• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we legalize sexual freedom?

Should we legalize all sex between consenting adults?

  • Yes

    Votes: 32 78.0%

  • No

    Votes: 9 22.0%
  • Total voters
    41
sangha said:
I think your distinguising between decriminalizing the prostitutes but not the pimps and johns was brilliant! Good work
Click to expand...

Being a john is also legal under this plan. There is nothing wrong with people establishing business for sex work.

The abuses take place mainly between sex workers and their pimps, followed by sex workers and johns. Under the current system, it's difficult for sex workers to report either without facing scrutiny. They need support. If we are going to make this a legal, taxable profession, then that means the bosses need to clean up their acts. No more sleaze, abuse, and accepting workers under shady conditions like importing. And when it's a sex worker plus her child, there should be even more legal rights established. Often the sex traffickers bring in women with their children; and yes, there is a child sex industry even in North America that they could be susceptible to.

But none of this gets accounted for because sex workers are doing illegal work, and so it's hard to have their voices heard on these matters.

Centrist77 said:
how do you keep prostitution illegal but decriminalize sex workers?
Click to expand...

You don't keep the work illegal - you keep the trafficking aspect regulated. A big percentage of the abuses that happen are via the ways that sex workers arrive at and start doing their work. They can be subject to manipulation, entrapment, and even indentured servitude if they are foreign to this country.

Centrist77 said:
I understand what you are saying I dont want abusive pimps etc but they would go away with regulation.
Click to expand...

They won't go away with regulation. Even if you make the profession legal, it won't be every aspect. There will always be a black market. But you can impact that by empowering the sex workers more. You don't want to legalize abuse, you want to minimize it.

You have to understand, the aspect that matters more here is the social one. The whole reason why the abuses can happen is because it's shaded from society, due to moral reasons. But sex work is always there, and it involves real people. Most other people don't have to be threatened with physical violence when they go to work. The same idea should be applied here.

Centrist77 said:
Im just confused on what you are saying?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that it's not a black and white situation of make it legal or make it illegal. The different aspects of it should have different degrees of legal entitlement. And on a social level, there needs to be a real desire for integration. Anything that maintains sex workers as "the other" is disempowering their ability to navigate their own market safely.
 
sangha said:
Young women in poor countries are promised legitimate jobs. When they arrive, they are forced to perform sex acts for money and threatend with violence if they refuse. They are warned that if they go to the police, they will end up being sent back home, where the sex traffickers can get back at them and their families.

The women who are forced in to sexual slavery have bigger worries than being arrested by the police.
Click to expand...

Which has absolutely nothing to do with my post or the topic of this thread. The key word is "consenting". These women did not consent to being sex slaves. Please try to keep up.
 
Absolutely. There are many sex acts that I consider to be perversions, and yet I don't feel the need to tell other people how to live their lives.

Prostitution has existed since the invention of currency, so I see no point in keeping that illegal. In fact, it would be safer for all parties involved if it were legal.
 
DiAnna said:
Which has absolutely nothing to do with my post or the topic of this thread. The key word is "consenting". These women did not consent to being sex slaves. Please try to keep up.
Click to expand...

Sure! If only we make it legal, all the pimps will just give up their source of income and will only use women who consent. The illegal traffickers will just give up too. :roll:

The point you're missing is that the cops will have no way of knowing that it's non-consensual if the women are too scared to tell the cops about the abuse

http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2010/142761.htm
 
sangha said:
Sure! If only we make it legal, all the pimps will just give up their source of income and will only use women who consent. The illegal traffickers will just give up too. :roll:

The point you're missing is that the cops will have no way of knowing that it's non-consensual if the women are too scared to tell the cops about the abuse

Trafficking in Persons Report 2010 Country Narratives -- Countries N Through Z
Click to expand...

Sex trafficking is illegal now. It will be illegal then. If the women will be too scared to tell cops about abuse then, they are also too scared to tell cops about abuse now.

