• 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 poll

Prostitution poll

  • I have hired a prostitute for sex, but it was rare

    Votes: 7 20.6%
  • I have hired a lot of prostitutes for sex.

    Votes: 6 17.6%
  • I have had sex with a prostitute, but it was free

    Votes: 6 17.6%
  • Never had sex with a prostitute, but might in the future

    Votes: 7 20.6%
  • I have been (or am) a prostitute for sex

    Votes: 4 11.8%
  • I have worked in the sex trade industry, but not as a prostitute

    Votes: 7 20.6%
  • I have many close friends who are/were prostitutes

    Votes: 6 17.6%
  • I have hired sex indirectly via buying the other person stuff

    Votes: 4 11.8%
  • I would consider marrying an ex prostitute

    Votes: 14 41.2%
  • I would not consider marrying an ex prostitute

    Votes: 10 29.4%

  • Total voters
    34
So you admit you were WRONG when you said:


"There is no part of Nevada where prostitution is legal. There are a few counties where brothels are legal, but otherwise prostitution is not."


Post #235


Legalizing prostitution would make it legal in ALL parts of the USA - and NOT just in licensed brothels.

I was just following the logic of the person who made that dumb claim that prostitution is legal in Nevada - but actually only some brothels in Nevada. IF that equates to "prostitute being legal" as that person claimed, replacing "Nevada" with "the USA" is also accurate.
 
A regulation is not a law.

Do you really not know this ?

"How are laws and regulations different?

Laws go through the bill process before becoming established as a law. A bill has to be written, sponsored by a legislator, debated and passed through both the House of Representatives and the Senate after various committee and budget hearings before going to the Executive to be signed into law. A regulation is created by a governmental agency, often to actually implement a given law, and does not have to go through the bill process described above. With regulations, an agency holds a public hearing and after that hearing makes a decision on either adopting, changing or rejecting the regulation.
Laws are also rules that govern everyone equally, while regulations only effect those who deal directly with the agency who is enforcing them. In other words, a law can govern the action of both the DEP and the FBI, but the DEP cannot write regulations that would be enforceable to the FBI.
"


Laws vs Regulations: What's the Difference?



"Letter of the Law

Laws are the products of written statutes, passed by either the U.S. Congress or state legislatures. The legislatures create bills that, when passed by a vote, become statutory law.

For example, in response to the stock market crash of 1929, Congress passed the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 in an effort to curb securities fraud and insider trading. The Act is codified in the United States Code as Title 15, Section 78a, and, among other things, prohibits the disclosure of false or misleading information related to securities transactions. The Securities and Exchange Act also created the Securities and Exchange Commission, tasked with enforcing federal securities laws.

Rules of Regulations

Regulations, on the other hand, are standards and rules adopted by administrative agencies that govern how laws will be enforced. So an agency like the SEC can have its own regulations for enforcing major securities laws. For instance, while the Securities and Exchange Act prohibits using insider or nonpublic information to make trades, the SEC can have its own rules on how it will investigate charges of insider trading.

Like laws, regulations are codified and published so that parties are on notice regarding what is and isn't legal. And regulations often have the same force as laws, since, without them, regulatory agencies wouldn't be able to enforce laws...
"


What's the Difference Between Laws and Regulations?

You do not understand what you quoted. Can an agency create a regulation with fines and possible jail/prison? Yes ONLY if first a "law" is passed giving the agency the authority to create such "regulations." Anything that may result in being jailed (even not paying fines) per se is "criminal." Accordingly, ANY law - civil or criminal - as a regulation - and all regulations are "laws." And potential jail via regulations, it comes an "criminal violate of a regulatory law." The "criminal" aspect is important, as compared to administrative regulations. - but that is a fairly complex topic for the diversity of applications.

If your theory was correct, the Department of Justice could just decree as a "regulation" that anyone who assaults anyone with the DOJ or a DOJ family member, even if a simple assault, has committed a 1st class felony with life without parole. A department head in a small town agency would summarily declare as a "regulation" and man with hair over his collar and with facial hair has committed an offense with a $2,000 fine - 20 days in jail if not paid and as typical bond would be $4000 before trial - and by regulatory decree that in jail his hair is to be forcibly cut and him forcibly shaved for sanitary reasons.

