What is the difference, besides cameras? In either case, it's someone getting paid to have sex with another person. SEN, I'd like to hear why you think one is illegal to men while the other is celebrated among all most men.

Picking some slut off of the street can get you life-threatening STDs. Watching other people have sex won't kill you.

It's politically expedient to tolerate pornographic production while banning prostitution.

Next time you talk about prostitution, just try not to let others think there are only women.
Same goes for supposing that there are only men watching porn.
(I do understand you haven't stated neither of these, though you should really consider changing the way you talk about this kind of issue.)

Feminism ftw.

I'm pretty sure mainly because in legit porn everything is being monitored and it's in a controlled environment. Prostitution can get you killed guis!

In civilised countries, prostitution is legal.

Also, legalisation is what makes it safe. Because it is legal, the government can then enforce health & saftey and employment standards on everyone operating in the industry, such as enforcing condom usage etc. It's safer for the clients and the workers. Because it's legal the government can also tax it much more easily. Really there's no reason not to legalise it, except your narrow-minded puritanical society has some bizarre 18th century hang-up about sex.

It's the same reason that drugs, euthanasia and abortion should all be fully legal, because they're going to happen anyway so the government might as well put controls in place, as well as profit from the activity (maybe not so much profit in euthanasia).

What did the U.S. do to you? Censor your porn site?

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 29 2010, 1:35 am by Vrael.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_tax_in_the_United_States

Also reduced maintenance costs and healthcare expenditure etc.

Again, I stress this point:
Propose to ban prostitution and no one will object. Try messing with the sex media industry and a horde of disgruntled men will show up in front of your house with torches and pitchforks. Our government does many stupid things (minimum wage laws that create unemployment, agricultural subsidies that literally involve paying farmers to burn their cotton, rent control that eventually leaves people homeless, etc.) because proposing said policies garners votes from the interest groups that benefit. In the case of the sex industry, the "interest group" that benefits from banning prostitution is effectively the entire female population, which generates high incentive to push for legislation that will illegalize the sex trade, since it benefits the politician at little to no cost to himself.

There's the rule that bleeds between the lines... Prostitution leads to many stds.

Thus they are bad and to have sex with people other then your wife (if its agreed upon by both parties of course) while married isn't... If prostitution was legal then we could control the flow sex and deny std victims.

If it was controlled and monitored then it would be legal but even if they do then it would kill woman's 100 year struggle for rights (men too ?) and the fact that there's always going to be a loophole with something this lucrative.

Luv that word... sounds like something I'll use to spruce up a pink velvet

Sorry, what? Making it legal for women to enter prostitution, IF THEY CHOOSE, and giving them legal protection while in that industry, is somehow "killing" women's rights? Don't really see the logic there...

Radical Feminists argue that prostitution contributes to "objectification" of women, since they are literally selling themselves for income in a manner much akin to the way one might sell merchandise. Ethically, I see how it might be objectionable, but that is not a sufficient reason to prevent people from voluntarily entering the sex trade industry.

True. Really saying "we have decided that you do not have the right to sell your body like that" is limiting women's rights much more, so it's a bit hypocritical. Chicken and the egg problem - prostitution exists because there is a market for it, but we think that it shouldn't exist because it's immoral; in the meantime there's no reason to stop supplying the market that exists. But as long as you supply the market, you're the biggest factor in the market continueing to exist...

A lot of women Pre 1900 were not actually people who wanted to voluntarily be a prostitute so this is why i assume is a point they argue with.

I don't really know much, but we might be in the post-1900 era...

Because in real life, prostitutes are ugly.

It's either controlled by the government, or controlled by the mob. Your choice.

Quote from Fisty

It's either controlled by the government, or controlled by the mob. Your choice.

The mob is more trustworthy, imo.

I'd take the ideological stance. Just because if we don't endorse it someone else will shouldn't be an argument for endorsing it.

Might as well make the same argument for burglary: Either controlled by the government, or controlled by the mob.

Quote from Centreri

Might as well make the same argument for burglary: Either controlled by the government, or controlled by the mob.

Quote from poison_us

The mob is more trustworthy, imo.

We at least know what a mob will do, with 99.99% accuracy.

...What? That isn't the same thing at all...