Is prostitution a form of modern day slavery?

[Prometheus]

And I've frequented the streets of Vancouver at night.

In that case, why not keep your pathetic responses to yourself, and go frequent the streets at night to check for prostitutes.

 

[Prometheus]

protitution is inherently/obviously/absolutely a shame, disgrace, humiliation, and therefore immoral.

Saint is inherently/obviously/absolutely a shame, disgrace, humiliation, and therefore immoral.

 

[Evo]

Let's try to keep this about the topic and not get personal.

 

[Gokul43201]

Let's try to keep this about the topic and not get personal.

I agree with the sentiment of this warning. But the nature of the original (and successive) posts seems to say that those who disagree with Saint's opinion are automatically deemed immoral. The thread itself is all about 'getting personal'.

Just my opinion...

 

[Moonbear]

A lot less than in the United States. I've lived in British Columbia for almost a decade, and I've seen one street whore. And I've frequented the streets of Vancouver at night.

I take it you've never been to Toronto then? It's also a pretty naive view that all prostitutes are out walking the streets.

And, no, I'm not saying it's moral, or immoral. I see it as something that is morally neutral.

 

[arildno]

The moral immaturity of individuals like dagenais and saint is, unfortunately, very common among religious people. Having no ability to be participants in a rational or reasoned discussion of anything (their scriptural outlook is antithetical to reason), they resort to flinging catch-words and abuse at anyone who happens to disagree with them.

The real culprit, however, is the particular brand of religion which happens to keep them shackled and strait-jacketed into a very primitive existence form, bordering on non-humanity.
Whether to pity or be disgusted with such malfunctionals is hard to tell; regarding them as worthy of the epithet "rational adults" is out of the question.

 

[Artman]

The moral immaturity of individuals like dagenais and saint is, unfortunately, very common among religious people. Having no ability to be participants in a rational or reasoned discussion of anything (their scriptural outlook is antithetical to reason), they resort to flinging catch-words and abuse at anyone who happens to disagree with them.

This is unsubstantiated opinion, presented as fact.

The real culprit, however, is the particular brand of religion which happens to keep them shackled and strait-jacketed into a very primitive existence form, bordering on non-humanity.

Again, this is unsubstantiated opinion, presented as fact.

Let's look at prostitution rationally then. First of all, prostitution is illegal in much of the world, which means the participants are criminals; to cover their involvement they are also liars, listing their profession as exotic dancer, massage therapist, escorts, etc.; and because it is an unregulated industry it forces them to hide their activities in sordid environments (cheap hotels, rooms rented by the hour, backallies, cars, truckstops), and work under pressure to avoid detection. Their profession spreads disease; their profession causes homes to breakup; their profession works on human frailties, to extract money by tempting individual urges and weaknesses (legally prostitution is considered a vice).

Let's not judge the participants, but is this really the description of a moral activity?

 

[cragwolf]

Let's look at prostitution rationally then. First of all, prostitution is illegal in much of the world, which means the participants are criminals; to cover their involvement they are also liars, listing their profession as exotic dancer, massage therapist, escorts, etc.; and because it is an unregulated industry it forces them to hide their activities in sordid environments (cheap hotels, rooms rented by the hour, backallies, cars, truckstops), and work under pressure to avoid detection.

First of all, prostitution is legal in many parts of the world, which means the participants aren't criminals, they're not liars, and the industry is regulated. So the crucial difference here is the legality of the act. If you made the consumption of alcohol illegal, then you would also get liars, sordidness, and surreptitiousness. Is the consumption of alcohol immoral?

Their profession spreads disease...

Only if it is unregulated or not properly regulated. Many products would have dangerous health effects if their manufacture and distribution was not properly regulated.

...their profession causes homes to breakup

No, the married man (or woman) who chooses to obtain these services causes homes to be broken up. It's not the axe, but the axe-murderer we throw into jail.

their profession works on human frailties, to extract money by tempting individual urges and weaknesses.

:rofl: Congratulations, you have just discovered what consumerism and capitalism is based on. Buying and eating chocolate is immoral!

Let's not judge the participants, but is this really the description of a moral activity?

Well, this is the question, but you really ought to be consistent when you judge prostitution to be immoral. If prostitution is immoral then so is any service that involves the renting of a body and/or mind (i.e. every job in existence!) Or if you're not going to be consistent, then explain why.

 

[aychamo]

protitution is inherently/obviously/absolutely a shame, disgrace, humiliation, and therefore immoral.

My mother and my grandmother are prostitutes and I am very proud of them. Their prostitution puts clothes on my back and food on my table.

 

[arildno]

Let's look at prostitution rationally then. First of all, prostitution is illegal in much of the world, which means the participants are BRANDED AS criminals; to cover their involvement they are also liars, listing their profession as exotic dancer, massage therapist, escorts, etc.; and because it is an unregulated AND BRANDED industry it forces them to hide their activities in sordid environments (cheap hotels, rooms rented by the hour, backallies, cars, truckstops), and work under pressure to avoid detection.

Since your post missed some crucial words in order to be a rational statement, I have inserted them for you

Rational outlook on prostitution:
A prostitute provides the service of physical pleasure&release for a paying customer.
In my opinion, it is quite nice of them to be willing to provide such a service for those in need of it.
There is nothing inherently reprehensible about prostitution.

 

[Artman]

First of all, prostitution is legal in many parts of the world, which means the participants aren't criminals, they're not liars, and the industry is regulated. So the crucial difference here is the legality of the act.

This is my opinion on the subject. Prostitution, as with other vices, is considered by many a victimless crime, which opens it for consideration for legalization. Legalizing vices is not done because the activity is desirable, or moral, but because it can be better regulated when legal.

If you made the consumption of alcohol illegal, then you would also get liars, sordidness, and surreptitiousness. Is the consumption of alcohol immoral?

alcohol abuse
This actually supports my previous statement. Just because something has been legalized does not make it right. Prohibition just doesn't work.
"Alcohol abuse and its related problems cost society many billions of dollars each year"

Only if it is unregulated or not properly regulated. Many products would have dangerous health effects if their manufacture and distribution was not properly regulated.

Gosh, even regulation doesn't stop alcohol abuse from costing billions of dollars a year.

Why don't you ask the spouse of an alcoholic how moral their spouse's drinking problem is. (Ask them after they drank away the rent money.)

No, the married man (or woman) who chooses to obtain these services causes homes to be broken up. It's not the axe, but the axe-murderer we throw into jail.

Yeah, the person shooting the gun not the gun. Still doesn't make the gun right.

:rofl: Congratulations, you have just discovered what consumerism and capitalism is based on. Buying and eating chocolate is immoral!

I love chocolate. I also have low blood sugar, a tendency to overindulge in candy, and a family history of diabetes. Perhaps for me it should be immoral.

Well, this is the question, but you really ought to be consistent when you judge prostitution to be immoral. If prostitution is immoral then so is any service that involves the renting of a body and/or mind (i.e. every job in existence!) Or if you're not going to be consistent, then explain why.

This is actually a good argument. Obviously this is a moral dilemma for some people (just look at the number of responses here). I still contend that In countries and areas where the business is illegal, I think that it is immoral a well.

 

[Artman]

My mother and my grandmother are prostitutes and I am very proud of them. Their prostitution puts clothes on my back and food on my table.

All question of morallity aside. I am glad that you are proud of your family.

I am curious though, aren't you also worried about them? Prostitution is a dangerous line of work. To be so vulnerable around strangers. I imagine it takes a brave woman.

 

[Prometheus]

I still contend that In countries and areas where the business is illegal, I think that it is immoral a well.

Do you consider that your opinion that prostitution is immoral is subjective, such that other people should be free to hold any opinion that they wish on the morality of prostitution, or do you believe that your opinion othat prostitution is immoral is objective, such that people who disagree with you are wrong and should learn to believe as rightly as you do?

 

[humanino]

"Alcohol abuse and its related problems cost society many billions of dollars each year"


Gosh, even regulation doesn't stop alcohol abuse from costing billions of dollars a year.

Alcohol brings a lot of money too. In France we export a lot of wine :tongue2:

 

[arildno]

This is unsubstantiated opinion, presented as fact.

Actually, it is not, since by following the "Word of God", scripturally minded Christians are obliged from time to time to commit murder, amongst other atrocities ("Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live")
Scripturally minded Christians deserve no respect whatsoever for their perverted morality view.

 

[Dagenais]

In that case, why not keep your pathetic responses to yourself

I called your posts pathetic, then using the same insult against me is what a 3rd grader would do. Unless you can come up with something better than a, "I know you are but what am I?" reply, stop talking to me.

It's also a pretty naive view that all prostitutes are out walking the streets.

Street hos are the most accessible and common.

The moral immaturity of individuals like dagenais and saint is, unfortunately, very common among religious peop

Stop assuming things.

Let's not judge the participants, but is this really the description of a moral activity?

No, of course not. It's dead obvious that prostitution is immoral. And if asked in real life, everyone here would agree. Of course, on the internet, people are vastly different.

My mother and my grandmother are prostitutes and I am very proud of them

An example of people being different on the internet than in real life. They are a lot ruder and say a lot of things they'd never say IRL.

First-off, your parents are not prostitutes.

He would have never even thought of saying that in real life to a group of people, because that would be embarrassing and disrespectful. He's been disrespectful to the point of banning at other forums. I'm sure you would have the bravery to say that during your job/college interviews too, that selling sex is so moral you would be proud if your mother did it? So don't disrespect us and say it in front of us just because we aren't right in front of you.

 

[humanino]

Dagenais I don't know you, but you could please show a little more respect. Please re-read the words you use in your last paragraph. Think about the person that is sharing facts about his family with you, and the way you reply to that.

 

[Dagenais]

Dagenais I don't know you, but you could please show a little more respect. Please re-read the words you use in your last paragraph. Think about the person that is sharing facts about his family with you, and the way you reply to that.

His parents aren't prostitutes. I've frequented forums he's been at, and he's stirred up trouble to the point of banning before. He'll say just about anything to prove his point.

I am not assuming anything about you dagenais

Yes you are. Especially since your assumption about me was incorrect.

You didn't even assume based on facts. Quebec is known for its population of Roman Catholics, not protestant Christians. At least try to assume correctly.

which is not obvious from your own posts.

Uh huh... :uhh:

You are a moral and intellectual failure.

Intellectual failures are those trying to justify selling sex and exploitation of women as an ethical business.

Moral failures are accusing and putting the people that don't agree with you into religious groups in which you obviously look down upon.

they resort to flinging catch-words and abuse at anyone who happens to disagree with them.

So an example would be...you?

 

[arildno]

I am not assuming anything about you dagenais which is not obvious from your own posts. You are a moral and intellectual failure.

 

[humanino]

I wish this discussion could go somewhere. Several persons tried to bring facts and thoughts related to the discussion, other only seem to display their own conceptions without even reading other posts. Make sure to realize it is just a discussion : no true forbideness of prostitution will come out of it !

Apparently it is doomed to closure by moderators. This is sad.

 

[Entropy]

Very cute. You do know what to say, and you have just said it.

What are getting at? I implied that I think prostitution is immoral and if you think it is moral I can't fathom your thought process. Whats wrong with that?

If you think that prosititution is immoral, you certainly have the right to your opinion, and your opinion is a valid one. If you bluster about how we should recognize how obvious it is that your opinion should be our opinion, then you are just sounding like a fool.

When did I say you should recognize how obvious it is? I implied it was blindly obvious to me. Nothing in my post implies anything negative against people who don't see it as obvious.

Next time you pretend that you do not know what to say, how about saying nothing?

How about next time you read people posts a little more clearly before you go off attacking people?

 

[Artman]

Do you consider that your opinion that prostitution is immoral is subjective, such that other people should be free to hold any opinion that they wish on the morality of prostitution, or do you believe that your opinion othat prostitution is immoral is objective, such that people who disagree with you are wrong and should learn to believe as rightly as you do?

The issue is certainly subjective. I try not to impose my moral standards on anyone. I know a lot of what I do is not up to the standards of others.

Although I consider myself a Christian, many of my thoughts would be considered heretical by some of the more conservative churchs.

 

[Saint]

No one would like his own wife/daughter/sister/mother to be prostitute, this simply points out that prostitution is bad!

 

[Moonbear]

Street hos are the most accessible and common.

You claim to have only seen one in your life; they don't sound that accessible and common. You just don't know where to look (reasonable since it's clear that you aren't interested in looking).

No, of course not. It's dead obvious that prostitution is immoral. And if asked in real life, everyone here would agree. Of course, on the internet, people are vastly different.

That's blatantly untrue. I would give you the exact same answers in real life as I would here. But, in real life, I probably wouldn't try to be as restrained with my tone and word-choice.

 

[Gokul43201]

<I sense a lock-down>

 

[Dagenais]

You claim to have only seen one in your life; they don't sound that accessible and common.

In Vancouver. Stop manipulating what I say.

 

[cragwolf]

I respect your opinions, Artman. Food for thought.

 

[Moonbear]

In Vancouver. Stop manipulating what I say.

Especially in Vancouver! I was actually surprised to see that Canadian law actually allows anyone over the age of 14 to sell sexual services, not even 18 at the legal limit! Though they do have a funny catch-22. It's not legal to buy sexual services from anyone under 18.

http://www.discovervancouver.com/GVB/prostute.asp

http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/issues/prostitution_residential.html

The second link explains why you don't see them out on the street. It is legal for prostitutes to operate out of their residences, but not to solicit on the street.

 

[Jin314159]

No one would like his own wife/daughter/sister/mother to be prostitute, this simply points out that prostitution is bad!

[irrelevant random comment that just sounds cool] Don't hate tha playa. Hate tha game. [/irrelevant random comment that just sounds cool]

 

[Artman]

I respect your opinions, Artman. Food for thought.

Thank you cragwolf. I respect your opinions as well, they are well thought out and well presented.

 

[Artman]

Since your post missed some crucial words in order to be a rational statement, I have inserted them for you

Rational outlook on prostitution:
A prostitute provides the service of physical pleasure&release for a paying customer.
In my opinion, it is quite nice of them to be willing to provide such a service for those in need of it.
There is nothing inherently reprehensible about prostitution.

A lot of this question of morality hinges on the participants. Are they married? Are they healthy?

If they are married, they are breaking vows. If they are not healthy (AIDS, or some other STD) they are possibly endangering the life of the other.

What do you think? Is prostitution still moral under these conditions?

 

[arildno]

True enough; but these are particulars which cannot determine the moral value of a given prostitution act in the general case (they are modifiers).

Basically, you bring up issues which are by no means necessarily combined with prostitution, and seem to think those moral issues are necessarily relevant in your evaluation of prostitution.

 

[Zantra]

Is prostitution illegal? in most places in the world, no doubt. Does it run rampant in many parts of the world? Absolutely. Immorality is a subjective word, which means it's opinion based. However, consider this for a moment:

Every day around the world countless millions of people go on "dates". The guys take the girl out to the movies, to dinner, to plays, to concerts, etc.. And the majority of the time who pays? The guy. This is by design, and how society works. What is the goal of the guy? In most cases, sex. Are there exceptions to the rule? absolutely. But when you're talking about a first date, it's sex. We may use euphamisms like " getting to know each other" but goal is one and the same. Is this not a form of prostitution in the literal sense ? Each time a guy buys dinner, pays for the movie, pays for drinks, pays for concert tickets, is he not hoping for sex? Now before the women and religious fanatics jump all over me, let me preface by saying that I'm only illustrating a point, not make a statement. Society walks a fine line of morality. If you took at prostitute to dinner instead of handing her the 50 bucks you would have given her, does that now make her a "date"?

Now, not every woman is just trying to get a free meal and a movie, just like every guy's goal isn't to get sex(ok some guys). My point is that you can easily blur the line between illegal sex act and courting ritual by simply changing your viewpoint or the method of payment. Personally, I feel it's a matter of choice. Women CHOOSE to be prostitutes. They CHOOSE to have sex for money. It's not a forced act. And it all goes to the deeper, darker side of humanity- our base insticts and appetites. It's supply and demand. There's a demand for sex, and since some men can't get that demand filled by regular means, they choose prostitution.

Let me ask you this-if a woman just gave sex to men freely with no demand for any form of payment other than the act itsself, would she still be considered immoral? Women have the same needs as men. Women have casual sex all the time, and they are deemed "liberated". But if you add money into the equation, she's suddenly a "whore". It's inferred that a prostitute receives no recipricol gratification for the act, and thus it's reduced to a business transaction. So does that mean if that if she did receive some sort of gratification from the act, that it can be no longer considered prostitution?

Funny how we twist things to suit our own views.

And for the record, I've never seen a prostitute in person.

 

[Dooga Blackrazor]

I don't agree with taking someone out and then having sex with them immediately afterwards. I think relationships and the potential of symbiotic joinings should over-power lust. People should get to know and like each other first. Maybe that doesn't seem like the most logical thing to most but I feel it is. If we can take the potential of relationships to create more long term happiness for the world, it would be a great accomplishment.

 

[Zantra]

So based on your views (which we can assume is the majority viewpoint of the conservatives in this thread) when can safely say you're not a supporter of casual sex, and you're entitled to your view. And let's assume the moral majority believe casual sex to be immoral. However, should we make casual sex illegal, or is it still freedom of choice? How would the country react if a law was proposed to ban sex on a first date(we'll stay away from the logistics of enforcement for now- it's just going to my point). There are many who want the choice of that right. An argument could be made that it is possible to have a "connection" on a first date.

This is a ripple effect that the conservatives in the country started. It goes to gay rights, to abortion, to religion in school. It's a cascading affect. What it comes down to is that conservates are not tolerant of ANY view but their own. Coming from a family of conservatives, I speak from experience. It's their way or the highway, and there's only on possible right way: their way.

So the question comes up: where do you draw the line? Where do you decide that freedom of choice can be overriden by the rights of others, because it affects other people? If prostitution is a victimless crime, and it doesn't affect other people, It's technically a violation of our rights. However, the bible thumpers would have you believe otherwise, and so it's illegal. I think when someone else's moral views enchroach upon another person's lifestyle choices, it defeats the purpose of freedom. But that's my view