RunUO Community

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Prostitution - Legal or Illegal?

Prostitution should be...

  • Legal

    Votes: 62 82.7%
  • Illegal

    Votes: 13 17.3%

  • Total voters
    75

Joeku

Lord
Prostitution - Legal or Illegal?

I'm writing an essay, and I just wanted to see peoples' opinions on this.

*Edit
The essay...
Outline
1. Introduction – Prohibition
2. Introduction – Prostitution
3. Body – STD Transmission
4. Body – Prostitute Abuse
5. Body – Fiscal Loss
6. Conclusion

Thesis – Underground prostitution renders the government unable to impose regulations for sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention, safety of prostitutes, and taxation.
Rough Draft (paragraphs 2/6)
On January the sixteenth, in the year nineteen hundred and twenty, prohibition was first enacted nationwide in the United States. This thirteen-year folly, brought forth by pietistic religious denominations, served to have no ultimately positive effect in the long run. Alcoholics simply ran their businesses underground, creating a lawless sub-society devoid of safety regulations or taxation. The government lost money attempting to prevent the manufacture and consumption of alcohol and losing the ability to profit off of such industries. Thousands of people died yearly due to poisoning from bad batches of alcohol produced by inexperienced, careless brewers. All in all, the attempt to achieve alcohol abstinence was a complete failure, resulting in the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment and the end of prohibition in 1933.

Closely mirroring this is the issue of prostitution. The religious right is pressing their views of morality upon the government and forcing them into legality. In truth, with the accordance of the separation of church and state, there is no reason for prostitution to be illegal. It does not cause harm to innocent third parties. It does not hinder the freedom of citizens. It is, overall, a relatively innocuous industry and is only perceived negatively when subject to conservative morality – which, in and of itself, is relative and, therefore, unreliable. The illegality of prostitution has done nothing but force it underground, where it continues to thrive in a dangerous environment. Underground prostitution renders the government unable to impose regulations for sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention, safety of prostitutes, and taxation.
Rough Draft (complete)
On January 16, 1920, prohibition was first enacted nationwide in the United States. This thirteen-year folly, brought forth by pietistic religious denominations, served to have no ultimately positive effect in the long run. Alcoholics simply ran their businesses underground, creating a lawless sub-society devoid of safety regulations or taxation. The government lost money attempting to prevent the manufacture and consumption of alcohol and losing the ability to profit off of such industries. Thousands of people died yearly due to poisoning from bad batches of alcohol produced by inexperienced, careless brewers. All in all, the attempt to achieve alcohol abstinence was a complete failure, resulting in the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment and the end of prohibition in 1933.

Closely mirroring this is the issue of prostitution. The religious right is pressing their views of morality upon the government and forcing them into legality. In truth, there is no reason for prostitution to be illegal. It does not cause harm to innocent third parties. It does not hinder the freedom of citizens. It is, overall, a relatively innocuous industry and is only perceived negatively when subject to conservative morality – which, in and of itself, is relative and, therefore, unreliable. The illegality of prostitution has done nothing but force it underground, where it continues to thrive in a dangerous environment. Underground prostitution renders the government unable to impose regulations for sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention, safety of prostitutes, and taxation.

Because prostitution is illegal, there is no system to ensure that STD carriers are kept quarantined and not allowed to work. Roadside hookers who aren’t aware that they have an STD, or even those who do know but don’t care, spread the disease to every customer they service. Not only does this harm the prostitutes’ unlawful customers, but any other innocent citizens that said customers come in sexual contact with afterwards. If prostitution was legalized and regulated, the government could create controls – licenses, regular health exams and blood tests, and other things – to make sure that STDs aren’t spread through these means. In areas where it is legal (for instance, the state of Nevada), weekly health checks and cervical specimens are required of all prostitutes working in brothels. Since 1986, when mandatory testing began, not a single brothel prostitute has ever tested positive for HIV.

Another issue that could be solved by legalizing prostitution is that of safety. Government regulations may help prevent pimping, which is by far a worse exploitation than that from a brothel owner. Oftentimes, prostitutes can find themselves trapped in such a lifestyle and forced to work. Pimps can be abusive, using psychological intimidation, manipulation and physical force to control the members in the "stable". Also, government-regulated brothels would decrease the number of roadside prostitutes. It is unarguable that roadside prostitution is far more dangerous than working in a brothel. A Canadian Report on Prostitution and Pornography concluded that girls and women in prostitution have a mortality rate 40 times higher than the national average. This rate would be decreased dramatically by protecting prostitutes under the law. The truth is, most prostitutes don’t want to work as they do. In a study of 475 people in prostitution, 62% reported having been raped in prostitution, and 92% stated that they wanted to escape prostitution immediately. Legalizing it and providing help for these people will give them a better chance to get back on track to a normal lifestyle.

The legalization of prostitution would provide fiscal benefits to the government. Not only would the government save money that it is currently spending on preventing prostitution and punishing those who take part in it, but it would be able to tax prostitutes.

Again, there is no reason not to legalize prostitution. The three reasons above are strong enough to do so immediately: it would prevent the spread of STDs, it would prevent prostitutes from being abused, and it would be of monetary benefit. Health checks and blood tests could be regulated. Prostitutes would be removed from dangerous situations such as roadside hooking and find a safer environment in a brothel. Prostitutes could be taxed for their services. Overall, prostitution is a harmless act of free will – the sale of one’s body for profit. We can only benefit by legalizing it, but keeping it illegal does nothing but make underground communities thrive that much more.
 

Hammerhand

Knight
Illegal if you get caught by a cop. Just plain stupid if your wife or gf is the one that catches you. Personally, I wouldnt shell out good money for sex. Oh wait.. I've been married twice. Guess I HAVE paid for sex after all. :eek:
 

crackrat

Wanderer
ill reply .... I voted yes...It seems to work in other countries and I do see some benefits in the health regulation that would probably accompany such legislation ....would I use the services , no. I'm happily married and even if i wasn't its not really my thing.
 

Joeku

Lord
Thanks for the replies so far.

I've posted what I have of my essay for those of you who may be interested (see first post).

@crackrat: You hit the nail on the head. That is almost exactly my stance on the issue.
 

TMSTKSBK

Lord
I could care less what other people do, but I'd just as soon have something be legal if it can be / isn't something obviously wrong like...murdering your parents or something.
 
I think it would be more advantageous to address the social aspect of prostitution and prohibition in your paper rather than religious. It makes for a more solid argument. Your thesis is too bloated, and you should cut out the history lesson and simply immediately draw on the two parallels between the prohibition of both.

Also, "On January the sixteenth, in the year nineteen hundred and twenty" sounds retarded. Simply write January 16, 1922.
 

Joeku

Lord
TheOutkastDev;727543 said:
I think it would be more advantageous to address the social aspect of prostitution and prohibition in your paper rather than religious. It makes for a more solid argument. Your thesis is too bloated, and you should cut out the history lesson and simply immediately draw on the two parallels between the prohibition of both.
bzk said the same thing over AIM. I guess this is why it's a rough draft haha. Looking at it now, I agree.
Also, "On January the sixteenth, in the year nineteen hundred and twenty" sounds retarded. Simply write January 16, 1922.
I wanted a dramatic attention catcher but... eh. I digress, it is somewhat cheesy :p

Thanks for the input, I appreciate it.
 

bzk90

Lord
profs. don't like it when people try to draw something out to be longer than it should be. Condensation is a must; last year my teacher crossed out 3 pages worth of material because it was "to detailed."
 

PappaSmurf

Knight
I say Legal with Conditions.

I say Legal with the conditions that all Prostitutes work out of established Brothels that are required to provide regular testing for STD's and have to obtain a business license in addition to be registered with the local health board. My reasons for this are that prostitution is going to happen, nothing is going to stop it but having it done in a controlled manner that is profitable for those engaging in such a profession, would make it harder for the immoral prostitutes that know they have diseases to find business.

Think of it this way, if you are going to get a prostitute would you prefer one you know is clean of diseases? or do you want to play Russian Roulette with someone you pick up at the corner outside the local 7-11?

This is a sound way to do this as it's common practice in some countries and I believe it's similar to how it is done in the areas of the US where prostitution is still legal. Turkey is a prime example of such a country where prostitution is legal in state-run brothels.

Here's a site that can give you some reference material on where it is and isn't and how it's set up if you like..."What countries have legal prostitution?"
 
well it IS legal in some states and countries so obviously it can be taxed and controlled like anything else.

Really I suppose it comes down to a moral issue and personal opinions so you will get lots of mixed feelings on it.
 
Joeku;727546 said:
bzk said the same thing over AIM. I guess this is why it's a rough draft haha. Looking at it now, I agree.

I wanted a dramatic attention catcher but... eh. I digress, it is somewhat cheesy :p

Thanks for the input, I appreciate it.

Quotes from famous people serve as good attention getters, as well as thought provoking rhetorical questions.
 

David

Moderate
Joeku;727505 said:
I'm writing an essay, and I just wanted to see peoples' opinions on this.

Rough Draft (paragraphs 2/6)
.... In truth, with the accordance of the separation of church and state, there is ....

Actually there is no requirement calling for a separation of church and state. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." is where that concept comes from.

Just sayin...
 

Ortanith

Wanderer
Kiwi;727575 said:
Yes. Spread of diseases will help population control

Not really, I cannot think of any stds that kill quickly enough for that. I really don't want stds more common then they are. It would be nasty if one of these days they mutate into something that can infect others via other means.

David;727563 said:
Actually there is no requirement calling for a separation of church and state. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." is where that concept comes from.

Just sayin...

When a church and state/country are not seperated usually that church/religion starts to assert laws that lead to total disaster.
The founding fathers were against the union of country and church. People's Weekly World - The Founding Fathers’ views on church and state

TMSTKSBK;727570 said:
This may not be the most impartial forum to ask in. Most of the users are male.

Just remind everyone that it would legalize male prostitution as well.
 
Top