In fact, it would take Congress to past that law with the President signing it for the DOJ to have to power then to create a regulatory process to enforce it and more precisely define that law - and the city council/mayor to create such a local law first - with all of it subject to review by the courts.
 
Last edited:
No attempt to support your many lies ?

How about your claim that no-one has used the term "actress" for DECADES ?
(I assume the Motion Picture Academy is covered by the term "no-one")

OK, enjoy your trip to Vegas...if you want to talk about how to improve prostitution in Nevada, then fine

I accept reality from another poster by what he/she can PROVE or logically deduce.
Your personal opinion and tall tales cut no ice.

:roll: Hollywood is the most sexist institution in the United States. In fact, they sell sexism more than anything else.
 
Where's the "never did it with a prostitute nor am I planning to" option?
 
Where's the "never did it with a prostitute nor am I planning to" option?

There is a 10 choice limit with 5 minutes to enter them and submit it. It would have taken at least 20 choices to cover it all.
 
I was just following the logic of the person who made that dumb claim that prostitution is legal in Nevada - but actually only some brothels in Nevada. IF that equates to "prostitute being legal" as that person claimed, replacing "Nevada" with "the USA" is also accurate.

You said:

"There is no part of Nevada where prostitution is legal..."

Post #235


I showed you that is legal in parts of Nevada

QED: You were WRONG.
 
Last edited:
You do not understand what you quoted....


It's the difference between a law and a regulation

Sorry you still don't understand it.


...can an agency create a regulation with fines and possible jail/prison? Yes ....

No, you are not jailed for breaking a regulation as it's a civil not criminal offense. You can however be fined but you're NOT a criminal.

By breaking a regulation you can be breaking the law however and you're charged with breaking a statute not a regulation.

(I'm surprised I have ever to explain this to someone who pretends to be an adult)

Example: In Georgia the restaurant code requires cooked and uncooked food to be stored separately - not on the same shelf in a refrigerator. Breaking that regulation can cause you to lose your restaurant license.


However if by breaking a regulation (or regulations) you end up poisoning a customer you are charged under a criminal statute.


Do you get it now ?
If not seek legal advice.
 
:roll: Hollywood is the most sexist institution in the United States. In fact, they sell sexism more than anything else.

You said no-one had called female actor an "actress" for three decades.


I gave you two examples - a contributor to the IMDB and the official Academy Motion Picture Awards.

Yet you still say that no-one uses the term "actress"



Meryl Streep is one of America's best known actresses, from her official web page:


"It's impossible to squeeze Meryl Streep's biography into a few sentences. That's why books have been written about her. It's probably also why critics keep calling her the greatest actress of her time, because in the end that's who Meryl Streep is..."


Simply Streep - Biography


Do you also include Meryl Streep as "no-one" or will you finally admit to being wrong ?
 
It's the difference between a law and a regulation

Sorry you still don't understand it.




No, you are not jailed for breaking a regulation as it's a civil not criminal offense. You can however be fined but you're NOT a criminal.

By breaking a regulation you can be breaking the law however and you're charged with breaking a statute not a regulation.

(I'm surprised I have ever to explain this to someone who pretends to be an adult)

Example: In Georgia the restaurant code requires cooked and uncooked food to be stored separately - not on the same shelf in a refrigerator. Breaking that regulation can cause you to lose your restaurant license.


However if by breaking a regulation (or regulations) you end up poisoning a customer you are charged under a criminal statute.


Do you get it now ?
If not seek legal advice.

You just explained how everything you are arguing for it essential irrelevant since there is no enforcement mechanism of any value. You just explained for what YOU want, nothing happens if someone is engaged in prostitution and is completely out of compliance nothing would happen other than fines they can not be forced to pay.

You are saying anyone can completely ignore the regulations you want - other than be fined and losing their license. However, since now you claim your regulations would not be backed up by jail if fines are not paid nor if a person doesn't have a license, there is no reason for anyone to comply.
 
You just explained how everything you are arguing for it essential irrelevant since there is no enforcement mechanism of any value....

