Legalisation of Prostitution

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Humble extra, Jun 25, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ardens_Furore Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2001
    star 4
    Those that don't get marriage, don't have sex.

    More sexual elitism.
  2. Kuna_Tiori Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 20, 2002
    star 4
    yodashizzle:
    how do you know this? have you taken a poll of prostitutes to ask if they suffer or how they feel about what they do? i'd say that being a human being means you're suffering to some degree. having the mental capacity to carry on does not equate with someone isn't suffering or engaging in self destructive behaviour.

    Well, that was the way I defined the word "suffering" for the purposes of my post. And besides, this is irrelevant. To those prostitutes who hate their jobs, I say that they should go find help in getting a job they like. I would say the same to all those computer engineers, and doctors, and janitors, and school teachers, and anyone else who hates their job.

    So, glad we got that out of the way. Now, this topic is on the LEGALIZATION OF PROSTITUTION. It has nothing to do with all the poor innocent prostitutes forced into their jobs by who-knows-who. We're talking about the practice here, about whether or not the practice should be legal. I'm sure there's at least ONE prostitute out there who likes his/her job. Should we let him/her do it? I say yes. Because what one does for a career is his/her business. Of course, exceptions would be if he/she hurts others. That's why I don't think we should be having professional serial killers or rapists running around. But if the prostitutes stick to consensual sex, what is the problem?

    again, you're using the arguement that money and wealth validate. would it be wise to deregulate the stock trade industry? to make insider trading legal? some people would be getting richer. but there would be no laws to prevent behaviour detrimental to the rest of us. i can't see how the arguement of how lucrative prostitution might be as a way to justify it's being made legal. lot's of things might be lucrative. it doesn't make them things which should be legal.

    Uh, you TOTALLY misconstrued me here. I put that comment (Perhaps. So what, there aren't any rich prostitutes out there? Considering how well it pays, I'd be surprised if there weren't any.) in response to this one from Jaded_Girl:

    By legalizing prostitution we are giving free licience to uninhibited- and more than likely frustrated- individuals to satiate their disordered and exaggerated desires at the expense of someone at a finacial disadvantage.

    becoming comfortable enough with sex to lose the emotional aspect isn't a "job/life skill." rather, i'd call it an opportunity to start down a path towards emotional problems. a prostitute who is emotionally involved will have a hard time being a prostitute. and a person who can remove emotion from the equation can apparantly turn emotion on and off like a light. how many people do you know who can effectively do that? what kind of people are they? do they have any significant problems?

    What exactly is your point? Does it matter what these people can or cannot do?

    Here's my basic philosophy: If they're not hurting anyone, and if it's consensual, it's ok. You're saying that prostitutes have or might have emotional problems. If so, then they can go seek help if they want. Again, what does that have to do with the PRACTICE of prostitution? So what if these people have emotional problems? Is it really the government's business to be telling them this, and to tell them to stop what they're doing and go seek help?

    for the same reason that if i wanted to hit myself in the head with a hammer until i'm causing brain damage in public as entertainment isn't acceptable. if i passed a hat around and collected money from people who were being entertained by me bashing my brains in all day, something is wrong with two groups of people.

    As repugnant as such an act would be, that would be your right. What you do with your body is up to you. If it isn't already, it damn well should be.

    Let me just put my opinion this way: There is nothing wrong with the act of having sex and getting paid for it.

    There certainly is something wrong with someone doing such things b
  3. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    At any rate, sex between consenting adults is...legal. Sext between consenting stranger adults is...still legal. Why the government would forbid financial transactions in the process is beyond me. Especially with the added-on bonuses of using taxes to have clinics to prevent transmission of STD's. The government wouldn't even have to do that, legally speaking, but it should. And it probably will, otherwise the bill legalizing prostitution would never pass.

    *round of applause* AMEN!!!

    Sex is very pleasurable and should ONLY be done within marriage. Sex is NOT a right. Those that don't get marriage, don't have sex. Period.

    I'm married. Trust me on this one--just because you're ready to have sex does not mean you're ready to get married. Getting married to have sex is like buying a 747 to get a bag of peanuts.

    If you're opposed to sex before marriage, that's you. The rest of us are not required to agree with you--especially given your comments against divorce. Don't you think that people who get married young because they think premarital sex is wrong would be more likely to get divorced? Having a successful marriage takes a hell of a lot more maturity than having safe sex does.

