Get The Government's Paws Off Other People's Consensual Behavior: Legalize Prostitution
It's a 2013 NRO piece by Charles C. Cooke that makes some very good points on the subject -- including historical ones -- starting with how ridiculous it is that it is "both permissible and socially acceptable to sleep with someone in pursuit of regular material comfort. Yet it is strictly felonious to have sex with someone else in direct exchange for cash."
Yet, whoops -- if you film yourself doing that, it becomes legal again.
To broach this topic in polite company is to invite someone, invariably under the mistaken impression that this constitutes a hammer blow, witlessly to parrot the banal old line that "nobody grows up wanting to be a prostitute."At best, this is a red herring. Certainly, few people grow up wishing to be prostitutes. But there are an awful lot of careers that escape the dreams of children. Many vegetarians mature with no intention whatsoever of becoming butchers and Christians rarely spend their childhoods wishing devoutly for a vocation as an imam.
The material question here is not whether one could foresee oneself ending up in an undesirable line of work, but whether or not that line of work is so undesirable that it should be prohibited by law.
On this, I am with Cornell's Sherry F. Colb, who has argued for legalization on the following grounds:
Prostitutes are not committing an inherently harmful act. While the spread of disease and other detriments are possible in the practice of prostitution, criminalization is a sure way of exacerbating rather than addressing such effects. We saw this quite clearly in the time of alcohol prohibition in this country.It is no accident that prostitution, which was almost uniformly legal in the United States from the period of colonization up until the start of the 20th century, was banned in almost every state within the same five-year period during which the Woman's Christian Temperance Union managed to convince the nation that alcohol should be constitutionally outlawed.
...Now, society may well elect to disapprove of prostitution. In fact, I rather do myself. But, then, while I have no desire to inject heroin into myself either, I reserve that right as a free man must. Indeed, this is one instance in which the pervasive pro-choice battle cry, "My body, my choice!" actually makes some sense. When wielded in defense of abortion, it is little more than a dysphemism, designed to distract from the fate of the other body being discussed. With prostitution, there is no such objection.
...If your political philosophy requires the micromanagement of all individual behavior as a means of achieving established societal aims, then you will presumably find little wrong with the status quo in this area. (Here, the progressive Left forms an unholy alliance with the moral majority.) But if you are of the view that republics are supposed to maximize the liberty of the individual and to privilege its protection above the vagaries of national schemers, then perhaps you might reconsider your position.
via @SteveStuWill
Totalitarian movements always promise libertinism, but they deliver puritanism. Mark my words -- a few years from now, if legal and quasi-legal marijuana starts to become a business where people are making money, the Left will pivot on it.
Cousin Dave at March 11, 2016 6:45 AM
Please, SJWs are in the midst of trying to outlaw BDSM and role play between consenting adults where there is no exchange of cash.
Hell, as we saw from one of yesterdays posts they are also trying to outlaw men allowing drunk women to stay in their apartments (while NOT having sex) long enough for the drunk woman's roommate to get home and let her in when she forgets her keys
lujlp at March 11, 2016 6:58 AM
"Woman's Christian Temperance Union managed to convince the nation that alcohol should be constitutionally outlawed"
"First they came for the alcohol, then they came for the prostitutes".
Proof again that nothing good ever comes from letting women come out of the kitchen.
And before any SJW/"feminists" get wadded up panties, it's a joke.
Marijuana: interesting that the most vocal against tobacco products are the ones most vocal for pot.
mer at March 11, 2016 7:52 AM
Can't be done at a federal level, without stomping on the Constitution. It is a matter of state law. But feel free to campaign for it, in your state.
Isab at March 11, 2016 8:04 AM
Agreed Isab. The procedure does matter. There is nothing wrong with each state choosing to allow or not prostitution. The federal government should stay out of things.
Ben at March 11, 2016 8:17 AM
Is it interstate commerce if your customer has a driver's license from out of state, as is probable in Vegas?
California - well, some of its jurisdictions - are requiring porn stars to wear condoms on the pretext of halting diseases, and according to Asia Carrera, the pros have a much smaller dating pool than the ordinary "sporting blonde".
What's the herpes rate in NYC? If this is a public health issue, is it time to ask the question posed in many cases already about AIDS? "Do you have to right to put others at risk based on your non-professional impression that you don't think you're infected with something?"
Radwaste at March 11, 2016 10:23 AM
Agreed Isab. The procedure does matter. There is nothing wrong with each state choosing to allow or not prostitution. The federal government should stay out of things.
Posted by: Ben at March 11, 2016 8:17 AM
My biggest problem with it, is the same as recreational drug use.
Leaving prostitution illegal keeps it somewhat tamped down. It stays out of sight.
Countries like Germany heavily regulate their prostitution so that it exists on the periphery of their culture.
It is low class, and sleezy, but a social necessity akin to a job cleaning public toilets.
That heavy regulation may not be possible in the US, with our constitutional rights.
Once something becomes legal in the US, it becomes *celebrated* and you have a shril chorus shrieking that prostitution is actually a *noble choice.* and superior to having traditional values.
Any civilization that actually buys into this nonsense will see a cultural and political backlash that will eventually sweep away everything good, along with these libertine freedoms.
Isab at March 11, 2016 10:33 AM
Shouldn't the fact that prostitutes are paid mean that the johns should be prosecuted for rape? After all, that's coercive pressure and persuading a woman to have sex is rape.
(For the braindeads who read this post, the above was an example of sarcasm. My, that's a big word, isn't it? Can you say "sarcasm"? Sar...cazz...um...Mr. Rogers knew you could.)
Patrick at March 11, 2016 11:44 AM
Isab:
Adultery is legal. It is not celebrated or regarded as a "noble choice."
Patrick at March 11, 2016 12:01 PM
Adultery is legal. It is not celebrated or regarded as a "noble choice."
Posted by: Patrick at March 11, 2016 12:01 PM
Of course it is. Don't you have a TV?
Lack of sexual attraction between a couple is considered to be the best reason, to dump them and find someone else to warm your bed.
That piece of paper you had is as meaningless as your cell phone contract.
Isab at March 11, 2016 2:24 PM
Poppycock. Television is not real life.
I know of no one who celebrates a cheating spouse. In real life, they tend to feel sorry for the jilted spouse and shun the cheater.
Patrick at March 11, 2016 3:01 PM
And that is exactly why it should be done state to state Isab, like so many other issues. If you don't do it all at once the few areas where it gets legalized first get to figure out how to deal with the downsides first. Others can learn from their mistakes or keep it illegal. You also reduce the cultural forces you are concerned about.
The current reality is a cop is more likely to sleep with a prostitute than arrest one. So how well things are enforced is questionable too.
Ben at March 11, 2016 6:10 PM
It is no accident that prostitution, which was almost uniformly legal in the United States from the period of colonization up until the start of the 20th century, was banned in almost every state within the same five-year period during which the Woman's Christian Temperance Union managed to convince the nation that alcohol should be constitutionally outlawed.
At one time, I read (or heard) that the most powerful motivating force behind the WCTU's drive was seeing (and knowing) the damage that alcohol ended up causing to families. That may be the case but, even if it is, I suspect there was a very strong moral (the Bible says its wrong, or it's just wrong) component too.
Bible-based morality was/is the most powerful motivating force behind opposition to same-sex marriage (and homosexuality itself.)
And I think that plays a very large role in opposition to legalized prostitution. I think the big difference between the last two -- which both have to do with what consenting adults can do with each other, as opposed to what an adult can do with a bottle of scotch or wine -- is that progressives (or what people here call SJWs) were overwhelmingly on the side of personal liberty with same-sex marriage. But, with prostitution, I think a lot of progressives are on the same side as religious conservatives, arguing against personal liberty, although for different reasons. Religious conservatives see prostitution as an affront to God, while the progressives who oppose legalization see it as harmful to people (sex trafficking, etc.) and also, I suspect, as a case of men lording it over women. This why I think prostitution faces a much tougher road to legalization than same-sex marriage did. In fact, it may never happen in the U.S.
JD at March 11, 2016 6:12 PM
Women got the vote and voted for politicians who would stop the competition for access to their husbands genitalia.
"It is no accident that prostitution, which was almost uniformly legal in the United States from the period of colonization up until the start of the 20th century, was banned in almost every state within the same five-year period during which the Woman's Christian Temperance Union managed to convince the nation that alcohol should be constitutionally outlawed."
David H at March 11, 2016 6:13 PM
Just because it's legal doesn't always mean it's consensual. Legalizing prostitution will not magically clean it up. It will still be a sleazy business rife with crime and abuse.
Legalizing it will allow it to be regulated - just like campus sex between students is regulated. What happens when a prostitute cries rape and the same people that implemented the Title IX "Dear Colleague" standards on campus get ahold of that?
Conan the Grammarian at March 11, 2016 6:23 PM
Nah. You get a no-fault divorce, take half the assets, and then find a younger partner.
Conan the Grammarian at March 11, 2016 6:25 PM
Isab: That piece of paper you had is as meaningless as your cell phone contract.
What would you propose? A husband or wife being able to sue the other for breach of contract if they meet someone else and want out of the marriage?
JD at March 11, 2016 6:42 PM
Conan: Just because it's legal doesn't always mean it's consensual. Legalizing prostitution will not magically clean it up.
True. Just as legal sex between people hasn't cleaned it up.
JD at March 11, 2016 6:54 PM
> Legalizing prostitution will not
> magically clean it up.
>
> True. Just as legal sex between people
> hasn't cleaned it up.
Dood! Comment of the Month™, March 2016. Watch your mail for her invitation to the banquet: You're automatically enrolled for Amy's annual drawing for a new car at Christmastime. Last year she gave away a Kia Sonata! There's some tax paperwork.
And not only that, how come all the people trying to be blasé about prostitution ('Well golly, it's just another form of commerce') can never name anyone from their family or close friendships who *ought* to have been making a living that way instead of waiting tables, flipping burgers, digging ditches, or parking cars?
Oh Honey, you wasted that summer detasseling corn in Iowa when you could have been blowing truckers out at the rest stop....
Crid at March 12, 2016 12:44 AM
Our love is like a honey baked ham.
Hot, salty-sweet, and unclean in the eyes of the lord.
Ben at March 12, 2016 11:57 AM
Leave a comment