So now you DO accept there is a difference between a law (convicted breaking one makes you a criminal), and a regulation (guilty of breaking one does not).


You now seem to cast doubt on regulations because regulatory offices are weak.


I could point out how many restaurants have failed inspections, how many truck companies, how many builders fail building codes...the list goes on as do the many penalties handed out, up to and including a withdrawal of the license.

Do you oppose the legalization of prostitution now because you feel regulatory bodies are ineffective or are you appealing that those bodies get more resources ?
 


You forgot to answer post #258

You said no-one had called female actor an "actress" for three decades.


I have given you now THREE examples:-

1. A contributor to the IMDB

2. The official Academy Motion Picture Awards

3. Meryl Streep's own official web page


Do you STILL insist that "no-one" has refereed to a male actor as an "actress" for three decades? Or will you finally admit to being wrong ?
 
So now you DO accept there is a difference between a law (convicted breaking one makes you a criminal), and a regulation (guilty of breaking one does not).


You now seem to cast doubt on regulations because regulatory offices are weak.


I could point out how many restaurants have failed inspections, how many truck companies, how many builders fail building codes...the list goes on as do the many penalties handed out, up to and including a withdrawal of the license.

Do you oppose the legalization of prostitution now because you feel regulatory bodies are ineffective or are you appealing that those bodies get more resources ?

Excuse me. You are not the only person posting on this forum and I am debating those with messages that actually mean something. That means normal application of regulations, which means fines backed up by jail if not paid.

You should have just said the regulations you want will only have any relevancy to your beloved brothels rather than wasting everyone's time. Brothels are already regulated so what you stumble all over yourself already exists and you are advocating for nothing other than keeping brothels regulated.

That is even before we get to your examples citing criminal regulations with potential jail - claiming this proves there is no jailing potential stupidly. If a restaurant, trucking company, building etc are fined and the person fined doesn't pay the fine, they are arrested and jailed. If a business requiring a license operates without one and refuses to pay fines, they are put in jail.

Name ANY regulation with a potential of a fine or violation of a requirement to have a license that FIRST did not have the legislative and executive branch of government (local, state or federal) that did not pass a law giving the power to create such regulations to the administrative branch of government. You can't.

You just keep making up nonsensical stupid stuff in your messages.
 
You forgot to answer post #258

You said no-one had called female actor an "actress" for three decades.


I have given you now THREE examples:-

1. A contributor to the IMDB

2. The official Academy Motion Picture Awards

3. Meryl Streep's own official web page


Do you STILL insist that "no-one" has refereed to a male actor as an "actress" for three decades? Or will you finally admit to being wrong ?

I stand corrected. Stupid old sexists still use "actress."
 
law noun
\ ˈlȯ \
Definition of law
1a(1): a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed (see PRESCRIBE sense 1a) or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority
(2): the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules
The courts exist to uphold, interpret, and apply the law.
(3): COMMON LAW
b(1): the control brought about by the existence or enforcement of such law
preserved law and order in the town
(2): the action of laws considered as a means of redressing wrongs
also : LITIGATION
developed the habit of going to law over the slightest provocation
— H. A. Overstreet
(3): the agency of or an agent of established law
When he saw that the fighting was escalating, he called in the law.
c: a rule or order that it is advisable or obligatory to observe
a law of self-preservation
d: something compatible with or enforceable by established law
The decrees were judged not to be law and were therefore rescinded.
e: CONTROL, AUTHORITY
The child submits to no law.
2aoften capitalized : the revelation of the will of God set forth in the Old Testament
bcapitalized : the first part of the Jewish scriptures : PENTATEUCH, TORAH
— see BIBLE TABLE
3: a rule of construction or procedure
the laws of poetry
4: the whole body of laws relating to one subject
criminal law
probate law
5a: the legal profession
studied for a career in law

It is just stupid to claim agencies don't enforce laws and that agency regulations are not laws. If they are not laws exactly everyone can ignore the regulations. If an action is not against the law, it is not against the law.
 
Excuse me. You are not the only person posting on this forum....

Neither are you


...normal application of regulations, which means fines backed up by jail if not paid....

But if you go to jail, you do so for not paying the fine - not for not observing the regulation.
In most cases not paying the fine results in a loss of your license not a jail term.

Give an example, from your self proclaimed knowledge base, of a person being sent to jail for breaking a civil law regulation.


...you should have just said the regulations you want will only have any relevancy to your beloved brothels....

You keep repeating that lie that brothels are a preferred location of business rather than a prostitutes own home
They are not and again I challenge you to say where it ever has been said

And in countries like Germany there are regulations for the prostitute and their place(s) of business

... rather than wasting everyone's time....

Your time is wasted in telling falsehoods and making unsupported claims

Do you often refer to yourself as "everyone"

...brothels are already regulated...


In places in Nevada, yet you claim several abuses...so wouldn't they not be a candidate for increased regulation ?


...that is even before we get to your examples citing criminal regulations with potential jail...

Lie #2
When has it been said that prostitutes who don't follow regulation would be breaking the law - in fact it's been explained to you that this is civil law not criminal law; and the difference between the two
When has it been said that prostitutes would face jail by anyone but you ?

...if a restaurant, trucking company, building etc are fined and the person fined doesn't pay the fine, they are arrested and jailed...

The fine is usually against the business not the person and would result in the business losing its licence if not paid
In extreme cases where jail is threatened, it is because of not paying the fine (or another criminal violation), NOT for the breaking of a regulation

If you doubt this, cite a civil law regulation that results in prison if broken. You can't
(probably cue fruitless internet search)


...if a business requiring a license operates without one and refuses to pay fines, they are put in jail....


Wrong - unless you deliberately make it a criminal offense to operate without a license - are you proposing that ?
Who are "they" and can you cite an example ?

For a self proclaimed knowledgeable man, you know very little. Indeed I suspect you're not an adult at all


...name ANY regulation with a potential of a fine or violation of a requirement to have a license that FIRST did not have the legislative and executive branch of government (local, state or federal) that did not pass a law giving the power to create such regulations to the administrative branch of government. You can't....

OK, the licensing body, in Georgia, to regulate say restaurants was set up by the state legislature
It created the civil law that they enforce
So what ?


...you just keep making up nonsensical stupid stuff in your messages.

"stupid stuff"
LOL

QED, you're not an adult but an adolescent making up tall tales and exposing themselves in the process.
 
...it is just stupid to claim agencies don't enforce laws and that agency regulations are not laws. If they are not laws exactly everyone can ignore the regulations. If an action is not against the law, it is not against the law.

More worthless copy and paste. It's stupid to claim regulations governing civil law are criminal laws.

Please stop posting on things about which you know nothing.
 
More worthless copy and paste. It's stupid to claim regulations governing civil law are criminal laws.

Please stop posting on things about which you know nothing.

You make the absurd claim that a person cares what YOU claim the reason the are in jail is called. :roll:
 
Neither are you




But if you go to jail, you do so for not paying the fine - not for not observing the regulation.
In most cases not paying the fine results in a loss of your license not a jail term.

Give an example, from your self proclaimed knowledge base, of a person being sent to jail for breaking a civil law regulation.




You keep repeating that lie that brothels are a preferred location of business rather than a prostitutes own home
They are not and again I challenge you to say where it ever has been said

And in countries like Germany there are regulations for the prostitute and their place(s) of business



Your time is wasted in telling falsehoods and making unsupported claims

Do you often refer to yourself as "everyone"




In places in Nevada, yet you claim several abuses...so wouldn't they not be a candidate for increased regulation ?




Lie #2
When has it been said that prostitutes who don't follow regulation would be breaking the law - in fact it's been explained to you that this is civil law not criminal law; and the difference between the two
When has it been said that prostitutes would face jail by anyone but you ?



The fine is usually against the business not the person and would result in the business losing its licence if not paid
In extreme cases where jail is threatened, it is because of not paying the fine (or another criminal violation), NOT for the breaking of a regulation

If you doubt this, cite a civil law regulation that results in prison if broken. You can't
(probably cue fruitless internet search)





Wrong - unless you deliberately make it a criminal offense to operate without a license - are you proposing that ?
Who are "they" and can you cite an example ?

For a self proclaimed knowledgeable man, you know very little. Indeed I suspect you're not an adult at all




OK, the licensing body, in Georgia, to regulate say restaurants was set up by the state legislature
It created the civil law that they enforce
So what ?




"stupid stuff"
LOL

QED, you're not an adult but an adolescent making up tall tales and exposing themselves in the process.

Once again, to to brothels if that's what you want. Otherwise since you have no enforcement of your regulations who cares since compliance and paying any fines is optional.
 
You make the absurd claim that a person cares what YOU claim the reason the are in jail is called. :roll:

No, the reason is the law despite your claim the jail is the fate for those ruled against in civil law cases


You know that civil law cases don't give verdicts of "guilty" or "not guilty" right ?
 
Once again, to to brothels if that's what you want. Otherwise since you have no enforcement of your regulations who cares since compliance and paying any fines is optional.

"To to brothels" - that doesn't even make sense


There is a licensing protocol - like taxi drivers or hot dog stand traders - failure to pay a fine means a loss of license. call that "optional" if you want

Operating a taxi or a hot dog stand without a license is a criminal offense in many places. You really know nothing about civil law and criminal law - despite your tall tales that your work brought you into contact with illegal prostitutes,

I suggest you Google prostitution in Germany and see how their system works.

Right now you don't come across as someone against the concept of legalizing prostitution and are clutching at straws to raise any objection that your young mind can think of. Are you pro or against it ?
If for, how would you regulate prostitution?


Right now it seems to be that prostitution shouldn't be legalized because licensing/regulation wouldn't work.
 
"To to brothels" - that doesn't even make sense


There is a licensing protocol - like taxi drivers or hot dog stand traders - failure to pay a fine means a loss of license. call that "optional" if you want

Operating a taxi or a hot dog stand without a license is a criminal offense in many places. You really know nothing about civil law and criminal law - despite your tall tales that your work brought you into contact with illegal prostitutes,

I suggest you Google prostitution in Germany and see how their system works.

Right now you don't come across as someone against the concept of legalizing prostitution and are clutching at straws to raise any objection that your young mind can think of. Are you pro or against it ?
If for, how would you regulate prostitution?


Right now it seems to be that prostitution shouldn't be legalized because licensing/regulation wouldn't work.

Typo: "Go to" not "To to."

I've stated what I want many times. A minor misdemeanor - fine or night in jail - for marketing prostitution on the street. That's it. That is the only laws (or what you call "regulations") I want. I am honest enough to acknowledge the fact that any law whatever you call it otherwise is a criminal law if there is any potential for jail.

However, such a law could be used at a felony level in regards to prostitution sex trafficking. I would be agreeable to laws about brothels so they could not be used for sex trafficking or to claim sex trafficked prostitution is a legal brothel. These also would be regulatory criminal laws.

If you had just said up front you want regulations that have no enforcement provisions I would have never bothered with you in the first place. So what if no one - individual, group or brothel - doesn't have or get a license? You now claim that nothing happens to them if they don't so why should anyone give a damn?
 
Last edited:
...I've stated what I want many times. A minor misdemeanor - fine or night in jail - for marketing prostitution on the street. That's it. That is the only laws (or what you call "regulations") I want. I am honest enough to acknowledge the fact that any law whatever you call it otherwise is a criminal law if there is any potential for jail...

So you'd be OK for a prostitute to place an ad in a newspaper or on-line ?

You'd be totally OK with legalized brothels with no regulations, like a restriction on the employment of felons, no age or immigration status checks on prostitutes?, no checking for drugs or disease ?
Which is interesting since your earlier posts dammed Nevada brothels for their practices - and that was WITH regulation.

You wouldn't do anything to oppose the spread of disease ?


....so what if no one - individual, group or brothel - doesn't have or get a license?


The operation of a brothel without a license or just operating as an unlicensed prostitute, would be akin to operating an unlicensed restaurant or operating a cab in NYC without a license - it would be, like they are, a violation of criminal law.
 
So you'd be OK for a prostitute to place an ad in a newspaper or on-line ?

You'd be totally OK with legalized brothels with no regulations, like a restriction on the employment of felons, no age or immigration status checks on prostitutes?, no checking for drugs or disease ?

Which is interesting since your earlier posts dammed Nevada brothels for their practices - and that was WITH regulation.

You wouldn't do anything to oppose the spread of disease ?





The operation of a brothel without a license or just operating as an unlicensed prostitute, would be akin to operating an unlicensed restaurant or operating a cab in NYC without a license - it would be, like they are, a violation of criminal law.

Good questions.

The question of age and immigration status are addressed by other laws. Don't see why felons should be prohibited. Wouldn't have a problem with health laws like restaurants and other public facilities.

As for advertising? That is marketing in public in one sense, not in another. I suppose if brothels (pimps with a permanent location) can advertise, so then should prostitutes be able to advertise online and publications too.

Required STD testing? No.

I would be agreeable to an optional license being available to prostitutes and that could require STDs testing, registration, background check or whatever. Then again I would like this to be universal - that anyone could get an STD's clean certificate - with it noted there is no such thing as the truly 100% reliable STDs testing - and a person clean today might not be tomorrow.

This then would not only apply to prostitutes who could get such an STDs clean certificate, nor also just Johns, but everyone. Then each person could decide the risk they were willing to take. However, I explained that in a prior message that no one responded to.

While prostitutes on average will have higher rates of STDs, they are not the only people who spread it and probably not who is most spreading STDs. So again we can get into hypocrisy or judgmentalism. Require prostitutes to have STDs testing but no one else?

Leave the decision of risk factors up to each person and making free STDs testing and certificate of being clean optional. Then a person could ask to see such a certificate - if they cared - whether from a prostitute or not - and a prostitute could decide whether to require a John to have one or not. So could anyone else of anyone else. Such records would be confidential of course.
 
....the question of age and immigration status are addressed by other laws....

The federal government just said there were as many as 22 million illegal immigrants in the USA

If prostitution were legal, a great many would find themselves working in legal brothels where their illegal status would make them vulnerable and less likely to come out and seek medical help and mandatory checks
So yes we have laws to deport illegals, we don't deport them.. So checking for illegal in brothels should be a priority as should licensing regulations - the same way it is difficult for an illegal immigrant to get a diver's license


...don't see why felons should be prohibited...

Depends what the felony is
If it's for violence or drug dealing for example, I wouldn't want them within a million miles from a legalized brothel


...as for advertising? That is marketing in public in one sense, not in another....

Again a regulation, would you want ads in comic books or billboards or national TV ?

How about on the hood of a NASCAR car ?

How old would you have to be to enter a brothel (or work there) - the age of consent or 21 like the national drinking age in bars is ?


...Required STD testing? No....

Absolutely that is required
To protect the prostitute themselves as well as a degree of protection for their customers. A condom will help you only so much


...I would be agreeable to an optional license being available to prostitutes and that could require STDs testing, registration, background check or whatever. Then again I would like this to be universal - that anyone could get an STD's clean certificate - with it noted there is no such thing as the truly 100% reliable STDs testing - and a person clean today might not be tomorrow....

No it has to be mandatory.

It's true that a person tested today might pass but tested tomorrow might fail - but that is true of all tests including emissions tests
At least with a mandatory test we have a better idea who the prostitute may have infected so they have a chance to be tested themselves


...while prostitutes on average will have higher rates of STDs, they are not the only people who spread it and probably not who is most spreading STDs. So again we can get into hypocrisy or judgmentalism. Require prostitutes to have STDs testing but no one else? ...

Who else would you suggest - everyone who works in a licensed brothel ? OK, I could accept that


...leave the decision of risk factors up to each person and making free STDs testing and certificate of being clean optional. Then a person could ask to see such a certificate - if they cared - whether from a prostitute or not - and a prostitute could decide whether to require a John to have one or not. So could anyone else of anyone else. Such records would be confidential of course.



No. in the same way a restaurant customer has the right to assume his/her food is clean without inspecting the licenses on the wall or the kitchen, a brothel customer should expect and assume the prostitute is clean.
 
Back
Top Bottom