    Prostitution should not be legal. It is demeaning. Most prostitutes are selling themselves because society and various other circumstances have led them to prostitution as a means of survival.

    And you can prove this?

    Prostitution pays well. Maybe some people just like getting laid.
  4. son_of_the_tear Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 5
    leia393:

    But why should all of us follow YOUR own morals and ethics?

    Why should we all follow your own religious view, if that's what it is?

    Sorry, I do think sex is a right. It's my right. Doesn't mean I get it all the time or when I want it. Nor am I going to force my right on someone.

    But it is my right to have sex when the opportunity comes, she's willing and of course if I choose to.

    If I get the chance to sleep with a girl that I am attracted to, like, love or feel a connection to... I will.

    And if I'm just feeling my hormones raging and I happen to meet a cute girl at a party or a pub who is also raging and we just want to hook up no strings attached just for the sake of pleasure... we will.

    I do agree that sex is best when it's between two people in love. But I can also enjoy sex in other circumstances.

    But that's me. It's my own choice and am in no way going to make someone else see it as I do.

    And nor should you.

    Besides, what if you someone doesn't believe in marriage? What if they just don't want to get married?

    And as pointed out, single guys go to an escort service or visit prostitutes all the time. And for the most part, they are normal guys. Sometimes they just feel lonely. Other times they're just horny. A guy who visits a prostitute doesn't mean he can't get laid. That's the case at times but at other times they can very well get dates often but they just feel like getting off with no strings attached and without having to spend a night at a club or bar picking up a one nighter.

    Put this into perspective. I once visted an escort service years ago. It was me and a group of friends. We all went together.

    I've enjoyed several relationships; some bad, some good as is always the case. Have no social malfunctions. Have good friends. Lead a good life in my opinion.

    But me and my buddies wanted to try something new and have a fun night. And it was a great night.

    We didn't go to some floozy on the street. We went to this realy high class place. The madam, loved what she did. She didn't hire junkies, drunks or girls looking for a place to escape. Most of the girls enjoyed their work and got paid well. Make more money than I do. Some were paying their way through college, others do it for both the pleasure and the money and others did it for just the fact that like any other job, it pays.

    And I will tell you that none of the girls felt used or degraded. None of the girls did anything they didn't want to.
  5. leia393 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 24, 2001
    star 4
    Ardens_Furore:
    More sexual elitism.
    There are limits on everything for the benefit of society. A person is not permitted to drive until he reaches a certain age, and passes a driving exam. Is that driving elitism? In the United States, a person cannot vote until 18. Is that voting elitism?

    Kuna_Tiori:
    Like many here, you're focusing on the people instead of the practice.
    Yes I am. The practice of prostitution deals with people and how they interact with each other.

    But that leaves all the people who enjoy being prostitutes. And however uncommon they may be, I'm sure there's at least ONE of them out there.
    Let's say, hypothetically, I get pleasure out of walking down the street and beating up the first person I see. Should I be permitted to do that?

    But more importantly, the act is what we're talking about. If EVERY SINGLE PERSON in this world suddenly promised to never kill another person in their life, and would teach their kids to do the same, would that suddenly mean that we can lift the ban on murder? No. Laws exist to punish anyone who commits the act, to discourage others from committing the act, and to show that the government will not tolerate such acts.
    I agree with you there.

    But that's their CHOICE! If they were made aware of the risks involved, then they have only themselves to blame. It's not
    our right or responsibility to tell them what to do with their lives.

    Yes, I agree that they made the choice, but I don't, however, believe in moral relativism. I believe that it is my responsibility to help my fellow human beings live full, productive, beneficial lives and to work to restore creation. However, I cannot and should not force a person to do anything, nore would I want to. However, I can express to them my views. Furthermore, as a citizen of the United States who is registered to vote, I am allowed to vote, send letters to government officials, and do other such things, in accordance with my beliefs.

    son_of_the_tear:
    But why should all of us follow YOUR own morals and ethics?

    Why should we all follow your own religious view, if that's what it is?

    I can't force you to follow my beliefs, just as you can't force me to follow yours. However, we both can express our thoughts opinions, and beliefs, just as we are doing.
  6. Red-Seven Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 21, 1999
    star 5
    on cue: Making sex pay
    ...Belgian legislators are hoping to bring that to a close with a parliamentary bill that would draw prostitutes into the legal fold and bring the industry under state control, providing sex workers with labour rights and greater health protection.

