no. people, especially prostitutes, think that prostitution should be legalized. if it was they would have no job. if it became a real job, companies would take over and find some truly sexy women to prostitute, so the ugly whores would be out of luck
2006-06-13 15:56:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by eman223 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes it should be legal. It is not the place of government to control it's peoples' daily lives. Sex is one of the most natural acts in the world and it is religous fanatics who have turned it into something to be ashamed of. I say have sex with whomever you want as often as you want even if it's with a prostitute.
How is prostitution any different that paying to take someone out to dinner, a movie, etc just to get in his/her pants?
As far as STD's are concerned, you are FAR more likely to get an STD from Mary Jane Rottencrotch next door than you are to get it from a legal prostitution ring. Prostitution is legal in Nevada and they have some of the lowest STD rates in the nation. It's when you force prostitution into back alleys with no regulation that people spread STDs.
2006-06-13 10:48:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by vicvega420 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Absolutely.
Selling is leagal. Sex is legal. Why shouldn't selling sex be legal?
If you regulated sexual commerce like, let's say, lawyers or doctors, as a licensed profession, then you would have less crime, fewer instances of public health issues, and a steeady income stream for local and state agencies that would exceed the one generated by court fines and restitutions.
Remember, it is not the responsibility of government to regulate morality, but only to protect citizenry from social harm. Which is more harmful: Pimps/Whores/Johns and the disease and crime that follow or Stae regulated sex providers who are free of coersion, age verified, and tested regularly for STDs?
As for demoralization or degradation of women is concerned....
women need to accept this as a casualty of legal equality. It is, at it's base level, an exchage of money for services. Massage therapists, personal trainers, dance instructors, chiropractors, and many other professions often engage in an echange of physical service for financial reward. As long as all participants are willing and receiving a benefit, then there is no degradation.
Sex (or abstinence from sex) is not something that women (or men) should use for their own valuation as humans. It is an act, like sneezing, laughing, or giving birth. Having a baby doesn't make you special, it just makes you a biological parent. Having sex only makes you sexually active. Neither action changes the value of an individual as a person.
2006-06-13 10:48:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by gremlinbass 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marriages in countries with prostitution are less likely to result in divorce because the marrying young male did not rush into the relationship pushed by sexual desire, and the woman is more accomodating realizing that witholding sex is not a bargaining technique in such societies. In addition, when legalized, drugs and pimping fall away.
- Yes
Fight traffic congestion
http://www.hallisystem.bravehost.com
2006-06-13 19:36:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by hallitubevolunteer1 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Most certainly.
With prostitution, you take two completely legal acts
(sex between consenting adults, exchange of money for services) and combine them, and you get an illegal act.
Why?
This makes no sense.
2006-06-13 10:48:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by TWB 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hmm...so you're asking if the demoralization of women should be legalized? Well, maybe. At least there would be laws governing the how and the what of it all. What do I know anyway...
2006-06-13 10:46:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by pisceanwillow 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think there could be an economic benefit to it since it would put that money back into the economy more.
2006-06-13 10:44:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
YES, THERE WAS MADAMS BEFORE THE BIRTH OF CHRIST, IF PROSTITUTION WAS LEAGLE, HAVE LAWS AND RULES TO GOVERN HEALTH , MAKE THEM PAY TAXES ON THE MONEY THEY MAKE.
2006-06-13 10:50:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by day77gc 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
no reason for it not be-only down side i could see would the government would then throw in their two cents-keep the peace old hippie
2006-06-13 10:45:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by bergice 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why bother; with so many giving it away, the market is shot.
2006-06-13 10:44:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by LoneStar 6
·
0⤊
0⤋