Topic: Should prostitution be legal?
Anonymous A started this discussion 14 years ago #19,301
If so, why?
Dr Bumhert joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #317,695
Legal is the default state. Arguments must be put forward to support the use of coercive force to prevent people from freely interacting and exchanging goods and services.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,698
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
fine. should it be illegal? If so, why? I'm okay with people using their own bodies as they see fit, but some are against this.
fine. should it be illegal? If so, why? I'm okay with people using their own bodies as they see fit, but some are against this.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,704
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,707
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,711
@previous (D)
there is when one side has control of the military, police, government, and public opinion
there is when one side has control of the military, police, government, and public opinion
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,715
dw joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 15 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,737
yes
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,743
Don't see why not. It should probably be loosely regulated, though. STDs and such.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #317,745
> Topic: Should prostitution be legal?
Yes no and maybe. Sex is currently available to me. If however at some point it is no longer available and finding it is too much trouble, it would be cool to have paid for sex available.
Now would I really do that? Not in this Aids infested society. Oooooops r04r used to PM me about keeping my posting non Geocentric.
So its AIDS here and SIDS elsewhere me thinks.
Yes no and maybe. Sex is currently available to me. If however at some point it is no longer available and finding it is too much trouble, it would be cool to have paid for sex available.
Now would I really do that? Not in this Aids infested society. Oooooops r04r used to PM me about keeping my posting non Geocentric.
So its AIDS here and SIDS elsewhere me thinks.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,747
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,750
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,760
@317,747 (A)
Hey maybe I fucked that up. Whatever. I fear AIDS. Sure one can get it from anyone.
Sex workers make the risk mega times greater re risk.
Hey maybe I fucked that up. Whatever. I fear AIDS. Sure one can get it from anyone.
Sex workers make the risk mega times greater re risk.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,763
@previous (G)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002533/
than dont fuck them, just dont arrest them either.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002533/
than dont fuck them, just dont arrest them either.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,780
@previous (A)
Hey I said I fucked up on the SIDS thing. Shoot me kill me.
Bottom line - Sex workers have more cooties then non sex workers.
Hey I said I fucked up on the SIDS thing. Shoot me kill me.
Bottom line - Sex workers have more cooties then non sex workers.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,784
@previous (G)
Oh, I thought that it was some European term for std's seriously, lol wasnt breaking your balls.
that's why it should be regulated. We could keep everything clean and safe, and fun!
Oh, I thought that it was some European term for std's seriously, lol wasnt breaking your balls.
that's why it should be regulated. We could keep everything clean and safe, and fun!
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #317,803
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 5 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #317,924
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #317,926
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 48 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #317,938
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #317,939
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
she approves of prostitutes being arrested. thinks it will straighten them out.
she approves of prostitutes being arrested. thinks it will straighten them out.
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #317,940
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 6 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,090
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
But you're paying for it with prostitution, so it should be STD free. Why are you against trying to stamp out STDs anyway?
But you're paying for it with prostitution, so it should be STD free. Why are you against trying to stamp out STDs anyway?
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,121
@previous (F)
Brothels that hire prostitutes with STDs will fail. Requiring STD checks of private individuals is incredibly onerous.
> Why are you against trying to stamp out STDs anyway?
Opposition to using the coercive power of the state to achieve a goal does not equate to opposition of achieving a goal.
Brothels that hire prostitutes with STDs will fail. Requiring STD checks of private individuals is incredibly onerous.
> Why are you against trying to stamp out STDs anyway?
Opposition to using the coercive power of the state to achieve a goal does not equate to opposition of achieving a goal.
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,122
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
But all if would be would be checking prostitutes for STDs so it doesn't become a problem for them or the customers...
Oh, you're mountainman. Of course you'd be against that. Stupid boy.
But all if would be would be checking prostitutes for STDs so it doesn't become a problem for them or the customers...
Oh, you're mountainman. Of course you'd be against that. Stupid boy.
(Edited 15 seconds later.)
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,128
Prostitution is legal (in the UK at least).
It is soliciting that is illegal.
It is soliciting that is illegal.
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,130
@318,122 (F)> But all if would be would be
Please learn English, and then come back. Thanks.
> agents of the state performing STD checks before people can participate in sexual relationships
Sounds like a great idea! Please run for office!
> Oh, you're mountainman. Of course you'd be against that. Stupid boy.
Don't you know? Literally every poster on this site is mountainman!
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,131
I don't know. I haven't made up my mind yet.
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,143
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 43 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #318,149
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 10 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,461
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,462
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,468
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 29 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,472
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 58 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,501
@318,468 (F)
I know it's him because he wont outright say that it isnt. that would be a lie, and lying is a sin.
I know it's him because he wont outright say that it isnt. that would be a lie, and lying is a sin.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,550
No. Nothing should be legal. Even breathing should require a special permit.
brie !OudrPWaUDQ joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,552
Yes, because the lawn.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,586
@317,715 (A)
> some non conservative feminists are against prostitution.
Many, I believe.
@317,938 (Dr Bumhert)
> No. If people are against it, they should not participate in it.
"If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
> some non conservative feminists are against prostitution.
Many, I believe.
@317,938 (Dr Bumhert)
> No. If people are against it, they should not participate in it.
"If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,595
@previous (M)
> "If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
That's why we have a military.
> "If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
That's why we have a military.
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,607
@318,586 (M)
> "If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
Sounds great to me! Maybe it is best that you fully expound your theory.
> "If people are against murder, they should not participate in it."
Sounds great to me! Maybe it is best that you fully expound your theory.
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,609
PROSTITUTION IS NOT ILLEGAL, YOU AUTISTIC FUCKING CUNTS.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
dw replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,611
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,612
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 40 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,618
Anonymous I double-posted this 14 years ago, 24 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,619
vocalon !!jdS+H4VgV joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #318,620
I don't see why not, so long as it's consensual.
Anonymous M replied with this 14 years ago, 31 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,655
@318,607 (Dr Bumhert)
> Sounds great to me! Maybe it is best that you fully expound your theory.
No, not great. I'm saying that simply not participating in something you're against, doesn't solve the problem.
> Sounds great to me! Maybe it is best that you fully expound your theory.
No, not great. I'm saying that simply not participating in something you're against, doesn't solve the problem.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,657
@previous (M)
Exactly, people who are pro-murder can join the military, become abortion doctors, or rogue nurses in old-age homes. People who are against it can avoid these professions.
Exactly, people who are pro-murder can join the military, become abortion doctors, or rogue nurses in old-age homes. People who are against it can avoid these professions.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Anonymous M replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,692
@previous (D)
Alright, I guess murder isn't as agreed upon. Also, I don't think abortion isn't murder, as there is (usually) no "malice aforethought".
But how about this one:
"If people are against rape, they should not participate in it."
Same for theft, fraud, you name it.
If the ones who do want these things, can freely do so, the problem isn't solved.
Alright, I guess murder isn't as agreed upon. Also, I don't think abortion isn't murder, as there is (usually) no "malice aforethought".
But how about this one:
"If people are against rape, they should not participate in it."
Same for theft, fraud, you name it.
If the ones who do want these things, can freely do so, the problem isn't solved.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,740
@previous (M)
Study for 12 years to learn how to scramble up fetus brains and vacumm the corpse out.
> Not premidated.
lolol
Study for 12 years to learn how to scramble up fetus brains and vacumm the corpse out.
> Not premidated.
lolol
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,741
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,763
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,779
Anonymous M replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,803
@318,740 (D)
> Study for 12 years to learn how to scramble up fetus brains and vacumm the corpse out.
>
> > Not premidated.
First of all, what does 'premidated' mean?
Secondly, I'm not saying it isn't premeditated. I'm saying there is usually no malice aforethought.
@318,763 (A)
> consensual sex is just like murder. you sound ridiculous.
First of all, sentences start with capitals.
Secondly, since I see no quotation marks around the first sentence: could you please explain to me how consensual sex is just like murder?
Lastly, if you did in fact intend to put quotation marks around the first sentence: that is a straw man. Tell me at which point I did so much as to imply that consensual sex is just like murder, and we can talk further.
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
First of all, why do you only emphasize the difference between coercive and voluntary as soon as you disagree with the implication? At first, the implication was about murder, at which point you said:
> people who are pro-murder can join the military
I've never been in any military, but as far as I know, it involves murder in a coercive context. Please learn the difference between coercive and voluntary!
Secondly, you're saying this as if the lack of coercion was a given for you to refute it simply by saying "If people are against it, they should not participate in it," but you didn't initially specify this; you're specifying it only now. I don't think "Please learn the difference between [...]!" is a proper way of specifying your opinion, in fact, it comes off as lame.
Lastly:
"If people are against bribery, they should not participate in it."
"If people are against fraud, they should not participate in it."
And theft doesn't have to imply coercion, so the same can still be said for it.
> Study for 12 years to learn how to scramble up fetus brains and vacumm the corpse out.
>
> > Not premidated.
First of all, what does 'premidated' mean?
Secondly, I'm not saying it isn't premeditated. I'm saying there is usually no malice aforethought.
@318,763 (A)
> consensual sex is just like murder. you sound ridiculous.
First of all, sentences start with capitals.
Secondly, since I see no quotation marks around the first sentence: could you please explain to me how consensual sex is just like murder?
Lastly, if you did in fact intend to put quotation marks around the first sentence: that is a straw man. Tell me at which point I did so much as to imply that consensual sex is just like murder, and we can talk further.
@previous (Dr Bumhert)
First of all, why do you only emphasize the difference between coercive and voluntary as soon as you disagree with the implication? At first, the implication was about murder, at which point you said:
> people who are pro-murder can join the military
I've never been in any military, but as far as I know, it involves murder in a coercive context. Please learn the difference between coercive and voluntary!
Secondly, you're saying this as if the lack of coercion was a given for you to refute it simply by saying "If people are against it, they should not participate in it," but you didn't initially specify this; you're specifying it only now. I don't think "Please learn the difference between [...]!" is a proper way of specifying your opinion, in fact, it comes off as lame.
Lastly:
"If people are against bribery, they should not participate in it."
"If people are against fraud, they should not participate in it."
And theft doesn't have to imply coercion, so the same can still be said for it.
Dr Bumhert replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,822
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,823
You are all lazy, uninformed ignorami and your opinions are invalid.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,832
@318,803 (M)
I'm not going to change my style of writing to make you feel comfortable, thanks. you compared prostitution to rape and murder.
I'm not going to change my style of writing to make you feel comfortable, thanks. you compared prostitution to rape and murder.
squeegee !firstkPE1Q joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,853
NO! absolutely not! legal prostitution would crater the rates. Good vagina should be worth something!
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,899
@previous (squeegee !firstkPE1Q)
> I'm not going to change my style of writing to make you feel comfortable.
10/10
@previous (squeegee !firstkPE1Q)
> Good vagina should be worth something!
10/10
> I'm not going to change my style of writing to make you feel comfortable.
10/10
@previous (squeegee !firstkPE1Q)
> Good vagina should be worth something!
10/10
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,909
@318,853 (squeegee !firstkPE1Q)
But this is wrong. Legal only ever means regulated in today's world. And regulation only ever increases costs. It happened in medicine, dentistry, education, and you can bet your ass it'll happen in prostitution too.
It'll be easier to find good vagina, but it'll definitely be more expensive.
But this is wrong. Legal only ever means regulated in today's world. And regulation only ever increases costs. It happened in medicine, dentistry, education, and you can bet your ass it'll happen in prostitution too.
It'll be easier to find good vagina, but it'll definitely be more expensive.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,911
@previous (H)
re increased cost?
> It'll be easier to find good vagina, but it'll definitely be more expensive.
Cut costs from Pros -------> What you get
HIV
Chancroid
Chlamydia
Granuloma
Gonorrhea
Syphilis
Candidiasis
CMV
Herpes simplex
HPV
Crab louse
Scabies
Trichomoniasis
re increased cost?
> It'll be easier to find good vagina, but it'll definitely be more expensive.
Cut costs from Pros -------> What you get
HIV
Chancroid
Chlamydia
Granuloma
Gonorrhea
Syphilis
Candidiasis
CMV
Herpes simplex
HPV
Crab louse
Scabies
Trichomoniasis
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 13 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,915
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,917
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,921
@previous (G)
Which is why you'll now need to pay taxes for the privilege of clean vagina. And also why legal prostitutes will be required to complete idiotic training classes.
Which is why you'll now need to pay taxes for the privilege of clean vagina. And also why legal prostitutes will be required to complete idiotic training classes.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,927
so the only real issue here with paid sex is that the vaginas are less clean?
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,928
@previous (A)
> so the only real issue here with paid sex is that the vaginas are less clean?
Implying vagina's are ever clean.
> so the only real issue here with paid sex is that the vaginas are less clean?
Implying vagina's are ever clean.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 20 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,935
I have mixed feelings about this.
One one hand a women owns here body and has a right to use it as she pleases. So long as she does not hurt anyone with it. Her body could be much like a loaded gun.
How all this is managed? Pimps rip women off, so I want the Gov to help control this (if this is even possible)
One one hand a women owns here body and has a right to use it as she pleases. So long as she does not hurt anyone with it. Her body could be much like a loaded gun.
How all this is managed? Pimps rip women off, so I want the Gov to help control this (if this is even possible)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,936
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,938
@previous (A)
100% Hetro myself.
Yea I cannot justify a reason why gender and body ownership & consenting sex would differ.
So I think the only Gov issue should be the protection of the masses. HIV was only managed by Gov intervention.
If Johns take home HIV etc picked up from a Male whore and take it back to the wife-family - Need some degree of Gov protection.
100% Hetro myself.
Yea I cannot justify a reason why gender and body ownership & consenting sex would differ.
So I think the only Gov issue should be the protection of the masses. HIV was only managed by Gov intervention.
If Johns take home HIV etc picked up from a Male whore and take it back to the wife-family - Need some degree of Gov protection.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,941
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 35 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,942
When will cunt weigh in on this issue?
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,947
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,949
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)@318,938 (G)
Another idiot who thinks government can eliminate all the risks of life. It's not my problem if I choose a dirty whore, it's the government's problem. lol.
Personally, I can't wait for the wholesale implosion of collectivist thinking. You idiots (who don't even own guns lol) are gonna be fucked.
Another idiot who thinks government can eliminate all the risks of life. It's not my problem if I choose a dirty whore, it's the government's problem. lol.
Personally, I can't wait for the wholesale implosion of collectivist thinking. You idiots (who don't even own guns lol) are gonna be fucked.
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 50 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,956
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,957
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,958
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,959
@previous (A)
What's the point of accusing me of being random anons? Do you think it's useful or helpful or likely to make me weigh in on your shit topic that's already been discussed multiple times before?
What's the point of accusing me of being random anons? Do you think it's useful or helpful or likely to make me weigh in on your shit topic that's already been discussed multiple times before?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,960
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
I never accused you of being a random anon. It's also not a shit topic.
I never accused you of being a random anon. It's also not a shit topic.
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 53 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,961
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,962
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
I was replying to another poster who said that you were anon c. Can't you read?
I was replying to another poster who said that you were anon c. Can't you read?
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,963
@previous (A)
Ah yes, because it makes significantly more sense to agree with a random anon troll about who another anon might be. Which granted, there wouldn't be many posts in this topic if you didn't have my opinions to discuss or accusations of which posters are which.
Quality topic, weirdo.
Ah yes, because it makes significantly more sense to agree with a random anon troll about who another anon might be. Which granted, there wouldn't be many posts in this topic if you didn't have my opinions to discuss or accusations of which posters are which.
Quality topic, weirdo.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,964
Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 37 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,965
I don't know, well, maybe. Probably yes. But who the fuck says that a toddler doesn't like it?
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #318,966
