|
Post by littlepea on Mar 20, 2006 16:36:34 GMT -5
what do you think about prostitution? legalize it? i did an essay for this for one of my uni courses which i'll post if anyone shows any interest in the topic, but it's a bit rushed and i'm not completely happy with it so i won't post it straight away. basically, my conclusion from my essay is that there's no sound basis for discriminating against prostitutes in the criminal law. prostitution is inevitable in any society, history has proven this, and the prostitutes themselves aren't the ones we should be punishing. the criminal law is ineffective in regulating prostitution and all criminal sanctions on the subject only push the matter deeper underground and further out of control, usually with disastrous results for the prostitutes themselves, and in fact there is practically no reason why the criminal laws on prostitution and all its surrounding offences shouldn't be lifted and the practice left to sort itself out according to normal commercial and business activity, the criminal law only getting involved where it happens to infringe other aspects not specific to prostitution (eg. assault, rape, under-age sex, coercion, inappropriate advertising etc.) any thoughts? my essay is a bit long-winded and isn't much of my own thoughts, more a summary of the most important writings on the topic as far as i can tell, and it's very rushed (i even forgot to make a cover page for it before handing it in ), but i'll post it if you like and you can tell me exactly how bad it is as well as seeing the points i made
|
|
|
Post by teancum79 on Mar 20, 2006 16:51:37 GMT -5
Well just off the top. I think anytime a society legalizes immorality they pay for it dearly.
Alcohol and tobacco (according to a friend of mine who runs his own insurance business) are the cause of 50% of all health care cost in the USA.
A lot of people did not like Prohibition and would throw a fit if Tobacco was outlawed, but we pay a dear price for tolerating them. Pornography and prostitution are no different. Many societies approve of them and cite the decrease in crime, but the price they pay in the long run is far greater.
Families are the primary building block that make up a society and prostitution weakens the family. Therefore the more a society tolerates of endorses it the weaker it will become.
|
|
|
Post by littlepea on Mar 20, 2006 18:28:54 GMT -5
the issue of whether prostitution destabalizes the family was addressed in one of the articles that i looked though i don't mention it in my essay so i didn't take much notice of the issue. that author certainly was not convinced by such arguments (if you have resources to find it, the article i'm referring to is “Charges Against Prostitution: An Attempt at a Philosophical Assessment” by Lars Ericsson and can be found in the journal with this citation, "Ethics, Vol. 90, No. 3. (Apr., 1980) 335". my inital response to your claim would be to say that adultery is not a crime, therefore there's no reason why prostitution itself should be a crime merely because it might involve adultery.
i was about to fully post my essay, but i'm thinking that perhaps i shouldn't until i get a mark back for it. not that i'm embarrassed that it might be utter poo (although i fear it might be, that wouldn't stop me from posting it), it's just in case somehow the university see it and i'd rather avoid any possible complications arising from that.
the main points of my article, however, were to look at other professions to see if there is anything distinct about prostitution that can really justify having laws against it. in the past, for instance, it used to be thought that opera singers were a kind of prostitute if they only performed for money, yet these days there are few nobler professions than the opera singer. this was based on a number of prejudices that would largely be seen as old-fashioned and irrational these days (namely, the upper-class prejudice that working only to earn a wage is "base", and the fear of the human body in public, particularly the female body, which has been prevalent throughout many societies throughout history, ours possibly lingering from our puritanical christian heritage). these prejudices must be put to one side if we are to find a sound reason for stigmatizing prostitution.
the main problems with prostitution as a profession (ie. from the point of view of the prostitute) are that it carries a high risk of disease and assault, it is highly stigmatized, and it can be seen to perpetuate patriarchy. with proper regulation, however, the risk of disease and assault could be greatly reduced, and this alone is not a sufficient reason for illegality - some factory workers face high risks of disease and all contact sports involve the risk of physical injury (eg. boxing). the stigmatization is quite apparent in modern society, but there is no reason why this could not improve over time like with the opera singer. the third factor brings up the issue of feminism, which i then go on to discuss in a bit more detail (turns out prostitution can either be rejected or supported on feminist principles - no surprise there then!)
anyway, i can't be bothered typing any more just now, so i await any responses.
i suppose there's no harm in posting my bibliography so you can have a look at the articles i refer to if you have the appropriate resources (the form of the citations goes: author, "title", journal title, journal volume, page reference):
Martha Nussbaum, “‘Whether From Reason or Prejudice’: Taking Money for Bodily Services, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. XXVII (January 1998) 639
Lars Ericsson, “Charges Against Prostitution: An Attempt at a Philosophical Assessment”, Ethics, Vol. 90, No. 3. (April 1980) 335
Laurie Shrage, “Should Feminists Oppose Prostitution?”, Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 2. (January 1989) 347
Carole Pateman, “Defending Prostitution: Charges Against Ericsson”, Ethics, Vol. 93, No. 3. (April 1983) 561
Sibyl Schwarzenbach, “Contractarians and Feminists Debate Prostitution”, 18 N.Y.U. Rev. L. & Soc. Change (1990-1991) 103
E. McLeod, “A Fresh Approach? A Critique of the Criminal Law Revision Committee’s Working Paper on Offences Relating to Prostitution and Allied Offences”, Journal of Law & Society, Vol. 10, No. 2, (Winter 1983) 271
if you're desperate to view these articles but don't have the means to do so then i could e-mail them to you, so PM me if that is the case.
|
|
|
Post by teancum79 on Mar 20, 2006 21:48:25 GMT -5
Adultery is illegal in many places, but like public spitting and J-walking the laws are not enforced.
