• 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!

Canada high court strikes down all restrictions on prostitution [W:232]

You seem to be confused as there is nothing that needs to be clarified.

It is a further erosion of standards of decency.

It is you who are assuming it says something it doesn't.
So again, I would suggest you stop assuming.

:lamo OK. :roll:
 
Who the hell decided those?
That is irrelevant to this discussion, as you were previously told.
They have been eroded.
You can not say they haven't been.
 
That is irrelevant to this discussion, as you were previously told.
They have been eroded.
You can not say they haven't been.

How can they be eroded when we don't what they are?
 
How can they be eroded when we don't what they are?
Bs! You know what they are/were. So I am not going to play that game.
 
All restrictions...

So if a gal wants to set up shop outside of a school, that is fine? Or walking up and down the street in front of your house? Or in a public park?

You have to remember, I do not see prostitution as a big deal myself. However, removing all restrictions I think is pretty stupid.
 
If two people want to enter into a service arrangment where someone cuts the grass for someone, or cuts their hair, or drives them somewhere....etc, that is OK.

But, if the service is some kind of GASP! sexual intercourse.....well then, they can't do that.

Why?

(yeah, I know...god, the bible, blah blah blah)

They aren't hurting anyone, let alone the OP, other than making him envious (wait...that is a deadly sin!)
 
Canada high court strikes down all restrictions on prostitution

By Randall Palmer, Reuters

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada struck down all current restrictions on prostitution on Friday, including bans on brothels and on street solicitation, declaring the laws were unconstitutional because they violated prostitutes' safety.

The sweeping 9-0 decision will take effect in one year, inviting Parliament to try to come up with some other way to regulate the sex trade if it chooses to do so.

[...]

Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin said many prostitutes "have no meaningful choice" but to "engage in the risky economic activity of prostitution," and that the law should not make such lawful activity more dangerous.

"It makes no difference that the conduct of pimps and johns is the immediate source of the harms suffered by prostitutes," she wrote.

"The impugned laws deprive people engaged in a risky, but legal, activity of the means to protect themselves against those risks."

[...]

Canada high court strikes down all restrictions on prostitution - World News

And the further erosion of decent standards.

The Justice's reasoning is absurd. Or is that liberal?

I question, are you being forced into prostitution? Are your personal liberties being taken away? Or are you just another guy who doesn't like change and thinks that everybody that doesn't live in a white picket fence house and two kids with a happily married wife is doing something wrong. If it doesn't affect you then why judge? Because you are afraid of what you don't understand?
 
That is irrelevant to this discussion, as you were previously told.
They have been eroded.
You can not say they haven't been.

Are you at least able to admit that "decent standards" is an entirely subjective notion?
 
I question, are you being forced into prostitution? Are your personal liberties being taken away? Or are you just another guy who doesn't like change and thinks that everybody that doesn't live in a white picket fence house and two kids with a happily married wife is doing something wrong. If it doesn't affect you then why judge? Because you are afraid of what you don't understand?
Your questions are irrelevant to that which was said.

It is a further erosion.
It is stating a fact.
Don't read into, or assume anything by that.
 
Are you at least able to admit that "decent standards" is an entirely subjective notion?
At the time they were codified. That is not subjective.
Those standards have been eroded by this decision, have they not?
 
Your questions are irrelevant to that which was said.

It is a further erosion.
It is stating a fact.
Don't read into, or assume anything by that.

Further erosion of what? your utopic society?
 
They aren't hurting anyone, let alone the OP, other than making him envious (wait...that is a deadly sin!)

You have to realize, I worked for many years in the "Adult Entertainment Industry". And while I do not think it should be outlawed, I also do not believe things should be a free-for-all either.

This removal of all restrictions makes Canada almost sound like a Libertarian Paradise. 16 year old girl prostitution herself to a 16 year old boy, why not? Hookers setting up at bus stops, what the heck, why not? No restrictions after all.

Now what they should have done if they were smart was to overthrow parts, pending revision of current laws. Throwing out all restrictions is simple insanity.
 
At the time they were codified. That is not subjective.
Those standards have been eroded by this decision, have they not?

At "the" time they were "codified?"

When was this, and where can I find them written?
 
You have to realize, I worked for many years in the "Adult Entertainment Industry". And while I do not think it should be outlawed, I also do not believe things should be a free-for-all either.

This removal of all restrictions makes Canada almost sound like a Libertarian Paradise. 16 year old girl prostitution herself to a 16 year old boy, why not? Hookers setting up at bus stops, what the heck, why not? No restrictions after all.

Now what they should have done if they were smart was to overthrow parts, pending revision of current laws. Throwing out all restrictions is simple insanity.

I think it should be done like Amsterdam, a zoned area, health checks mandatory, and ensure that it is all adults.
 
I think it should be done like Amsterdam, a zoned area, health checks mandatory, and ensure that it is all adults.

I actually have no problem with that. Although I think it would be better if they followed the Nevada model (rural areas, zoned farmland or industrial, regulated).

Simply throwing out all regulations is never a smart idea. And I bet there will be a lot of predation until the new rules are enacted and put into place.
 
Bs! You know what they are/were. So I am not going to play that game.

No, we don't.

Are nude magazines OK? Movies? Sexual Devices (remember, cucumbers), R rated films? Double entendre' jokes on sitcoms? Selling condoms? Lacy Underalls? (Caddyshack reference).

Where does your particular level of values that you want to impose stop? What are the limits? For example, in my state, there is an actual law that women can only own 2 sexual devices (LDS legislator...). I want some specifics so I am sure not to break any law by having any un pure thoughts.
 
Further erosion of what?
Still trying to play a game huh?
You already know what the erosion was of. Especially as it was already stated.
 
Still trying to play a game huh?
You already know what the erosion was of. Especially as it was already stated.

Unfortunately for you there is no protections in either the canadian or US constitution that protects its citizens from the erosion of society. Guess we will just have to live :2wave:
 
You have to realize, I worked for many years in the "Adult Entertainment Industry". And while I do not think it should be outlawed, I also do not believe things should be a free-for-all either.

This removal of all restrictions makes Canada almost sound like a Libertarian Paradise. 16 year old girl prostitution herself to a 16 year old boy, why not? Hookers setting up at bus stops, what the heck, why not? No restrictions after all.

Now what they should have done if they were smart was to overthrow parts, pending revision of current laws. Throwing out all restrictions is simple insanity.


I think I tend to agree with this sentiment. It's bad enough that boys and girls don't court each other anymore as it is, now the youngens rather than date will arrange business transactions, and it will become commonplace. Christ even in Amsterdam prostitution is only allowed in key locations. I think the court was very short sighted on this one, and I'm actually for the legalizing prostitution under sober common sense restrictions, but this seems a bit to far, and potentially dangerous for a society as a whole.

The law of unintended consequences would apply here.


Tim-
 
In related (?) news, immigration to Canada has gone up 3000% since the Supreme Court announcement. :2razz:
 
In related (?) news, immigration to Canada has gone up 3000% since the Supreme Court announcement. :2razz:

My guess is that the Canadian Ballet will be offering a new line item on its menu for their guests.

Canadian Ballet refers to the Sundowner strip club in Niagara Falls, Ca. World famous place so many will know what I'm talking about. :)


Tim-
 
Back
Top Bottom