    But for a fee.

    The sex workers themselves would be expected to pay up when the tax man calls - boosting state coffers to the tune of an estimated 50 million euros a year.

    It represents an attractive option for a country currently struggling to balance its budget deficit - a means of generating money while affording prostitutes better protection.

    The fact is, sex is a good source of revenue, as the underworld has long known. The industry is incredibly lucrative, given the consistent nature of demand for the services of the world's oldest profession.

    In Thailand, for example - where both sex workers and some policy advisers have been pushing for legalisation and taxation - the sex industry is thought to account for at least several percent of the nation's GDP.

    In Britain, it is estimated that some £770m ($1.2bn) is spent on prostitution every year, more than on cinemas or many other forms of entertainment.

    Those who can tap it, do. The US state of Nevada, where prostitution is legal, hopes to pick up millions of dollars over the next two years from houses of prostitution.

    But for most it remains untouchable capital, beyond the reach of politicians needing cash injections for ailing health services, welfare systems and other popular expenditures.

    Legalisation is often the only way to tap into this source of wealth while offering prostitutes better working conditions, a route both Germany and the Netherlands have embarked on in recent years.

    Prostitutes in Germany, believed to number around 400,000, have for the past year been able to take part in a scheme that offers social benefits like pensions, health insurance and a 40-hour week in sanitary conditions, in exchange for a slice of their earnings.

    For their part, Dutch prostitutes have been asked to pay 19% VAT for similar rights since brothels were legalised nearly three years ago.

    Advocates of this kind of legislation believe it is the only way to make sure sex workers enjoy adequate health and employment protection.

    Opponents say it simply consolidates them in a position from which governments should be battling to remove them.

    Finance ministries in both Germany and the Netherlands say it is impossible to calculate just how many prostitutes have registered to pay tax as forms do not ask them to name their profession.

    But anecdotal evidence from prostitutes' organisations suggests that many have, where possible, at least tried to take up the offer.

    "It has, however, been very difficult," says Marion Detlefs of the Hydra prostitute advice centre in Berlin. "When it was set up there was much talk of securing proper contracts, proper health insurance but a lot of this hasn't materialised because of big holes in the legislation.

    "At the moment it looks like all the government cares about is getting their hands on sex workers' money - women who are already hard-up are giving their earnings away and getting very little return."

    Despite the problems of these fledgling laws, European groups lobbying for better conditions for prostitutes believe they are at least a step in the right direction.

    "But it has to be a matter of mutual benefit," says Marieke van Doorninck of the Institute for Prostitution Issues. "Governments have to offer real labour rights and protection in exchange."

    "It's a slow process, but I do think it's moving, and that the situation for prostitutes is improving. People's attitudes are also starting to soften."

    Ms van Doorninck says that while money provides one impetus for governments to legalise prostitution, the other issue is bringing the industry under state control to regulate its expansion.

    In the Netherlands, legalisation has not
  7. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    leia:

    There are limits on everything for the benefit of society. A person is not permitted to drive until he reaches a certain age, and passes a driving exam. Is that driving elitism? In the United States, a person cannot vote until 18. Is that voting elitism?

    Neither of those issues involve regulating what people can do in the privacy of their own homes when their actions are not hurting anyone else.

    Besides, there are laws against having sex with a minor--it's called statutory rape. The point is that once you reach the age of consent, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you please as long as you are not hurting anyone else.

    Let's say, hypothetically, I get pleasure out of walking down the street and beating up the first person I see. Should I be permitted to do that?

    Back to my previous example. Beating someone up hurts someone else. If I get pleasure out of selling sex, and someone else gets pleasure out of buying it, then neither of us are hurting anyone else.

    Yes, I agree that they made the choice, but I don't, however, believe in moral relativism. I believe that it is my responsibility to help my fellow human beings live full, productive, beneficial lives and to work to restore creation.

    What you're going to have to recognize is that whether you like it or not, your view of what's moral and what isn't, is not necessarily shared by the rest of society. There are some fundamental truths represented in all religions--mainly the Golden Rule (I prefer the Wiccan Rede myself, the shortened version: "As ye harm none, do as ye will"). However, beyond that, no one can say that his or her version of morality should be the one that dictates society.
  8. yodashizzzle Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2003
    star 4
    for anyone who wants to make prostitution legal, i have a question. why is it that i can't walk down the street screaming at the top of my lungs dropping F-bomb after F-bomb at passers by? i'm not hurting anyone. being loud and hurling insults doesn't really hurt anything, yet, i'll still be arrested for disturbing the peace. my rights are being crushed!!!


    and why can't i offer a very good looking seventeen year old who wants to have sex and is every bit as intelligent and mature as many people in their twenties and isn't being self destructive at all, but just wants to explore her sexuality (a really wonderful thing, sex! and NO ONE will control what *I* do or who *I* sleep with!!!), so why can't i? why is it just legally statutory rape? she's consenting. she's well adjusted. she'd be happy to have some sex with me for money. but the EEEvil government says no. WHY NOT!? i'm just helping out a person who'd be happy to get laid. but there's a LAW that says, "NO." how restrictive! how unfair! :mad:

    this is the kind of "anything for civil liberty" mentality that is so far removed from sensibility that i can't believe there are people naive to believe that such things are fine or should be made legal. i mean, c'mon. those who seem to be supporting the ban on prostitution are being lumped into a conservative "all sex is bad" category. if there is nothing wrong wrong with two PEOPLE who consent to exchange sex for money, then just answer my hypothetical question about why i can't have sex with a teenager. who knows? maybe my civil liberties are being trampled on because of evil laws that prevent me from doing what i want with my body and sex. i mean, teens are people too. they need sex like anyone else, right?

    seriously, does the idea of a MODICUM of reason make sense to those who support lifting the ban on prostitution? because there are laws keeping me from sleeping with a teenger. and i suspect that they have some basis in morality rather than science, so don't give me a "oh morality cannot be an acceptable reason for laws." i mean, it's not that grown men physically CAN'T have sex with thirteen year olds, it that they're not supposed to. for everone with such an "open" mind, why can't i indulge in a 13 year old prostitute? if you say it's because it's "wrong" you're on thin logical ice considering the basis for most of your arguements about all things sexual.
  9. son_of_the_tear Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 5
    My brother met his current wife when he was 20 and she was 16.

    Been married for 10 years now. Very happy and no exploitation there. So, yes, at times, even age is relative. Just like sex.
  10. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    I agree with you guys that age is relative, and that plenty of people under 18 are mature enough to have sex. However, as I have not come up with a solution to the problem yet other than giving maturity tests, I have not been promoting repeal of the statutory rape laws. Lowering the age of consent to 16? Quite possibly.
  11. yodashizzzle Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2003
    star 4
    if age is relative,(and i'd agree that it is), why do you guyys accept the laws preventing me from having sex with a ten year old? i mean, forget any testing for maturity. there's no such test for driving a car, right? you just need to pass the test issued and be of legal age. so then the question i have for those who would legalize prositution, what is the point of law for you? when is it a matter of civil liberties as opposed to the governbment taking a stance on reasonable things like my not being able to sleep with my 4 year old niece even if she'd pretty consenting? should i have free reign to show her how to inject heroin if she'd like to try? see, the arguement for 99.9999% of people would be based on "oh, how horrible to do that to a child!" so, then what makes it wrong? children use legal drugs. children often masturbate at early ages. they seem pretty willing to do that, actually. so, where would you draw the line? what...it's just all good? civil liberty till we're all so free and happy and using whatever chemicals and sleeping with whomever we want where ever we'd like? at what point are civil liberties going to be put down in the name of trying to find morality or decency? because hookers on the street saying they'll blow me for $25 aren't decent to me. no matter what lovely experiences may be had with happy hookers who are safe and really okay with laying on their backs and taking **** all day, the two women i've known were really messed up. and the fact that prostitution was ILLEGAL made a difference in one of them at least moving back to her mom's to try to get her act together and get off drugs. she got sick of it and was tired of being arrested and hassled by the cops. the consequences of prostitution motivated her to at least TRY to do something else. if it were legal, she might well still be a prostitute, (and for all i know, she may well be one now). so, across the board prostitution isn't cool. i'd maybe have agreed when i was younger about certain instances where it might seem more innocuous, but by and large no matter how good your experience in a brothel S_O_T, prostitution overall isn't a good or acceptable thing anymore than me sleeping with a willing ten year old is. the government agrees with me as it currently stands. please delineate some sense of where to draw the line.
  12. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    The point of age limits is that you draw the line at an age where, according to anyone who has studied the human psyche, most people would be considered mature enough to make that sort of decision for themselves.

