unique perspectives from six people

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Should We Decriminalize Prostitution?

#1 Our Religious Rights End Where the Freedoms of Others Begin

Yes, prostitution should be decriminalized. But that is not enough. It must be well regulated, organized, and taxed.

We have slowly begun to understand that not everyone shares the same moral standards, and that it is not ethical to force our moral standards on someone else simply because it is our moral standard and we believe that it was handed to us by some higher power. Most people believe that their moral standards are approved by or generated by a higher power. Those that don't most likely don't recognize any higher power at all.

Our religious rights end where the freedoms of others begin.

In addition, keeping it criminalized has not eradicated prostitution. It has made it more dangerous, less healthy, and more likely to lead people into other forms of crime. In decriminalizing it, we must go further. We must regulate it - ensure the health of those who would work in that industry. We must organize it - put power in the hands of the labor in the form of unions. We must tax it - there will be costs, and the money to pay those costs should be generated from within the industry as much as possible, seeing as a majority of people (at least in the short term) will not approve of it.

Submitted by Matthew Rohr.

#2 Prostitution Threatens to Cheapen the Experience of Human Sexuality

In a practical sense, moral laws are established so as to discourage actions that would harm the character of individuals or the community.  In particular, prostitution threatens to cheapen the experience of human sexuality by making intercourse more available and more frequent than is common (think economics…”dumping” product on a market decreases the price and the value).  Shared sexuality is a core component of our lives, so it has been historically justifiable to protect it and make it sacred.

Though the U.S. constitution does not, our state and local laws have made human sexuality sacred by reserving it for specific circumstances.  For example, we do not consider it acceptable for people to have public intercourse.  We also encourage young women and men to refrain from having intercourse until reaching the age of consent.  Further, we prohibit intercourse between adults and children, humans and animals and a myriad of other things that we commonly find morally deviant.  In essence, our laws regarding human sexuality represent what is commonly acceptable as being “legal” and oppositely represent what is uncommon as being “criminal” (e.g. “deviant behavior”).  Even though it has never been uncommon in the United States, prostitution has always been commonly unacceptable and is banned in 49 states for this reason.

Interestingly, two consenting adults having sex before marriage was once uncommon and therefore labeled deviant behavior under the law.  Also, two consenting adults having sex with people other than their spouses was once uncommon and considered deviant behavior under the law.  And finally, for a breathe of current air, two consenting adults of the same gender having sex together was once considered uncommon and deviant behavior under the law.  It should be obvious that what is common behavior has the tendency of changing over time. And as a result of changes in behavior over time, deviance from the standard of what is commonly acceptable should not be labeled criminal behavior.  But if we no longer have at least some standards based on our common morality, we should also expect eventually to commonly dissolve sanctity from our shared human sexuality.

Submitted by Jason Buchanan.

#3 The Constitution of the United States Protects the Right of the Individual to Make Horrible Personal Decisions

We live in a nation defined by a constitution which was written to ensure each individual the freedom to make their own decisions. And that freedom should be impeded only when it damages the rights of others to make their own decisions. And no matter how strongly I feel about the profession of prostitution, I believe that the constitution of the United States protects the right of the individual to make horrible personal decisions.

I think it is very important that those of us who so strongly believe in the importance of American freedom of religion, remember that freedom is for everyone. We do not have the right to legislate the interactions of two consenting adults, based on our religious beliefs, no matter how firmly held.

Aside from religious reasons, the only reason I can think of for a law against prostitution is the hope of protecting men or women from being victimized or trapped in a life of sexual abuse by strangers. And I simply cannot see how making a person a criminal for being a participant in a less than optimal way of life, benefits anyone, least of all the prostitute. It is a policy that is counterproductive to allowing these people to find a way out.

Submitted by Beth Rogers.

#4 Seems Like a Win-Win

The only real victims of prostitution as it stands are the women themselves. The world's oldest profession lends itself to violence, degradation and abuse. But let's just say for a moment that it didn't have to. Let's say that it was legalized. Let's go a step further. Say it was even taxed by the government. If there were houses run by madams, where the women were tested and received regular medical care and kept safe, this would solve a myriad of problems. It would get the women off the streets, prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, reduce the violence and abuse that is rampant among this type of profession, all the while making money for the government. Seems like a win-win. 


Submitted by Lauri Lennox.

#5 Last Time I Checked The McGriddle Was Still Legal

Absolutely. The only two things being accomplished by the criminalization of prostitution is, 1) further driving a sinister black market for the exploitation of women and girls, and 2) further victimizing these women and girls at the hands of the criminal justice system. I've represented COUNTLESS women (and men) who have been charged with prostitution or its offspring (e.g., "failure to register" as a sex offender and "crime against nature"). Guess how many men I've represented for patronizing these individuals? NONE. If we as a society have decided we morally want this to be a behavior subject to criminal penalties, then why is this the case? 

