• 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!

Moral question (don't click if you're squeamish)...

Should the sadistic billionaire's offer be legal?


  • Total voters
    30
what law or government would allow doctors to break the hippocratic oath in such a blatant manner?

The law already does. People wish to change their body in all sorts of manners that cause them harm in one way or another and the law permits doctors to do many of them at this very minute. Why not this?
 
Let me tell you about Sonia's self-esteem. Sonia is the younger one.

She is a professional actress. Everything I say fascinates her. My member is just the right size. I'm awesome and the best lover she ever had. In return, she has to spend one hour with me and make more than a MacDonalds worker makes in a week of 8 hour days. Sonia has more money than I do.

Her self-esteem is just fine, bordering on arrogance I suspect.

Don't confuse professional escorts with slave girls. I wouldn't use a slave girl - I'd call the cops.

Most people don't love their jobs. Sonia loves hers. So I'm old and wrinkled. So what? She closes her eyes and thinks of Justin Beiber (or something like that). Just as you do when you're not that excited about your date (not Justin Beiber but you know what I mean).

You're 69 years old, so you should have enough life experience to know, on some level, that you're being deceived.

What do you think Sonia is going to tell you? She's going to tell you what you want to hear, because you're her meal ticket. She's a professional actress? Yeah, around you. Her life is an act.

She's selling you a fantasy. Sonia might not even be her real name.

You believe her act because you want to. You want to believe that a beautiful, young girl really wants to have sex with you, no strings attached.
 
sex is not meant to hurt each other, cutting someones eyes out is.

It does hurt the other person when they are being objectified. The statistics I posted about prostitution show this. Prostitutes are far more likely to do drugs, far more likely to suffer psychological problems, and are far more likely to commit suicide than the average woman.

Honestly, I think that any man who believes prostitutes are average, normal women with normal psychological makeups are either just lying to themselves, or really inexperienced with the opposite sex.
 
And by protect the vulnerable you mean control and limit their decisions. I would rather live in a society where people can be paid to have their limbs chopped off and make their own choices than a society where moral busybodies like you make things they don't agree with illegal.

No, I want to control and limit the offers that a sicko can make with his money.
 
You got that 40 times rate from rapeis.org and if you pose the question on google you'll get 100 different answers. I call BS on this - it's just agenda statistics - just like the claim that 13 is the starting age.

I've met many escorts and they were well over 13. No doubt there are child prostitutes in countries like Thailand but its not the case here. You can always find a horror story but that doesn't make everyone on the same par. For most women, it's profitable and satisfying. I know one girl who is just turning 50 and she owns more San Francisco real estate than Larry Ellison does (maybe). She loves her job - she meets all kinds of interesting men and travels all over the world.

You're confusing young crack whores with Escorts and Courtesans. I consider myself very moral and ethical and I love Escorts and what they do for me.

SMH. Find yourself a wife.
 
The law already does. People wish to change their body in all sorts of manners that cause them harm in one way or another and the law permits doctors to do many of them at this very minute. Why not this?

I guess it would depend on "what kind of harm", at least that is what I would expect or hope. Removing ones healthy eyes for no other reason that being paid for it is a bridge too far I would hope.
 
It does hurt the other person when they are being objectified. The statistics I posted about prostitution show this. Prostitutes are far more likely to do drugs, far more likely to suffer psychological problems, and are far more likely to commit suicide than the average woman.

Honestly, I think that any man who believes prostitutes are average, normal women with normal psychological makeups are either just lying to themselves, or really inexperienced with the opposite sex.

it can also be that drug users are more likely to go into prostitution to pay for their drug use. The same goes for sufferers from psychological problems, they might get into prostitution because of those psychological problems.

The high number of these issues in prostitutes goes to the chicken and the egg problem, what was first, the prostitution that caused drugs addiction/psychological problems/suicidal tendencies or were these things already there before they chose to go into prostitution.
 
it can also be that drug users are more likely to go into prostitution to pay for their drug use. The same goes for sufferers from psychological problems, they might get into prostitution because of those psychological problems.

OK, suppose you're right. Then the question becomes.... why? Why do drug users choose prostitution as a profession, more than other people? Why do sufferers of psychological problems choose prostitution as a profession, more than other people?

What barrier exists that would cause most normal people to avoid prostitution, whereas drug users and the mentally ill do not?

The average woman simply does not go out and decide to become a prostitute.

Here is my answer: prostitution is demeaning. It kills self-esteem. If someone goes in to the profession, it kills their self-esteem. If they have no self-esteem to begin with (drug dealers or mentally ill), they have less of a problem resorting to prostitution.

Either way, the profession is destructive to the prostitute.
 
I'd rather sell my arms, legs, nose, liver, one eyeball, one testicle and the hair on my chinny-chin-chin than to saddle myself with one of those things.

When I see Sonia, I pay $100 for the sex and $400 for her leaving when I'm done.

Marriage is a three ring circus: engagement ring, wedding ring, suffering.


SMH. Find yourself a wife.
 
I'd rather sell my arms, legs, nose, liver, one eyeball, one testicle and the hair on my chinny-chin-chin than to saddle myself with one of those things.

When I see Sonia, I pay $100 for the sex and $400 for her leaving when I'm done.

Gotta admit, that was pretty funny. :peace
 
No, I want to control and limit the offers that a sicko can make with his money.
Which has the effect of prohibiting people from accepting those offers. So you are controlling and limited the decisions of both the rich man and the man on the streets. And I don't want to live in a society where self-righteous people like you think that they have the authority and the "duty" to make everyone conform to their ideal way of living.
 
Which has the effect of prohibiting people from accepting those offers. So you are controlling and limited the decisions of both the rich man and the man on the streets. And I don't want to live in a society where self-righteous people like you think that they have the authority and the "duty" to make everyone conform to their ideal way of living.

Hey, cool it with the name-calling OK?

We have a difference of opinion. I can see the libertarian viewpoint, I simply disagree with it. I believe that every transaction, deal, or agreement is made with a tilted, or uneven playing field. This is because one dollar to you is not worth the same as one dollar to me. At some point, when that playing field becomes VERY tilted or VERY uneven, we have an obligation to step in and control such transactions.
 
This is in direct response to the "should prostitution be legal" thread, and is intended to make you think. It surprises me how many of you answered "yes" to the question, this in spite of all the data which shows prostitutes suffer from a variety of diseases and psychological disorders - including heightened suicide rates - as a direct result of their profession.

Therefore, you are saying it's OK to pay someone to harm themselves as long as both parties are consenting. Fine, but how far are you willing to take this logic?

Here is a hypothetical question, answer it "yes" or "no."



Suppose a sadistic billionaire went around offering poor people a million dollars each to have their eyes removed. The procedure would be carried out by a licensed plastic surgeon, under sedation, in a certified medical facility. Should that be legal? Both parties are consenting.

What if the sadistic billionaire offered one of your parents, or your adult children, and they accepted? Should that be legal?

What if the sadistic billionaire offered someone high on drugs, or a heavily addicted drug addict? What if they offered the elderly, or mentally impaired?

Is it simply a case of two consenting adults involved in a financial transaction, or is there more to it? Is the sadistic billionaire taking advantage of the poor person's problems?


This is an irrelevant and foolish counter to the question of legalizing prostitution. However, the answer is "yes" to all. :shrug:
 
This is in direct response to the "should prostitution be legal" thread, and is intended to make you think. It surprises me how many of you answered "yes" to the question, this in spite of all the data which shows prostitutes suffer from a variety of diseases and psychological disorders - including heightened suicide rates - as a direct result of their profession.

Therefore, you are saying it's OK to pay someone to harm themselves as long as both parties are consenting. Fine, but how far are you willing to take this logic?

Here is a hypothetical question, answer it "yes" or "no."



Suppose a sadistic billionaire went around offering poor people a million dollars each to have their eyes removed. The procedure would be carried out by a licensed plastic surgeon, under sedation, in a certified medical facility. Should that be legal? Both parties are consenting.

What if the sadistic billionaire offered one of your parents, or your adult children, and they accepted? Should that be legal?

What if the sadistic billionaire offered someone high on drugs, or a heavily addicted drug addict? What if they offered the elderly, or mentally impaired?

Is it simply a case of two consenting adults involved in a financial transaction, or is there more to it? Is the sadistic billionaire taking advantage of the poor person's problems?

I could see there being contention on the last part, wherein one may not be in proper facility to strike contract. But other than that, yeah you should be free to sell your eyes if you really want to.
 
I could see there being contention on the last part, wherein one may not be in proper facility to strike contract. But other than that, yeah you should be free to sell your eyes if you really want to.

Read thru the rest of the thread. I already shot down the libertarian argument.
 
Hey, cool it with the name-calling OK?

We have a difference of opinion. I can see the libertarian viewpoint, I simply disagree with it. I believe that every transaction, deal, or agreement is made with a tilted, or uneven playing field. This is because one dollar to you is not worth the same as one dollar to me. At some point, when that playing field becomes VERY tilted or VERY uneven, we have an obligation to step in and control such transactions.
I'm not name calling. Thinking that you know what is best for people and what choices they should or shouldn't make requires an awful lot of self-righteousness. And to me that is incredibly offensive. But if calling you out for what you are bothers you, I will stop, and I apologize if my language offended you.

Who has conferred you with this obligation? How do you know when the playing field is objectively "too uneven?" What if the poor man begged you to let him cut out his eyes for money. Would you let him? It is people who limit the choices individuals can make that are creating an uneven playing field. By subjecting everyone else to your opinions, you right off the bat put your own choices above theirs, claiming the moral high-ground.
 
I'm not name calling. Thinking that you know what is best for people and what choices they should or shouldn't make requires an awful lot of self-righteousness. And to me that is incredibly offensive. But if calling you out for what you are bothers you, I will stop, and I apologize if my language offended you.

Who has conferred you with this obligation? How do you know when the playing field is objectively "too uneven?" What if the poor man begged you to let him cut out his eyes for money. Would you let him? It is people who limit the choices individuals can make that are creating an uneven playing field. By subjecting everyone else to your opinions, you right off the bat put your own choices above theirs, claiming the moral high-ground.

Sometimes the only difference in the playing field is effort and/or desire.
 
I'm not name calling. Thinking that you know what is best for people and what choices they should or shouldn't make requires an awful lot of self-righteousness. And to me that is incredibly offensive. But if calling you out for what you are bothers you, I will stop, and I apologize if my language offended you.

Who has conferred you with this obligation? How do you know when the playing field is objectively "too uneven?" What if the poor man begged you to let him cut out his eyes for money. Would you let him? It is people who limit the choices individuals can make that are creating an uneven playing field. By subjecting everyone else to your opinions, you right off the bat put your own choices above theirs, claiming the moral high-ground.

Alright, you seem a little too heated for this debate right now, bro. Maybe we can pick it up again tomorrow when you've had a chance to cool off and collect yourself a bit. :)
 
Read thru the rest of the thread. I already shot down the libertarian argument.

Yeah, you say that. But it still doesn't change the fact that if one truly wanted to sell his eyes and was in full control of their brain, then that's that. Little trite statements like "I already struck down the libertarian argument" are meaningless. Quote it then if you did. Probably you just used a lot of hyperbole and semantics to make it seem like you advanced a point when you really didn't.
 
Alright, you seem a little too heated for this debate right now, bro. Maybe we can pick it up again tomorrow when you've had a chance to cool off and collect yourself a bit. :)
I'm fine--I'm more or less using the heated language to prove a point. But if you want to take a break that's fine--but be warned. In that time I may have paid someone $1 million to gouge out their eyes...and it would be all..your...fault. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom