posted on September 4, 2001 10:39:49 AM newBUT I still am questioning the fact that if society tells us at one point in history that something is wrong, immoral, illegal, call it whatever you want, then how it can it then become right, moral and legal now?
It happens. Sale and consumption of alcohol was illegal during prohibition. Now it's not. Has morality changed, or has society simply decided to favor one group's sense of morality over another's?
Slavery was once pefectly legal, and now it's not. Abortion, on the other hand, used to be illegal, and now it's legal.
Growing up, it was illegal for stores in my home state to be open on Sundays [they called it the "Blue Laws"]. That was changed a number of years ago. A lot of people still avoid going shopping on Sundays because it violates their personal moral code, but the decision was made to no longer have a law that reflected the views of only a limited portion of the Commonwealth.
Whether prostitution is legal or not shouldn't change your personal view on its inherent morality, and I don't think anybody is trying to convince you that it is moral. But at the same time, not everybody agrees that it is, in fact, immoral, and if enough people feel that way then the law will probably end up changing.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on September 4, 2001 10:43:02 AM new
godzillatemple:
I guess I'm just not very good at voicing my thoughts am I? My hubby says the same thing, "just spit out girl!"
Okay, here's my main reason, among others: I truly believe that if we, as a society, condone sex for money then we will at some point condone other things, such as stealing, or not saying thank you, or not saying please, or maybe someday even murder. Maybe not someday soon, but maybe, just maybe someday. It has to start somewhere doesn't it? Maybe not, if we stop it now, maybe it won't go any further.
I'm just so saddened by the state of decay that our country seems, to me ,to be in. Maybe I watch too much news, but there's more "bad" in the news than "good", although I suspect that's more for ratings than what's truly going on.
I do know from observation of children in public, they disrespect their parents more often than not, and that just can't be good. It may lead to other things, and personally that scares me. Who knows what those "other things" might be?
posted on September 4, 2001 10:47:57 AM new
{{{{Helen}}}}...sigh...sometimes I feel you just don't understand me...
OK, instead of taking your post out of context, donny interpreted it the way you intended, adding him to the list of posters that understand you....not that he was the only poster that does. Kook!
posted on September 4, 2001 10:54:09 AM new
"Sale and consumption of alcohol was illegal during prohibition," "Abortion, on the other hand, used to be illegal". This is what I'm talking about. The people who had fears back when these were issues, like the prostitution issues of today, probably feared the same things I do.
How do you think they feel today? They probably think things are getting worse by the minutes, I would assume, maybe wrongly so, but nonetheless, and are they worse off. I wasn't around during the prohibition, so I don't know what life was like, is it any better, or is it worse? If it's worse, maybe we should pay attention to history, or it may repeat itself. If we're better off (although I can't imagine we are), then I guess I'll just take my lumps and shut up.!
posted on September 4, 2001 10:55:18 AM newflynn: I truly believe that if we, as a society, condone sex for money then we will at some point condone other things, such as stealing, or not saying thank you, or not saying please, or maybe someday even murder
Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it sounds like the classic "slippery slope" fallacy to me. It's hard to see a connection between "sex for money" and those other things you mentioned, other than the fact that you think they are all bad and one bad thing leads to another.
I mean, I could see a possible link between abortion or euthanasia and murder, for example, if somebody wanted to argue that devaluing human life in some instances might lead to devaluing it in other instances as well. Because in that case we're talking about the same general type of act taken to anotehr level. But going from having sex for money to stealing, bad manners and murder? Where's the link? What in the world does prostitution have to do with bad manners???
I suspect what you are trying to say [and forgive me if I am putting words in your mouth] is that prostitution is an example of moral decay in general, and that somebody without morals is capable of any bad act, whether it be stealing, murder, or even being impolite. However, as has been pointed out, somebody can accept sex for money and still have a highly developed moral code that prohibits such things as stealing, murder, bad manners, etc. The same way that somebody can have a glass of wine with dinner [considered immoral by some] and not be a child molester, or a tax fraud, or a serial rapist.
Just a thought....
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on September 4, 2001 10:59:03 AM new
Prostitution isn't illegal everywhere. Are the people in the countries where it's legal less moral than Americans? I tend to doubt it. Maybe they're just more pragmatic about sex.
As to demeaning, I'm thinking a pretty young woman who aims at a decent class of clientele could probably make a nice chunk of cash in a few years and if she were smart, either continue on in the business or find something else to do when her looks faded a bit. If she's protected by law, she's less likely to be beat up, robbed, etc. because the perpetrator would know she could call the cops.
She would also pay taxes. Maybe even have a husband if he could psychologically seperate sex with love from sex for money.
Some years ago, when I lived in FL, there was a big brooha (sp?) over the hot dog vendors that wore thong bikinis. Some thought this was demeaning to women. I thought making these women cover up and work at McDonald's for minimum wage would be more demeaning.
Another thing I'm not sure was addressed here was "special needs," - i.e. fetishes. Should a person's whole reputation be in jeopardy because s/he has to trust a date or wife with sexual likes that if blabbed to the community could ruin him/her? Prostitutes would be (are) a safe haven for people who have fetishes.
I don't think that legalizing prostitution would make more women go into it. It's legal to drink, smoke, own a gun, etc. - some people do these things and some people don't. Their upbringing and personal value system dictates this, not the law.
I also think a person can be very moral and still not think sex has to be sanctified to be appropriate. I'd rather have an accountant (for eg.) who slept around but didn't steal.
It seems to me that since the woman's movement, any way a woman wants to make money trading on her looks or sex is deemed demeaning. To be truly liberated, a woman should be able to decide for herself how/if to earn a living.
Note: I know I referred to prostitutes in general as women/she/her, but I feel the same about male prostitutes.
posted on September 4, 2001 10:59:28 AM newflynn: "Sale and consumption of alcohol was illegal during prohibition," "Abortion, on the other hand, used to be illegal". This is what I'm talking about. The people who had fears back when these were issues, like the prostitution issues of today, probably feared the same things I do.
Well, don't forget the other example I cited, that of slavery. That used to be legal, but is now illegal. So maybe society is actually growing more moral in some respects and less moral in others? Were the people who advocated slavery immoral, or were they simply raised to think that slavery was OK?
I agree that society is going to hell in a handbasket, personally. But it's more because people don't follow the laws that exist than it is because we don't have enough laws.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on September 4, 2001 11:00:44 AM new
flynn, I thought your post was really wonderful . You sound like a decent human being. This is just my opinion, but holding on to your own values and beliefs is what's MOST important, even if the world around you is crumbling in your eyes. Let you belief system be your guide through life, but also have the openmindedness to think about other ways of thinking, even if you don't adopt them as your own. I think gut instinct will let you know if something's right or wrong for you, so trust your own judgement.
posted on September 4, 2001 11:15:46 AM new
Well like I said in a much earlier post, "if we were all the same this world would probably be very very boring".
I will do my best to be more openminded, but at the same time hold onto my beliefs. It shouldn't be such a difficult thing to do, but with so much peer pressure and forums such as AW (which btw I think is such a wonderful thing to have), it is sometimes difficult for me to not be swayed into believing something I don't normally even think about.
Kinda scares me to think that I could be swayed to believe a certain way on an issue that, for me only, would be detrimental, based on my own beliefs, just because I don't know all the facts.
I also want to add, that I think every single human being on this earth has at least one good cell in his/her body. Maybe I'm too naive sometimes, maybe not naive enough, who knows.
Thank you all for taking the time to disagree, agree or even think to yourself, what an idiot! This country is a great place to live, no matter how one chooses to live his/her life.
posted on September 4, 2001 11:18:40 AM new
Sounds to me that you're using a "parade of horribles," scenario, flynn, and those never stand up to scrutiny. If one thing happens, these other things might happen, who knows what could happen, everything will fall apart!
"Also, if prostitution can become right, moral and legal, then why can't anything else that was once thought to be wrong, immoral or illegal, then become right, moral and legal?"
I don't think most people who view sex for money as not immoral then, by extension, view it as moral. I don't. I view it as morally neutral. Things don't always have to be "right" or "wrong." They can be neither.
"Wrong, immoral, or illegal," don't always have to be on just one side, with "right, moral and legal" on the other. Some people honestly think that merely playing cards is immoral, but it's not illegal. Speeding is illegal, we all know that, but very few people would characterize it as immoral. As Barry, points out, legal status and moral views can change, independantly of each other.
posted on September 4, 2001 01:06:06 PM new
Gee, how are you feeling bunnicula?? You're probably all bruised....maybe you'll have to take some time off work and chat with us longer.....
posted on September 4, 2001 01:09:05 PM newkraftdinner: Hi! I'm pretty sore today, but back at work. I came home for lunch but will go back in a few minutes. Gimping around fairly well!
posted on September 4, 2001 04:37:04 PM new
I think prostitution should be legalized, or at least decriminalized. In places like Amsterdam, prostitution is regulated, with women having regular health checks. There are specific areas they may ply their trade, from the windows of buildings facing onto streets. They do not need to face the danger of soliciting on the street. Their clients come to them. They don't need pimps - they arranged their business themselves.
Prostitutes are often seen as the criminals. The real criminals (to my mind) are the pimps, that take their earnings from the women, forcing them to maximise their earnings and exploiting their bodies.
I think it is true that the Dutch have a more pragmatic attitude to sex (and drugs). Legislating to make it go away doesn't work. Recognising the foibles of humanity and working with that seems much more sensible. Maybe even making it "legal" will make prostitution less attractive to some.
It is just sex. It is not as fulfilling (I don't think) as sex with someone you care about. But sometimes it can be a pleasant interlude.
Sex feels nice because it is. I cannot see what is so wicked about it.
posted on September 5, 2001 05:53:36 PM new
I was just reading George Carlin. What he says makes sense. Selling is legal. Sex is legal. Why is selling sex illegal. It makes no sense whatsoever to make selling sex illegal when giving it away is not. Just not logical.
posted on September 7, 2001 09:14:36 AM new
So since the welfare program has been reformed (a proven successful move that helps poor children) and the lifetime cut off is now 2 years (or something like that) and welfare recipients have to receive job training and take any available job by a certian date or lose all income...
if prostitution were legal and considered a "valid profession", do we train welfare recipients to be good prostitutes and force them to take that job at the end of their two (or whatever) years?
posted on September 7, 2001 09:42:39 AM newdo we train welfare recipients to be good prostitutes and force them to take that job at the end of their two (or whatever) years?
Only if they're really attractive....
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on September 7, 2001 10:04:10 AM new
Many states had blue laws. If I am not mistaken, they still apply to alcohol in some places.
Barry, I would like ask you a question on a subject on which I think you are knowledgable but it's unrelated to this thread. Is there any other way to contact you? Could you contact me by chance? It's a "real" type question.
T
Oops. I see that you have your e-mail here. I will e-mail you.
[ edited by jt on Sep 7, 2001 10:06 AM ]
posted on September 7, 2001 10:25:18 AM new
welfare reform limit is 5 yrs. I'm up in May. Ebay will be my only income then.
only jobs out there are minimum wage. I know in my instance, they'll only work you 25 hrs a wk max because here 30 hrs is fulltime and they don't want ft workers. $5.15/hr before taxes.
25 hrs times $5.15 is $128.75 a wk (before taxes)times 4 wks equals $515 a month before taxes. Cheapest childcare around here is $75/wk per child. That's $300/month. So that's $215/month before taxes. Cheapest rent around here is $350 a month without utilities. Now the jobs want you to work nights and weekends, there's no childcare nights and weekends. So you'd have to find a second babysitter for nights and weekends to work that one job. You're paying money out of savings around here to work a job flipping burgers?? I don't see how that is economically sound or even wise.
Last time I worked at a job was back in Virginia. The nearest babysitter I could find that would babysit at nights was 30 miles away (no one wants to do it anywhere it seems) and I ended up working 4 part-time jobs just to be able to afford childcare and pay utilities. I was in welfare housing, so I didn't have to pay rent. I was working 52 hours a week and going to college fulltime. Was lucky to get 4 hrs sleep at night. And when I tried to get childsupport from my ex, the judge had the gall to call me lazy?? I wanted to slap him. My ex was making $1200-1800 a month and whined because he was ordered to pay $32/wk childsupport. The judge was so sympathetic to him and lowered it. He still didn't pay it. He wanted custody, however. The ***** couldn't afford $32 a week but wanted custody?? And the judge wanted to give it to him, but I was breastfeeding at the time. My ex owes over $10,000 in back childsupport and the courts in Virginia won't make him pay.
Single parents work more than a lot of other people because they have no help. They do everything themselves. It's amazing that childcare providers are considered working, but the single parent that does the same thing as a childcare provider is classified as "lazy" by society and society balks when she asks for financial help. Welfare here pays $225/month. A childcare provider makes more than that. The courts order less than that in child support. Clearly society does not place much emphasis on the value of a child, nor does all these deadbeats that won't pay a red cent to help take care of the children they help procreate. Currently 67% of the childsupport in this country goes unpaid/uncollected. That's pretty pathetic statement for the fathers out there. Only 33% of fathers pay their childsupport in this country. The deadbeats have no problem driving around in a new car and making car payments, but supporting their children is a no no. What's worse, all these welfare moms slaving away in poverty to take care of their kids, or these deadbeat dads who abandon their kids?
Congress has no problem throwing moms off welfare, but they do very little to make men responsible for the children they help bring into the world.
If the only way a mom has to support her kids on decent wage is to prostitute herself, this is a real sad country. Considering the deadbeat rate, I think it's already pathetic.
posted on September 7, 2001 10:32:11 AM newtigress: Nope, Massachusetts. The original "Puritan" state....
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
I am sorry to hear of your situation. We have supported a family of 4 and a $750 house payment for over 3 years now on ebay alone.
I homeschool our 2 kids as well as do ebay. We sell stuff that we buy at thrift stores and from junk dealers. You can support your family if you work your fanny off. Before ebay there weren't many options to work at home. I wish you much success on ebay and otherwise.
T
Also, how old is your child? If you don't have medicaid, you can get CHIPS to cover your child's healthcare...but I am assuming that you probably have medicaid. We qualify for CHIPS and I am glad of that. Even if hubby and I are uninsured, the kids are covered. That's something.
[ edited by jt on Sep 8, 2001 02:34 AM ]
Should a person's whole reputation be in jeopardy because s/he has to trust a date or wife with sexual likes that if blabbed to the community could ruin him/her? Prostitutes would be (are) a safe haven for people who have fetishes.