Nothing will change if prostitution is made legal... except that sex trafficking rings will have fewer clients, because the vast majority of men looking for a pro will go to legal brothels. Your post is a logic fallacy that cannot be supported by any form of reason or rational thought.
 
DiAnna said:
Sex trafficking is illegal now. It will be illegal then. If the women will be too scared to tell cops about abuse then, they are also too scared to tell cops about abuse now.

Nothing will change if prostitution is made legal... except that sex trafficking rings will have fewer clients, because the vast majority of men looking for a pro will go to legal brothels. Your post is a logic fallacy that cannot be supported by any form of reason or rational thought.
Click to expand...

If prostitution is made legal, it becomes easier to traffic in humans. This is supported by the facts

Trafficking in Persons Report 2010 Country Narratives -- Countries N Through Z
 
sangha said:
If prostitution is made legal, it becomes easier to traffic in humans. This is supported by the facts

Trafficking in Persons Report 2010 Country Narratives -- Countries N Through Z
Click to expand...

Likely, if prostitution was made legal, the only people getting trafficked would be children-since hopefully adult/child sex will always remain illegal. If an action or a substance is made illegal, you can bet that there will be an underground market for it. This usually creates more danger than the acts or substances themselves.
 
evanescence said:
Likely, if prostitution was made legal, the only people getting trafficked would be children-since hopefully adult/child sex will always remain illegal. If an action or a substance is made illegal, you can bet that there will be an underground market for it. This usually creates more danger than the acts or substances themselves.
Click to expand...

There are black markets for things that are legal. Tobacco has a black market. So does alcohol. Designer clothes and accessories.
 
O_Guru said:
I've come to learn some people will just never see logic and common sense, their emotions will always drive their rational instead of common sense. While I agree with you that they are very entertaining, sometimes it is best to leave them alone, they will eventually hurt themselves somehow.

When you feed a monkey it might throw **** at you ;)

Anyway I'm with you and the majority, there's no real reason to think crime will increase and we will magically have a high increase in the number of slaves and sex/kid crimes.
Click to expand...

yep you are right LMAO

its hilarious how clueless some people are, they talk in absolutes and it get them in trouble all the time. In ways its also scary how people deny reality and logic at times too. Oh well you are right if you feed monkeys you might get **** thrown at you LOL
 
roguenuke said:
If the prostitute is not properly licensed and/or does not meet the requirements to be licensed, then the prostitute, the prostitute's "employer", and any person who purchases the service of that prostitute are all criminals. The prostitute for not being properly licensed to sell his/her-self, the employer for not ensuring that their employee meets the necessary requirements for fulfilling that position, and the purchaser for not ensuring that the prostitute was legally able to sell them the service.

Sex purchasers are much more likely to go through a legally licensed prostitute than one who isn't. Why do something illegally when you can do the same thing for basically the same amount legally as long as the person you make the purchase from is properly licensed?
Click to expand...

yep basic common sense
 
DiAnna said:
Most of what I feel about this subject has already been well represented. I believe any sexual contact between consenting adults should be legal, including prostitution (which, along with The War On Drugs, is part of the Law Enforcement Employment Protection Act).

Some of the hysterics in this thread have been, well, hysterical. The idea that if prostitution is made legal that crime syndicates will leap in and create sex trafficking rings. Ridiculous. First of all, sex trafficking involves non-consentual activity. Second, there are all ready sex trafficking rings operating right here in the good old U.S. of A. They are illegal now, and would remain illegal if prostitution was legalized. They would, however, be less profitable. Crime syndicates and cartels prosper by providing illegal goods and services for which a demand exists. Make prostitution legal, poof. Customers have a clean and legal service to access, and are less likely to utilize the terrified, tear-stained sex slave who takes man after man after man without so much as a sponge bath in between. Well run bordellos can provide clean, medically-certified women who choose prostitution as a career. Frankly, legalization takes a bite out of crime rather than enhancing it.