Regardless of the legality of adultery however it is still immoral and should not be endorsed by a society.
|
|
|
Post by littlepea on Mar 20, 2006 22:43:32 GMT -5
prostitution is not adultery, however, and legality does not mean that it is encouraged, merely that it is tolerated. i agree that prostitution should not be encouraged (though if you read the Ericsson and Schwarzenbach articles they think it could be beneficial to society if regulated properly, the latter even advocates this from a feminist perspective).
the issue of legality is separate from the issue of whether it is good or evil. if it decided that it is good then clearly it would be illogical to make it illegal, but if it is decided that it is bad then there may still be other reasons for decriminalisation. my personal feelings are that i don't think it should be encouraged but it should be decriminalised. it is impossible to eradicate prostitution and the criminal law is not an appropriate tool for the regulation of it.
|
|
|
Post by Mestemia on Mar 21, 2006 1:43:27 GMT -5
There is only one state in the USA that has adultry as illegal. That state is Massachusettes. Though adultry is grounds for divorce, it is not illegal in the other 49 states. Prostitution is legal in some counties of Nevada: www.sexuality.org/l/workers/nevada.html
|
|
|
Post by dianaholberg on Mar 21, 2006 8:18:16 GMT -5
prostitution is not adultery, however, Are you speaking only legally? Prostitution is most definitely adultery.
|
|
|
Post by Mestemia on Mar 21, 2006 12:41:40 GMT -5
If both parties are not married then it is not adultry. Unless you have some definition of adultry that I do not know about.
|
|
|
Post by littlepea on Mar 21, 2006 15:34:15 GMT -5
that's what i was thinking, polytheist. assuming the prostitute is a woman and her clients are male, it is only adultery if the man is married, in which case it is he who is to blame not the woman (unless the prostitute herself is married, i suppose). prostitution is not necessarily adultery since it is also open to unmarried clients.
it is not illegal to have sex with a stranger no matter how immoral some people think it is, so why is it illegal to have sex with a stranger for money?
|
|
|
Post by dianaholberg on Mar 22, 2006 12:07:14 GMT -5
If both parties are not married then it is not adultry. Unless you have some definition of adultry that I do not know about. Matt 5:27-29 27 " You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Adultery is not limited to the married, nor to the physical.
|
|
|
Post by dianaholberg on Mar 22, 2006 12:10:02 GMT -5
it is not illegal to have sex with a stranger no matter how immoral some people think it is, so why is it illegal to have sex with a stranger for money? Selling oneself (or buying another person) is beyond immoral. It reduces a human being to a commodity. This is a violation of the civil rights of a human being.
|
|
|
Post by Mestemia on Mar 22, 2006 13:24:58 GMT -5
so I cannot violate my own civil rights? I know thousands of dead American troops who would argue differently.
|
|
|
Post by Mestemia on Mar 22, 2006 13:45:09 GMT -5
Well just off the top. I think anytime a society legalizes immorality they pay for it dearly. Define immoral. I heard a commercial on the radio that claimed that every eight seconds a person dies from using tobacco products in Indiana alone. Let us do a little math: 60 seconds per minute times 60 minutes in an hour = 3600 seconds an hour times 24 hours in a day = 86400 seconds in a day divided by 8 seconds = 10800 people multiplied by 356 days a per year and you get 3,844,800 people who die EACH YEAR in INDIANA alone from using tobacco products. This doesn't include those who have died for other resons like: Cancer, accidents, crimes, etc. According to this website: www.stats.indiana.edu/population/PopTotals/2005_stateest.htmlThe population of Indiaina is: 6,271,973 In less that three years the use of tobacco pruducts will completely wipe out the whole state of Indiana all by itself. And what reasons would be cited as to why the ban on tobacco products? Is tobacco use immoral as well? This statement is based upon what? That if there were no prostitutes, cheating husbands wouldn't cheat? Society or prostitution?
|
|
|
Post by Mestemia on Mar 22, 2006 13:47:48 GMT -5
If both parties are not married then it is not adultry. Unless you have some definition of adultry that I do not know about. Matt 5:27-29 27 " You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Adultery is not limited to the married, nor to the physical. This is not a definition of adultry. It is merely a perception of what adultry is. It is your opinion that even thinking is a sin. It is my opinion that thinking is not the sin. It is the doing that is the sin. Since we will never agree on this, I offer to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by cenk on Mar 22, 2006 14:01:49 GMT -5
I am not in favour of prostitution. However, littlepea prostitution is legal in Amsterdam. I've been to Amsterdam twice and all I can say is that you would have to be blind not to find a hooker and some ganja. If a man wants a little bit of action why not let him? Likewise if a woman want abit of action why not let her? (Theres an increasing number of male prostitutes) - As long as it is properly regulated and within certain "red light" districts and the local residents are happy with it and the government can charge these prostitutes taxes and these prostitutes are tested so they dont carry diseases regularly. Then I dont see much of a problem with it. At the end of the day if a man wants to have sex then he will do just that. If he doesn't go to a prostitute he will have to 'court' a female in a bar or club and that has a higher chance of leading to adultery and getting caught than going to a prostitute. This is a violation of the civil rights of a human being. What about the many women who volunteer (and are not forced) to sell their body? Are they violating their own civil rights? Can someone violate their own rights?
|
|