Prostitution: legal-ethical discussion-debate


Unforgiven
#151
Quote: Originally Posted by Minority Observer84View Post

I agree that it should be legal . Lots of good people with small incomes are forced to live in areas considered strolls . That is prostitutes work on their street , pimps beat said prostitutes in front of their children and needles and used condoms are on their lawns everyday . We need to legalize it so that we can create a red light district it will be safer for the workers , safer for the johns , it would create revenue instead of cost the city money to monitor numerous strolls and jail offenders . More importantly it would take this adult industry out of our streets away from our children .
I don't see how anyone can argue with :
1) child safety and security
2) Prostitute safety and security
3) John safety and security .
4) tax revenue and health safety
5) free's up third shift police officers to do real crime fighting .

Exactly and the whole thing is called harm reduction. Meaning that with it legal and regulated, less harm is caused from the activity than when it is criminalized and forced underground.

One more tool to take away from organized crime.
 
Deafening Silence
#152
Quote: Originally Posted by UnforgivenView Post

Sorry if I don't get the syntax you're using.
You seem to be using professional and damage out of context.

Probably would be much better to learn about sex from an experienced consenting partner. If that happens to be a government inspected prostitute working out of a reputable brothel then I can say in all honesty that I'm ok with that. There are plenty of other ways to experience sex for the uninitiated, that are far more harmful.

And yeah pregnancy and stds can be pretty damaging.
They way you use it here sounds like the only drawback of jumping out of a plane without a parachute is the landing, other than that it's all good.

Leaving it up to kids to find someone else, probably someone from their peer group, to sort it all out for each other has traditionally resulted in near epidemic problems in some areas.

But we're not really talking about that here. The focus is on the benefits of the switch to a legalized and regulated prostitutiion industry.

Not at all. Your argument is all. "What if..." My argument is that we should be striving for the ideal, not throwing our hands in the air and saying. "Whatever". Just because something is legal and regulated doesn't mean it is not harmful. Your argument about the parachute is inapplicable in this case. Yes. Two people who feel intimacy learning from one another is fine in my book. We should be setting the scenario up to succeed. Read "Sexpolitik" by Wilhelm Reich and you will see what I mean.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#153
Quote: Originally Posted by Deafening SilenceView Post

Not at all. Your argument is all. "What if..." My argument is that we should be striving for the ideal, not throwing our hands in the air and saying. "Whatever". Just because something is legal and regulated doesn't mean it is not harmful. Your argument about the parachute is inapplicable in this case. Yes. Two people who feel intimacy learning from one another is fine in my book. We should be setting the scenario up to succeed. Read "Sexpolitik" by Wilhelm Reich and you will see what I mean.

The existance and legalization of prostitutes does not preclude two people from doing as you suggest. Nobody is going to force anyone to use them.
 
Zzarchov
#154
Quote: Originally Posted by Deafening SilenceView Post

Totally illogical. Priests and nuns experience lots of intimacy and no sex. I experience intimacy with my daughter without sex. You are completely off base here. Until you produce a medical reason why lower level needs have to be met first, I just don't buy it. Intimacy without sex is far more beneficial for mental health than sex without intimacy.


Because sex is a physiological need? I know its cute you want to counteract nature. But mankind evolved to breed, like all animals. You go insane without sex.

And in Maslow land "intimacy" is not the term used. I use it here because people were implying romantic intimacy had to be intimate. Family bonds with your daughter are not the same and do not fill the same human need. So thats waaaay off base and getting away from the issue. I hope out of confusion and not by trying to derail a debate with willfully wrong information.

As for Nun's and Catholic priests, I think that one has been put to rest. Through the ages very few priests and nun's have suppressed that need for long term. Many who do are that segment of the population born without a sex drive.


Sex is a physiological drive, like hunger and need for sleep. Those have to be met first. Then come needs of safety and security. THEN come needs for love, belonging and family connections (including romantic relationships). After that comes the need for esteem such as status and reputation. And the last stage is the need for self fulfillment and growth.

Basically, no matter what else: You cannot be happy until you have food, sleep, sex and shelter.

If you have all that, then you need security and protection. But if you don't have lower order needs (like you don't have food) you will sacrifice security and protection for it. This is why despite the risks people go to prostitutes.

Then if you have all that, you need family connections, friends and a relationship. But you will sacrifice and put this at risk for a lower level need. Even if you have a happy family and love your spouse, if you are in a sexless marriage you will risk it all for sex. This why many affairs happen. This isn't just related to physiological needs either. Many people will leave their family for security needs too, such as going away for long periods of time to send money to keep their home life stable. Or sometimes they just go and leave to work themselves and get a stable life (then having met that need try and make ammends to the abandoned family)

After than comes the need for esteem. Reputation and social standing. The need to be respected and important. But, this too will be abandoned for low level needs, be it risking everything to get oral treatment from an intern (physiological needs) or deciding you don't give a damn what others think and choosing to stand by your friends/family/spouse (lower level need, belonging)

And the last thing is self-actualization and growth. Once you have everything else behind you , you will strive to better yourself for its own sake, and that will be what makes you happy. In lower levels you will still better yourself, but those times are to achieve needs. (Ie, I will learn to hunt so I can eat, I will learn to drive so I can get a job and have security, I will go to college so I can get the good job and support a family, I will take these courses so im elligible for promotion and get the status I want), When you hit self actualization you grow for the sole purpose of growing (I will learn to be a carpenter, because hey, its fun to learn to be a carpenter even though i'll never use the knowledge)
 

Similar Threads

30
Ethical dilemma
by CDNBear | Apr 8th, 2007
3
Reid defends 'ethical' army.
by Blackleaf | Feb 19th, 2006
no new posts