Now the old in-breeding hysteria. "OMG! If incest isn't illegal, brothers and sisters will be banging Mom, Dad and Grampa every damned day, because there ain't no law against it any more!!" Really? The fact that incest is illegal really stops related individuals from having sexual relations in private now? No, it does not. Will millions of sex-starved citizens suddenly leap the bones of their parents or siblings just because they won't go to jail for doing so? Oh hell no! 99% of people would literally get nauseous at the very thought. So what we are really doing is making incest illegal for the 1% or less of individuals, including distant cousins, who might actually be attracted to a relative. My question... so ****ing what if they are? It's none of our damned business.

The only reasons to keep prostitution illegal is because of religious reasons, individual morality, and to keep vice law enforcement officers off the lay-off list.

We as a nation need to flush laws that prohibit what consenting adults can do with each other or ingest in their own bodies, and concentrate on crime that is inflicted on non-consenting victims. Period.
Click to expand...

more common sense!!! seems that you like the majority here live in AMERICA, in REALITY and not tv land.
 
BBC NEWS | Programmes | From Our Own Correspondent | Trafficked to the West

Last summer, she had been approached by a childhood friend, she told me.

He said he knew someone who was recruiting women to work as prostitutes in Holland.

Prostitution is illegal in Lithuania, but in Holland he said, she would make big money. Trusting him, she agreed.

Within weeks she arrived in Holland - only to find herself a prisoner in a brothel - sold by her friend to a Lithuanian gang.

For months she endured beatings, sexual abuse and a constant stream of clients.

She saw little of the money she had been promised. When she escaped back to Lithuania her childhood friend tipped off the gang members.

They beat her so badly, she almost died. Today she is in hiding, terrified that her attackers will return.
Click to expand...

Canada Considers Further Legalizing Prostitution While Amsterdam Mayor Admits Legalization’s Failure | LifeSiteNews.com
Policemen in Amsterdam’s infamous red light district were quoted by Dutch media Friday as saying, “We are in the midst of modern slavery.” Due to the legalization of prostitution in the Netherlands in 2000, police are hampered in confronting the horrors that are characteristic of the sex trade.

Even Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen, who as recently as four months ago was quoted in the media as praising the legalization of prostitution has been forced to admit the scheme’s failure.“Almost five years after the lifting of the brothel ban, we have to acknowledge that the aims of the law have not been reached”, said Cohen, as quoted by NCR. “Lately we’ve received more and more signals that abuse still continues.”
Click to expand...

2005 Country Report on Human Rights Practices in the Netherlands

Most traffickers used threats of violence to the victim, or to the
victim's family, to control their victims. Underage girls and young women of
Moroccan and Turkish descent (mostly lover boy victims), underage asylum
seekers, women with a dependent residence status (pseudo marriage), and women
recruited in Africa were most vulnerable to becoming victims of trafficking.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Most of this should fall under states' rights - probably even under a smaller, more limited level - maybe a county or district, etc. Strip bars (and regular bars for that matter) are often legislated that way. If I want to live in an area with legalized prostitution, gay marriage, etc., then I should be able to do so if there are enough others that want to live the same way without moving out of the USA. But, if I don't want to live in an area that promotes certain behavior, I shouldn't have to move out of the USA (or really my state), either.

Personally, I'd like my kids to grow up believing that the sex is something shared between a man and women (the way the body naturally works) preferably in the context of a happy marriage (the way healthy relationships usually work). I don't have a problem with people doing what they want to do, I just don't like pretending that I think it's wise long term behavior.

A guy wants to satisfy the emptiness in his life termporarily with a one-night stand? A prostitute may be socially healthier than tricking a gal into thinking it'll end up being more. But, as Frightened Rabbit says you can't "Keep Yourself Warm" that way. I'd rather the place I live reflect my basic values. I'm sure, those who want to raise their kids in a more socially liberal atmosphere feel the same way. So, I think it comes down to states' rights - the US is too big for everyone to agree on morality (or the lack thereof). If you want a prostitute - do it in secret or go to Vegas (or whatever new town legalizes it). If it's legalized where I live, I might move somewhere else.
 
I believe that sex requires love and what you do with the one you love is private and limited only by what the two of you consent to, and love the way I see it has no limits.

I have been betrayed by two women that I am aware of and they both turned out to be major liars, and cheaters.
 
evanescence said:
People who want society to reflect their personal moral beliefs are not only annoying, but they are one of the biggest threats to liberty.
Click to expand...

Morals are not just what them thar bible thumpers thumping they Harry Potter books, trying to get you to join their church, knocking on your doors and singing praise Jebus. You do realize that almost all laws are based on someone's morals and that it is not restricted to just people with religious views but atheists as well? Laws against stealing, murder, rape and many others are based on someone's personal view of right and wrong.


Moral - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior
 
I believe this is a "taboo" within our christian based society. If you really sit down and think on hours on who and what's going on around you, it would seem to be one big fake hypocrisy. But then again, the labeled "dark side" of our society only exists because it feels an unfulfilled need. Whether is love, sex, money, excitement, escape, etc.. Something to ponder.
 
evanescence said:
People who want society to reflect their personal moral beliefs are not only annoying, but they are one of the biggest threats to liberty.
Click to expand...

Everyone wants a portion of society to reflect their personal moral beliefs. People who insult people for having beliefs are annoying. Everyone has beliefs. And, again, I think there should be a place for most of what's been discussed in this thread. I just don't think it can be one-country-fits-all. Smaller geographical areas are needed.

I'll give you an example of how I know that everyone wants society to reflect their own beliefs. No one teaches their kids to believe things that they have grown, over a lifetime of experience, to believe are wrong. The most liberally minded might encourage their kids not to be biased by anyone and to only think for themselves. But, even then, the kids will gravitate toward the way their parents think until faced with realities of life and experience that convince them of their own moral "truths" and most of those parents will be very disappointed if the kids end up being, by their definition, "narrow minded".

Another example - you want people to believe what you believe. You try to make that happen by scoffing at people like me. I'm not trying to convince you to live by what I've learned. I'm just suggesting that we'd each be happier with some things not in view of our kid's schools or in our own face 24/7. I would personally choose a more conservative community to live in. You might personally choose Vegas. We should each have a choice.
 
GreenvilleGrows said:
Everyone wants a portion of society to reflect their personal moral beliefs. People who insult people for having beliefs are annoying. Everyone has beliefs. And, again, I think there should be a place for most of what's been discussed in this thread. I just don't think it can be one-country-fits-all. Smaller geographical areas are needed.

I'll give you an example of how I know that everyone wants society to reflect their own beliefs. No one teaches their kids to believe things that they have grown, over a lifetime of experience, to believe are wrong. The most liberally minded might encourage their kids not to be biased by anyone and to only think for themselves. But, even then, the kids will gravitate toward the way their parents think until faced with realities of life and experience that convince them of their own moral "truths" and most of those parents will be very disappointed if the kids end up being, by their definition, "narrow minded".

Another example - you want people to believe what you believe. You try to make that happen by scoffing at people like me. I'm not trying to convince you to live by what I've learned. I'm just suggesting that we'd each be happier with some things not in view of our kid's schools or in our own face 24/7. I would personally choose a more conservative community to live in. You might personally choose Vegas. We should each have a choice.
Click to expand...
Everybody wants society to reflect their personal beliefs, but not everybody wants to enforce their personal beliefs through law.
 
theplaydrive said:
Everybody wants society to reflect their personal beliefs, but not everybody wants to enforce their personal beliefs through law.
Click to expand...

Good point. Hard to dispute. But, I'd suggest that we all want some of our personal beliefs enforced through law. There are just other personal beliefs that aren't as widely agreed upon. Most (not all) agree that things like murder, rape, theft, etc. are wrong and want that belief supported by law. Some (not all) believe that as long as a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone.

I tend to agree that if a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone. But, I think when that person's destructive behavior (sex, heroin, self sabotage) becomes socially acceptable, it will hurt people in that society. And, law is one way we define socially acceptable behavior. Prioritizing enforcement (or not) is the scale we use to judge the "danger" to society. For example, I don't really have much of a problem with someone wanting to use heroine in private (although I do have problems with the social ills that arise around heroine trafficking). But, I certainly have a problem condoning heroine use as a society because I don't think encouraging people to think it's "ok" will be beneficial to any of us.

Putting a foreign substance in your body (or someone elses) is enforced in a lot more areas than that of sex.
 
GreenvilleGrows said:
Good point. Hard to dispute. But, I'd suggest that we all want some of our personal beliefs enforced through law. There are just other personal beliefs that aren't as widely agreed upon. Most (not all) agree that things like murder, rape, theft, etc. are wrong and want that belief supported by law. Some (not all) believe that as long as a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone.

I tend to agree that if a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone. But, I think when that person's destructive behavior (sex, heroin, self sabotage) becomes socially acceptable, it will hurt people in that society. And, law is one way we define socially acceptable behavior. Prioritizing enforcement (or not) is the scale we use to judge the "danger" to society. For example, I don't really have much of a problem with someone wanting to use heroine in private (although I do have problems with the social ills that arise around heroine trafficking). But, I certainly have a problem condoning heroine use as a society because I don't think encouraging people to think it's "ok" will be beneficial to any of us.

Putting a foreign substance in your body (or someone elses) is enforced in a lot more areas than that of sex.
Click to expand...

The problem is, you cannot prove that making things like same sex marriage legal will have any negative effect on society, let alone will actually cause measurable harm. You only have your opinion.

And unless someone can show some proof that certain things will cause measurable harm or have some negative effect on society, then you still have to treat them equally under the law, no matter what state they are in. Saying that a couple cannot enter into a legal contract based solely on their relative sexes is against the 14th Amendment.
 
GreenvilleGrows said:
Good point. Hard to dispute. But, I'd suggest that we all want some of our personal beliefs enforced through law. There are just other personal beliefs that aren't as widely agreed upon. Most (not all) agree that things like murder, rape, theft, etc. are wrong and want that belief supported by law. Some (not all) believe that as long as a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone.

I tend to agree that if a person isn't "hurting anyone" they should be left alone. But, I think when that person's destructive behavior (sex, heroin, self sabotage) becomes socially acceptable, it will hurt people in that society. And, law is one way we define socially acceptable behavior. Prioritizing enforcement (or not) is the scale we use to judge the "danger" to society. For example, I don't really have much of a problem with someone wanting to use heroine in private (although I do have problems with the social ills that arise around heroine trafficking). But, I certainly have a problem condoning heroine use as a society because I don't think encouraging people to think it's "ok" will be beneficial to any of us.

Putting a foreign substance in your body (or someone elses) is enforced in a lot more areas than that of sex.
Click to expand...
Things like murder, rape, theft, (sometimes) drug laws and so on are outlawed because of the threat they pose to our safety not because of the personal beliefs we have about them.

However, for things that fall under the category of sexual freedom - like SSM or prostitution - restricting them is based only on personal belief. In other words, while laws against murder, rape, theft and so on are based in objective safety concerns, laws against SSM, prostitution, etc. are based in subjective personal beliefs.
 
roguenuke said:
The problem is, you cannot prove that making things like same sex marriage legal will have any negative effect on society, let alone will actually cause measurable harm. You only have your opinion.

And unless someone can show some proof that certain things will cause measurable harm or have some negative effect on society, then you still have to treat them equally under the law, no matter what state they are in. Saying that a couple cannot enter into a legal contract based solely on their relative sexes is against the 14th Amendment.
Click to expand...

I give it about 10 years until there is major whining for polygamy to be legally recognized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom