English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-05-13 13:01:25 · 16 answers · asked by Layne J 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

Believe me, I think that prostitution is wrong, but I think that if people want to do it, then they should be allowed to. They don't hurt anybody but themselves and the guys stupid enought to sleep with them.

2007-05-13 13:19:20 · update #1

16 answers

morality. it's legal in Nevada. personally i think it's stupid trying to legislate morality that way, although I'd never pay cash for sex. i know some guys that will and do.

2007-05-13 13:07:25 · answer #1 · answered by David S 4 · 1 1

The justification for making prostitution illegal, usually has to do with the protection of women, and the control of sexually transmitted diseases. That could make sense if as a result of the law, prostitution completely ceased to exist.

In practice however, the fact that prostitution is illegal, normally results in the exploitation or abuse of prostitutes, and does contribute to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

Illegal prostitutes may be the target of violence or rape, and will be hesitant to contact the police. Or else, they may simply disappear, and nobody may ever know.

Similarly, by driving prostitution underground, the law effectively makes it impossible to maintain any form of sanitary control. Of course, street prostitution is the worst, since it often occurs indiscriminately, at night and in a rush.

More recently, legal scholars have opined that Roe v. Wade may legalize prostitution. If a woman has a constitutional right to decide whether or not to keep a pregnancy, why would she not have a right to use her body as she sees fit, including the right to offer it for sale (maybe "rent" would be a more appropriate term)?

Punishing the prostitute rather than the client makes very little rational sense, if the stated goal of the law was to protect the prostitute in the first place.

2007-05-13 20:09:58 · answer #2 · answered by ☆Bombastic☆ 5 · 1 1

In the 19th century prostitution, while not always legal, was tolerated in most of the world as a necessary evil. Enlightened opinion held that hey, boys will be boys, and men will be animals. The best we can do is regulate prostitution, including health inspections, licensing of brothels, etc.

But in English-speaking countries the regulatory impulse was countered by growing sentiment that prostitution was evil, period, and ought to be suppressed. Middle-class women played a leading role in the antiprostitution movement, arguing that prostitution threatened family life. Sympathetic journalists suggested that prostitutes were the principal carriers of venereal disease, then thought to be rampant. (Prior to the advent of effective treatment in the early 20th century, VD was certainly no trivial matter.)

The abolitionists ultimately carried the day. Before 1900 most legislation dealing with prostitution sought merely to control it. After World War I, usually considered the end of the Progressive era, the goal was to stamp it out.

Occaisionally, there's talk of abolishing prostitution laws, but feminist protest the change, calling prostitution just another form of female slavery.

2007-05-13 20:13:25 · answer #3 · answered by ? 6 · 0 2

Tough question. Some argue health and safety. Others say it is hard for a government to tax. Then there are the moral arguments. I suggest looking at http://www.prostitutionprocon.org for more info.

2007-05-16 19:08:56 · answer #4 · answered by Jack S 2 · 0 0

It's not in Nevada. Mostly because it is considered immoral but when prostitution is not overseen by local government, disease becomes and issue.

Government inspection of prostitutes takes place regularly in Nevada. There may be other states but I cant re-call any others right now.

2007-05-13 20:14:21 · answer #5 · answered by Ret. Sgt. 7 · 1 2

It's hard to regulate, and the people say publicly they want it to be illegal, so there's no political upside to allowing it.

Like, the government has that right: just do anything, as long as 50%+1 are on your side.

2007-05-13 20:06:07 · answer #6 · answered by Yesugi 5 · 2 1

the only thing I see wrong with it is that they spread STDs. Besides that it helps people deal with their sexual tention built up that must be released. I'd pay good money to screw around with a clean hot woman or guy. But I'm good enough to get my own lover so I don't need any prostitutes.

2007-05-13 20:08:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Because officials have too high of morals and if they didn't there would be many people who frowned upon them (like Christians) and that would cause them not to get reelected. Basically there's too many people who have problem with it and even though it doesn't concern them they think it dose.

2007-05-13 20:19:22 · answer #8 · answered by Tori 1 · 0 2

do u want her to bother u for paying her body, uh? i believe that no men ever love her as prostitute. so myself dont act like prostitute n i do not want to bother man i love that he can be approved me. there r so many time i see the prostitution on my home area is looking so awful with skinny n she want ppl to pay her with no job. n so she is so ugly. so u kno the answer is prostitution is wrong. God dont satisfy with that. understand me?

2007-05-13 20:15:39 · answer #9 · answered by lovebearrhyme2003 1 · 1 3

Because people pay in cash and the government can't tax it or it would be legal.

2007-05-13 20:09:11 · answer #10 · answered by Steven C 7 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers