• 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!

Prostitution

Should prostitution be legalized?


  • Total voters
    117
Fifty posts in, and we have yet to run into anyone who doesn't want prostitution legalized. I think it's time to take this to Congress!
 
Pff. Unlikely.

"Champagne room" is basically code for "con guys too drunk or inexperienced to know any better into wasting $300.00 on a really long lap dance."

Try again.
 
Fifty posts in, and we have yet to run into anyone who doesn't want prostitution legalized.
I think it's time to take this to Congress!




I'm just going to guess that if you check with the far right evangelicals you'll find plenty of opposition.
 
The answer to your question is "they could, but they won't". You are asking the wrong questions.

The better question is "Why do people act against the broader interests society when they are acting under the influence of market forces?" One of the answers to this question is very simple. Because the logical incentives sometimes engendered by market forces encourage actions which run counter to the interests of society, and many people act to further their own selfish interests over the interests of others. These people are acting in accord with perfect logic and self interest.

Other answers are not as simple, but yield the same result. For example, some people are short sighted, while at the same time they are also selfish. They see short term gain, and can't see that in the long term they are likely be worse off. Forecasting into the longer term is complex and sometimes requires knowledge and training to assess likely outcomes.

In some scenarios, society can act deliberately through government to overcome these deficiencies of market systems.

Oh and this quote deals with your argument too. :D

"Laissez-faire! I will begin by saying, in order to avoid any ambiguity, that laissez-faire is used here for honest things, with the state instituted precisely to prevent dishonest things.

This having been said, and with regard to things that are innocent in themselves, such as work, trade, teaching, association, banking, etc., a choice must be made. It is necessary for the state to let things be done or prevent them from being done.

If it lets things be done, we will be free and optimally administered most economically, since nothing costs less than laissez-faire.

If it prevents things from being done, woe to our freedom and our purse. Woe to our freedom, since to prevent things is to tie our hands; woe to our purse, since to prevent things requires agents and to employ agents takes money.

In reply to this, socialists say: “Laissez-faire! What a disaster!” Why, if you please? “Because, when you leave men to act, they do wrong and act against their interests. It is right for the state to direct them.”

This is simply absurd. Do you seriously have such faith in human wisdom that you want universal suffrage and government of all by all and then you proclaim these very men whom you consider fit to govern others unfit to govern themselves?" - Frédéric Bastiat
 
I'm just going to guess that if you check with the far right evangelicals you'll find plenty of opposition.

I was just expressing my surprise that they haven't shown up in the poll results or the posts yet. You'd think at least one person who opposes legal prostitution would be on the forum right now.
 
My strange combination of a champagne fetish and my age of seventeen makes my prostitution experiences in the champagne room incredibly expensive.

No way in hell. I'm too attached to my alias Gustav von Spicyweiner to change my ways this late in the game.

How has nobody liked either of these yet? How???
 
I think all victimless crime should be legal- the government should not be allowed to regulate behavior.
 
I think all victimless crime should be legal- the government should not be allowed to regulate behavior.

I should have said that.
 
So the government is somehow different in this regard? Do you think politicians are not selfish? Why do you think all politicians leave office a great deal richer than when they arrived in office?
Absolutely, politicians are selfish. When voters have enough power over them, they act in accordance with that selfishness such that they act in the interest of voters. Right now, those incentives are skewed by corporate money, indeed, but voters do still have significant influence, especially in certain matters. I would imagine that in the matter under consideration in this thread, voter's interests would hold sway.

For another, why would market forces lead to people acting against the interests of consumers? Do you think it works to their advantage to have their consumers and workers for that matter getting diseases? That seems like a pretty bad problem for the business to overcome considering that prostitution would be a pretty competitive field.
You sound as though you actually believe individual business people and businesses don't often act contrary to the interests of their customers. Please confirm that I am mistaken in this impression, because I need to be sure I am not dealing with a self deluded person.

Answering why market forces sometimes lead people to act contrary to the interests of consumers is interesting, and it may lead to solutions involving minimal government involvement. In the case under consideration, I think the best I am going to be able to do is to try to put myself in the place of the sex workers who actually do act contrary to their client's well being. I imagine that sometimes they figure that they are desperate for money, and that even though they have AIDS and that they could spread it, that customers are a dime a dozen, and they won't even know where they caught it in the first place. I imagine that sometimes they don't even know they have STDs, and they have just been careless recently, but that no harm will likely come of it. I could go on, and with each iteration would hit upon what at least some of them think. The fact is that they do act contrary to their customer's interests. The "why" will always be speculative, unless we ask THEM.



So to avoid taking control of their own lives they go to the government? How does that solve anything?
. Oh please, Thorgasm already explained how not all those involved can protect themselves. But aside from that, why not make a product safer through regulation? That way I don't have to worry as much about it when I purchase the product. It makes life simpler to have safety regulated. I like not worrying about toddlers toys being unsafe for my nephews when I purchase them. I would imagine sex worker's clients will feel a little more peace of mind, too.
 
Fifty posts in, and we have yet to run into anyone who doesn't want prostitution legalized. I think it's time to take this to Congress!

I'll bite.... Decriminalized, yes; legalized, no. I see no reason to legalize it; it is a matter of morality. Though I do not believe in legislating morality, I see no reason to un-legislate those rules that have existed for centuries that have a reason consistent with the social good.

BTW, the original concept of "decriminalized and regulated" is somewhat oxymoronic as decriminalized is not the same thing as legalized. To my knowledge, we have yet to figure out how to regulated illegal activities. As a matter of illustration, marijuana has been decriminalized it many states; but it has been legalized in two (WA and CO). Marijuana is available as a controlled substance (drug)

There's a big difference between legalization and decriminalization | The Daily Caller
 
Last edited:
Oh and this quote deals with your argument too. :D

"Laissez-faire! I will begin by saying, in order to avoid any ambiguity, that laissez-faire is used here for honest things, with the state instituted precisely to prevent dishonest things.

This having been said, and with regard to things that are innocent in themselves, such as work, trade, teaching, association, banking, etc., a choice must be made. It is necessary for the state to let things be done or prevent them from being done.

If it lets things be done, we will be free and optimally administered most economically, since nothing costs less than laissez-faire.

If it prevents things from being done, woe to our freedom and our purse. Woe to our freedom, since to prevent things is to tie our hands; woe to our purse, since to prevent things requires agents and to employ agents takes money.

In reply to this, socialists say: “Laissez-faire! What a disaster!” Why, if you please? “Because, when you leave men to act, they do wrong and act against their interests. It is right for the state to direct them.”

This is simply absurd. Do you seriously have such faith in human wisdom that you want universal suffrage and government of all by all and then you proclaim these very men whom you consider fit to govern others unfit to govern themselves?" - Frédéric Bastiat

The answer as to why human wisdom is occasionally better manifest through government action rather than market forces is varied. Sometimes it is because the government has more information, or better training at analyzing a complex situation, or both than the people on whose behalf they are acting. Sometimes it is because government is acting to protect people from deceptive other people. Sometimes it is because a minority in society can use market forces to manipulate markets to their own advantage, and away from the advantage of other players, often their customers. Etc.

It is absurd that you think that markets magically automatically behave more rationally toward the benefit of society than government can. Quite often it is true that they do, and you focus on those examples so intently that you fail to realize you are extending those examples to matters for which they do not apply.

Laissez Faire, yes!! But only when it is working well according to the judgement of society.
 
It should be legal and regulated like any other business. This is a women's safety issue to me. Illegal prostitution leads to abuse, disease, crime, and human trafficking. It just makes NO SENSE to me to make prostitution illegal.

It's not clear that legalizing prostitution improves women's safety, however. There's some evidence that sex trafficking can actually increase as a result of legalization.

Human Trafficking Persists Despite Legality of Prostitution in Germany - SPIEGEL ONLINE
 
The answer as to why human wisdom is occasionally better manifest through government action rather than market forces is varied. Sometimes it is because the government has more information, or better training at analyzing a complex situation, or both than the people on whose behalf they are acting. Sometimes it is because government is acting to protect people from deceptive other people. Sometimes it is because a minority in society can use market forces to manipulate markets to their own advantage, and away from the advantage of other players, often their customers. Etc.

The government always acts on those in society to put in place the solutions it sees fit. They manipulate everything and everyone to their own desires and while sometimes there is a positive return there is always the lose of choice and a basic failure to protect the rights of the people that goes with it. There is no reason what so ever to think that the government that gets it's workers from the those same people that could be employed by industry are any more qualified or have the potential to be anymore informed than anyone else on any given issue and therefore no reason whatsoever to assume that they can make decisions others can not.

It is absurd that you think that markets magically automatically behave more rationally toward the benefit of society than government can. Quite often it is true that they do, and you focus on those examples so intently that you fail to realize you are extending those examples to matters for which they do not apply.

It's not about what is rational, but leaving the decisions of peoples lives to the people to leave them free from the control of the government. Most of the time industry will find itself in compliance with the desires of consumers or they will be left behind. The exception to this rule are usually monopolies held up by the very government you are running to the solutions for. I don't think that an industry that will undoubtedly be filled with competitors will not have things like HIV testing as something most of those in industry will practice as the risk is too high for them to not. They will lose consumers and open themselves to lawsuit, and neither of which they will find in their interest to a large degree.

Laissez Faire, yes!! But only when it is working well according to the judgement of society.

But the market is to the judgement of society. If you complain about a cable company providing you crappy speeds or making you rent out a box for no reason(which there isn't one), and you keep buying the service anyway you have made a choice and empowered bad business practices. Money talks and people doing business with cable companies speaks volumes. While on the other hand, the government is only to the judgement of those that win over those that lose or more times than not just involve the say of government.
 
Last edited:
It's a very complicated issue because there are so many girls who are victims of human trafficking involved. They are engaged in prostitution involuntarily. And those girls end up being treated like criminals even though they are actually victims.

If somebody has sex with a prostitute who is doing it involuntarily they are a rapist. I think we should legalize prostitution and institute the death penalty for rape.
 
How else will Gper get some trim?
 
I think it would be best to have sex for free. As in governmentally sponsored prostitution :mrgreen:
 
I think all victimless crime should be legal- the government should not be allowed to regulate behavior.




Try convincing all of the far right Evangelicals to support that idea.

Lots of luck.

They'd like to stop you from drinking beer and dancing.

All for your own good (To keep you from going to Hell.), of course.
 
Last edited:
I think it alredy is or was in some countries. Dutchland perhaps?

Prostitution is fully legal here in Germany.
 
Prostitution is fully legal here in Germany.

Yes, so I read another posters link. Congrats, but it still does not helps with human trafficking it seems? Why do you think that is?

But my comments about Dutchland (not to be confused with Deutschland) was about governmentally sponsored (thus free) prostitution. Would be nice to have such a thing and go when one feels like it and for free :mrgreen:
 
Yes, so I read another posters link. Congrats, but it still does not helps with human trafficking it seems? Why do you think that is?

But my comments about Dutchland (not to be confused with Deutschland) was about governmentally sponsored (thus free) prostitution. Would be nice to have such a thing and go when one feels like it and for free :mrgreen:

Well, if you create a situation, where the work is allowed, but the Person is not allowed to do it, because they come from a country without working rights, you have a perfect situation for human trafficking and exploitation. Even de facto slavery is possible and practiced.

I did not realize that the Dutch government sponsors free prostitution. Do they consider it a public good?
 
Well, if you create a situation, where the work is allowed, but the Person is not allowed to do it, because they come from a country without working rights, you have a perfect situation for human trafficking and exploitation. Even de facto slavery is possible and practiced.

Without rights to work in Deutschland you mean. Okay, I see.

I did not realize that the Dutch government sponsors free prostitution. Do they consider it a public good?

No, wait, I am not certain on this. I said "perhaps" on the post above, and the following post sort of put the word out of context. I heard one country does or did this. I think it could be the Dutch or perhaps Sweden?
 
Back
Top Bottom