Don’t prosecute prostitutesRe ” ‘D.C. Madam’ found hanged,” May 2As a lawyer who defends women arrested for prostitution, I see how devastating it is for a woman to be convicted for crimes that should not be regarded as violations of the law. I am not surprised that a conviction with a six-year prison sentence, for activities that hurt no one, could drive someone like the “D.C. Madam” to take her own life. Deborah Jeane Palfrey has now become a martyr in the cause of expanding personal freedom. Laws criminalizing prostitution among consenting adults are among the most hypocritical and oppressive in the criminal justice system. Just look at the high-ranking political figures who were among Palfrey’s clients. How much time should they do behind bars? Does society want to drive these men to commit suicide too? The best lesson to take away is that prostitution among consenting adults should no longer be a punishable crime. No more women or men should ever again hear the jail doors slam shut because of buying or selling adult sexual pleasures. Edward Tabash
Our own Eddie Tabash had this published in the LA Times, and it got me thinking. I’ve often asserted that gay rights, death with dignity, and abortion rights all mainly stood under the umbrella of the Separation of Church and State. I wonder now, as I think about it, if prostitution (as described above) also falls into this category.
It’s all about personal liberty, something the republicans despise when it’s anti-baby jesus, and something the democrats despise when it’s anti PC.
You can go ahead and lump in the failure of the War on Drugs in there too.
I’ve been saying for years that there is absolutely no justification for making prostitution illegal other than a religious or moral objection just like the objections to gay marriage. If I meet some guy on the street and we have sex this is legal but if I pay for the sex somehow it magically becomes a criminal act. Stupid, stupid, stupid and none of the government’s goddamned business.
Alex
It is stupid but then this is America – Land of the free (don’t ever pay for it) and home of the brave (STD? Who me?).
alex, I agree, and I am straight:)
What you do with a willing partner, in just about every case, is your own business.
Laws against prostitution is a religious law. Sodomy laws are religious laws also. Boy, have I broken some laws?
Talk about religion getting into personal lives. What second grader would watch Howard Stern.
http://liz727.blogspot.com/2008/05/teacher-loses-job-for-bikini-image.html
Comment from: alexatheist
Rather a short sighted view of things…
Try reading up on “retired” prostitutes and tell remind me of how happy and well adjusted their lives become…
Just like the gay community, prostitutes have a much shorter life expectancy then the rest of society.
You can disagree with that statement all you want, but facts are facts.
Following the other thread, I would imagine Dave would only report on republicans visiting a brothel…
Dems can do whatever they want…after all, if the republicans are considered the party of morality, then the Dems MUST be the party of immorality…
I do believe that the anti-prostitution laws are religiously driven. I also do not believe in the idea of a victimless crime — no victim, no crime. As long as both parties are consenting adults, I don’t see the problem.
As far as prostitutes being unhappy and not living as long as the general population, I think that it is more than simply that they are prostitutes. Little girls don’t dream of growing up and being prostitutes, they end up being prostitutes because there is nowhere else to go. The kind of person who would typically end up being a prostitute is going to be unhappy anyway because of a long series of bad decisions in their life.
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
H. L. Mencken (1880 – 1956)
I absolutely agree that prostitution is only a crime because of prudish, nosy religious idiots prying into other people’s lives. And that it should be considered a seperation of chruch and state issue.
It has always struck me as being amazingly hypocrtitcal that, if you buy somebody dinner and a movie, and then have sex with them, it’s not considered prostitution. But if you just hand them the cash, then it is. Unbelievable double standard – but that churchy sanction makes everything okey dokey. Just another example of the complete lack of morals that religion instills in its’ follwers.
It also seems to me that marrying somebody for teh secks (or whatever else you want from the relationship) is merely hiring a copnsiderably more expensive prostitute long term. Prostitution is just an up-front agreement about the financial end of things. If you marry them, and pay for their care, it’s not prostitution. But if you don’t marry them, and still pay for their care, now you’re engaging in an illegal act.
I also see that the phreakish religiously insane moral scold who tosses out non-facts into the discussion has weighed in. Without backing up his superstitious nonsense about life expectancies with, you know, facts and stuff. Par for the course. Watch him ignore this comment (like he has ignored pretty much everything every time he is challenged on his occult fairy tales) once again. And did he just say that Dems must be the party of immorality, without any basis in reality upon which to make that statement? After Diaper David Vitter and the rest of the Republican’t corruption crew that has set new records for illegal and immoral behavior for the last seven years? Nice set of blinders you gots there…
DD
Sodomy laws are religious laws also.
Thankfully, all remaining sodomy laws were struck down by the Supreme Court a few years ago so gays and straights both are now free to engage in consensual oral and anal sex without fear of commiting a crime (yes sodomy laws covered straight people too). Now if they would just do the same with laws against prostitution.
phreedum
Wyy are my blockquotes above all wonky? I did them the right way.
Argh!
(:tom:),
I rarely comment on this site but read it often, if for no other reason than for the laughs I get when you dress down “the moral scold”.
Did she really suicide? I read somewhere that she was the Veep’s call girl, and he had her killed to keep her from exposing his “contributions”.
OOH. gossip!
Prostitution is legal in Nevada, and I’ll wager that the legal prostitutes there do not have shorter-than normal lives. Criminalizing activities like prostitution and drug use drives them underground where they are uncontrolled and unprotected.
Quoting from GT5463a but, the question is open to all:
How much of the unhappiness and problems are caused by the way they are treated by society?
Although there are gender differences, I think a substantial amount of perceived differences are a product of society, that is, learned differences not hardwired differences. I would like to turn the table a bit and narrow the scope for illustration.
Suppose the scope of prostitution was limited to two women and one man. Each of the women want to have sex from time to time but, prefer not to complicate their lives with relationship issues and they don’t like the issues involved in the socially acceptable one night stand approach. The man doesn’t like the one night stand approach basically for the same reasons that the two women don’t, however, the man likes to pamper women but doesn’t find a day to day monogamous relationship to be fulfilling. The man offers to pamper the women but wants to be compensated for time and expenses.
Now, the christians will object, saying that their god-idea finds such activity “sinful” but, aside from that fairytale issue is the activity itself harmful? Or is the problem a misguided social norm, put in place to solve some seemingly or actual related issues?
Our society says sex is for all intents and purposes mandatory if married but, should be unacceptable otherwise. However, the sex act is unchanged, the change is in various other factors. If there is a problem that needs to be addressed it lies in the other factors not the sex. The law needs to be directed at the actual problem not at a convenient scapegoat.
Anyone who is interested in the absurdity of consensual victimless “crimes” should read this book. I bought it back in 1996 when it was first published.
http://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-You-Consensual/dp/0931580587
Is there really a such thing as “victimless prostitution” though, Dave? And, if so, how do we make sure that there are no victims?
QF’s blog: http://irrationaltheorist.blogspot.com/
By that, I mean to say that it isn’t always consentual if there is a pimp involved. I’ve heard that the pimps hire somebody to kidnap/smuggle the girls into our country, then the pimps slap the girls around, drug them, and force them into prostitution. If that is the case, then I can’t quite say it is “consentual” but forced.
However, I suppose there are some prostitutes that are independent of the pimps that run them?
So answer me this:
For those of you who state that prostitution is a victimless crime, what about the sexual exploitation of half our society that squats to pee by the other half that pees standing up?
Christianity says women are chattel to be used for propagation purposes and exploits them. Women should never have been given the vote,
they exist solely to satisfy their husbands needs and must obey them unquestionably,
can not be priests,
can not own property,
can be beaten and killed with impunity,
they are less than humans.
I thought that as Atheists, we were above the sentiments of Christians as spouted above. Doesn’t anyone respect women?
So you’d rather a woman be forced to sell her body on the streets rather than in a well regulated brothel? People will always pay for sex. Making the practice illicit merely creates a black-market.
Okay, you’ve convinced me. Prostitution should be legal then.
There will always be people who want to pay for sex and there will always be people who want to be paid for sex. What does making it legal or not legal have to do with respecting women?
I like Thomas Jefferson’s criterion for illegality. Something should not be illegal if it ‘neither breaks my bones nor picks my pocket.’
Somewhere in Europe, I think it’s in Germany, they deal with the issue by making it illegal to be a john, but not to be a prostitute.
Consenting adults should be free to do what they want. Period.
Circumstances such as sex slavery, child racketeering, pimped drugs addicts etc are not consenting adults. They are under age and under duress. Limits could be circumscribed around it like any other industry.
And hey, Jebus best buddy was a hooker,
What’s wrong with my blockquotes today? I have triple checked them before sending my comments but they still are screwed up.
GT and Alex,
Your responses to Peter are spot on.
The freedom for an individual to be a sex worker has nothing to do with respect for all women. I consider the granting of that particular freedom to be far more respectful than the denying of it.
Prostitution, as long as it is a personal choice for all involved, should not be regulated except to make sure the prostitutes are free of STDs (or as free as possible) and that the customers are aware of possible risks.
Peter,
If women want to behave in a way that makes society look down upon them why is it more respectful to deny them that right than to give them that personal freedom?
I’ll answer for Peter: because human liberty is much more important than societal perceptions. Full stop.
We don’t deny people being $cientologists even though most people look down on it as a crazy cult because in America we recognise that personal liberty trumps societal perceptions.