? The comparison is plain to see, many of the problems surrounding prostitution are caused by the law. It should be able to operate openly as any other legitimate voluntary exchange of value for value.
I disagree. I say that girls would then be trafficed into larger cities. It all has to do with the $$$.
23 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyYou've almost got it, the cogs are starting to fall into place. Forced prostitution or forced shoe making, they're alike in the same way that voluntary prostitution and voluntary shoe making, are alike.
You know your right. I hate it when young girls are rounded up and taken to major cities against their will to make shoes. It's just disgusting if you ask me.
You can no more compare forced prostitution with the voluntary manufacture of shoes than you can compare forced prostitution with voluntary prostitution.
Good for you, you got it right.