    I don't think too many people are going to disagree that ten is too young.
  13. son_of_the_tear Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 5
    Exactly. At Ten most people don't even think about guys or girls.

    With my brother, it was easy. Her parents were ok with it. They met my bro and they approved.

    Back when I was 22 I dated a 17 year old girl for a few months. She was mature enough and besides, I met her parents. They were cool with me.
  14. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    Well it's pretty simple..

    Prostitution should not be legalized. It is unethical and harmful to society. I'm not gonna go into whether sex is a loving act or simply for physical pleasure. It can be both. Even married couples have sex purely for fun. There is nothing wrong with that. The essence is that pros can transmit diseases and that cannot be allowed. There are better more civilised jobs available. Prostitution is not an option. Many people DO make fairly conscious choices to do that work. And many other people DO pay money for their services, and there is some good evidence that prostitution, pornography, etc. actually can off-set repression & violence, sexual or otherwise.

    There do seem to be some strongly-felt, and even legitimate reasons to view, particularly, sexual prostitution as unethical or at least non-conducive to society. Perhaps many wives who may feel they devote a good deal of their lives to being in deep relationships with their husbands, may feel betrayed at the idea that he can go out on the street and simply pay for "it." Or vice-versa. And some men may feel like it 'cheapens' the potential for relationships. But perhaps these people still should not have the right to try to regulate the behaviors of other people who don't feel as they do?

    If someone wants to have sex it's preferable he/she remain monogomous. Sex with numerous partners is not just morally wrong but can also increase the probablity of disease.
  15. yodashizzzle Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2003
    star 4
    then why is sixteen a possibility? do we all need to take psyche classes at government expense to determine and agree upon an appropriate age of consent? could it not be possible that there might be some happy and consenting 14 year olds out there? surely, there are reasonably minded 14 year olds who would be just as legally consenting and qualified to have sex as someone with only two more years on them. how about 14 being a age where women can start having sex for money? seems fair to me. see, there has to be a set of limits on things, correct? so why is the government prohibiting prostitution so wrong? why are civil liberties at stake? my answer would be that they most certainly are not. you say that we all can agree on 10 year olds being too young. not so fast, A_G. YOU'RE saying that. not everyone. YOU'VE set an age of 10. but i can guarantee that some will say that you're encroaching on the civil liberties on 10 year olds. and no, i wouldn't be one of them. but those people would in all seriousness push for more and more and more all in the name of civil liberties and it's frankly a bunch of hooey. pushing for the legalization doesn't win anyhting in the name of liberty and freedom. it hides behind an untenable and naive suppostition that the government should NEVER restrict a person on what they can or cannot do provided they aren't hurting anyone else with their actions. why is it the government's responsibility to help people get out of prostitution (as KT suggested) or off drugs, but it cannot make prostitution and drugs illegal. why are taxpayers putting money towards government programs that try to fix broken people who didn't believe the self destructive behaviour they indulged in would have serious and long term reprecussions? i mean, if it's the RESPONSIBILITY of the government to never delineate acceptable behaviour, why is it uncle Sam's RESPONSIBILITY to provide aid to people? why bail people out of their own messes? they were irresponsible. they knew what they were doing. no welfare. no single moms getting help raising children born out of wedlock. no responsibility one way means no responsibility the other way. you can't have it both ways. if the government gives people the freedom to practice prostitution and use heroin, we're in trouble. we already ARE in trouble, but we'd be making things worse by allowing those things instead of (even if it's futile) fighting them.

    S-O_T:

    if you were 22 dating a 17 year old, that's not something i'd be exactly proud of. you "knew her parents?" did they realize you were having sex with her (if that was the case) ? most parents aren't exactly looking for their seventeen year old daughter to be sexually active with 22 year olds. but, hey, if there's grass on the field, play ball. viva la civil liberty!
  16. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    The essence is that pros can transmit diseases and that cannot be allowed.

    I teach school. You know how many diseases I've caught on my job? Should my job be illegal?

    That's why God invented condoms.

    Perhaps many wives who may feel they devote a good deal of their lives to being in deep relationships with their husbands, may feel betrayed at the idea that he can go out on the street and simply pay for "it." Or vice-versa. And some men may feel like it 'cheapens' the potential for relationships.

    Your point would be... ?[face_plain]

    No one said that by making prostitution legal, people are going to be forced at gunpoint to participate.

    But perhaps these people still should not have the right to try to regulate the behaviors of other people who don't feel as they do?

    No, they shouldn't. Plain and simple.

    yoda:

    but those people would in all seriousness push for more and more and more all in the name of civil liberties and it's frankly a bunch of hooey. pushing for the legalization doesn't win anyhting in the name of liberty and freedom. it hides behind an untenable and naive suppostition that the government should NEVER restrict a person on what they can or cannot do provided they aren't hurting anyone else with their actions.

    Why is that such a "naive supposition"? Why should the government be allowed to tell me what to do? What is this, a dictatorship?

    Also, if you'll notice from my previous posts, you have never seen me advocate government handouts.
  17. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    That's why God invented condoms.

    For your knowledge condoms to not provide complete protection. Approximately 80% protection. They are porous and can burst.
  18. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    If your condom is only providing 80 percent protection, you're using it wrong--leaving it in your wallet, using the wrong size, lubricating with Vaseline. They are 99.9 percent effective when used correctly. I've been using them for years--and my only bambino is a feline one.
  19. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    Wrong

    Condoms have recently been proven less effective than first realized. I'm talking high quality condoms here. I still hold to 80%. And thats a fact. Plus I thought you're female how can you use a condom?
  20. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    PPOR.

    I've got a body that has never reproduced as my proof.
  21. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    That's a different story. Think about it. They are porous plastic material. Anything can penetrate that membrane. Maybe not the semen but certainly the mucous that resides in body tissues..
  22. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
  23. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    I've read those articles and they are not completely truthful. Don't believe everything you read. I suggest you consult a professional on the issue. They are more reliable than articles found randomly on the internet.

    Getting back on topic:

    Men AND Women would not longer feel compunction to enter relationships to satisfy their "needs" for sex. This would, I would posit, initially surpress the intensity with which people (in the aggragate) seek long-run companionship. However, couldn't it be argued by most peoples experiences that relationships that are entered primarily for this reason don't usually end up all that well anyhow. Wouldn't it be better for people to choose to commit to each other because of love, respect, and the desire to have children with someone? It would certainly change the view people take of marriage,
  24. Vader666 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 5
    anakin girl

    How many sexual partners did you have? I bet you remained monogomous most of the time. Perhaps that is reason to believe why you are disease free so far.
  25. yodashizzzle Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2003
    star 4
    Why is that such a "naive supposition"? Why should the government be allowed to tell me what to do? What is this, a dictatorship?

    do you REALLY think it's a dictatorship that makes prostitution illegal? it's a free country. if you REALLY think going into the sex-for-money arts is a freedom that we're missing out on, there's always the possibility of expatriation to Amsterdam.

    the reason why i say it's naive is because people have a tenadancy to either be afraid if sexual issues altogether and live somewhat repressed lives or they tend to buy into the college atmosphere idea of sexual liberation. which means any sex is good sex. and it's just ridiculous to me. i don't have a problem with consenting adults having premarital sex. but i have a problem with the blase attitude towards sex by our culture in general. it's just nonsense to embrace freedom without responsibility. the latest generation is the freest most irresponsible generation in history. we wanna party and all be rock stars. and no one wants to pay the bill when the party's over. we all think we're just exploring our sexuality. then we get our hearts broken by someone who just wanted a booty call. the thing about human beings is that we REALLY like sex, but we've attempted this very immature double standard whereby we hold others responsible for emotionally hurting US (when we are cheated on, dumped for another lover, etc.) yet, we never seem to hold the same level of responsibility towards OURSELVES. i know dozens of people who have hurt/ manipulated/ deliberately looked to "conquer", etc. people with sex, myself included. but most people do a pretty bad job of being consistant when it comes to defining sex and what responsibility it entails. or they settle down, get out of the game, marry, and after a while get bored and get a divorce because they're chasing a dream that's pretty hard to realize and most people have a lot of work to do when it comes to achieving long term relationships and cohabitation. living with a person is hard. heck, if i got married (to my 14 year old asian prostitute i'll be acquiring via the internet), i'd want her to live in her own house and i'd live in mine. unconventional? sure. but the maybe we'd have a chance together. look, i have a dream, allright?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.