There is a serious double standard being used to persecute women and girls who have most often already been subjected to circumstances in their lives which would horrify us. And for what? Some puritanical notion that prostitution is a sin? Well, so is gluttony, but last time I checked the McGriddle was still legal. So is greed, but Wall Street's still too big to fail. At least in the case of prostitution, if it were legalized we'd stop perpetuating an often insurmountable barrier to the "perpetrators" being able to become productive, non-puritanical belief system-offending citizens. For instance, I'd often see rap sheets three pages long or more that had "prostitution" or some derivative of it listed as the first charge followed by, "failure to register: no address provided," "failure to register: failure to pay registration fees," "failure to register: no notices sent," etc., and then low and behold, another conviction for "prostitution" would pop up... Some of these "failure to register" charges are felonies, mind you, so guess who can't get a job? Guess who can't find housing because no one wants to rent to a felon? Guess who can't register or send notices because they don't have a home much less the ability to pay any registration fees? And hmmm, if you were a woman in this position who society had already tagged with a scarlet letter anyway with little to no means of raising yourself out of these circumstances, what might be one way to feed yourself or put a roof over your head for a day or so? 

The criminalization of prostitution is doing absolutely NOTHING but hurting any chance these women and girls have to getting out of this vicious cycle. Luckily, states have been taking prostitution out of the lists of crimes for which one has to register as a sex offender (a designation originally designed to identify sexual predators but expanded by religious zealots to include every possible sex-related offense under the sun), and some have even forgone prosecution of prostitutes as felons. However, more needs to be done to decriminalize something that is inherently should not be criminal in the first place. I could talk all day about how not every moral tenet needs to be turned into a criminal statute, but that's for another post. However, in particular to prostitution, it is especially harmful to target the women and girls who engage in it and not take a good hard look at whether doing so actually solves any society ills.

Further, I firmly believe that if some version of prostitution were legal, there would be more of an outlet for people's sexual desires who wanted to engage in such behavior and perhaps, less of a black market for exploiting young girls by the way of human trafficking or other predatory behavior. As a judge once told a peeping tom client of mine while he was admonishing him during sentencing, "listen, if you need to do that, I can tell you where to go." He was referencing a strip club down the street from the courthouse. In a roundabout way, my sentiments exactly.

The simple truth is that the criminalization of prostitution hurts women and young girls, and it is not the answer to the problem, even if you are of the persuasion that prostitution is a sin. For more about how damaging the criminalization of prostitution is for especially young girls, how our criminal justice system is failing them, and how this topic intersects with the issue of human trafficking, see:

http://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/1028191/should-child-sex-trafficking-victims-go-to-jail-for-prostitution

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-raphael/legalize-prostitution_1_b_4251956.html


Submitted by Amanda Love, Esq.

#6 Prostitution Will Not Go Away

While I try not to adhere myself to political labels, I’d have to admit up front that I typically land more within the Libertarian camp than anything else. This position is not due to any particular party loyalty, I simply believe that all things being equal, grown adults should and can be responsible for themselves.

There are no easy answers to such horrors as the sex slave trade, poverty, public health issues and the other types of criminal activity that go along with the sex industry in general. However, I believe wholeheartedly that a decriminalization of prostitution would be a step in the right direction.

Taking the world's oldest profession out of the back alleys and into government regulated, taxed and protected arenas would, in my opinion, make considerable improvements in an industry that refuses to be abolished no matter what steps are taken to prohibit such activities.  The current criminalization of prostitution is a key component in the victimization of the women and men who choose that profession. For those inside it who haven’t chosen it, but instead have been sold into the industry, the darkness under which they must stay hidden provides the very cloak of oppression that keeps them in such a horrific situation. Decriminalizing prostitution would help to bring those dark places into the light of public and governmental accountability and regulation.

Governmental regulation would also mean that, like the porn industry, regular testing and governmental oversight would help protect public health much more than the aforementioned cloak of darkness. It also means a potential tax on a multi-billion dollar industry, providing tax dollars that could help educate those in the profession, assist those in need who may be choosing it out of a multi-faceted poverty structure, and also help stop sex slave trades. 

In short, prostitution will not go away. We can either continue to fight it in our current strategy and continue to lose, or work with it to minimize the casualties. If the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expect different results, then the continued criminalization of prostitution is, indeed, insane. I believe decriminalizing it would be a much better step in the direction of solving the base issues that both feed into the industry and arise out of it. 

Submitted by Shae Cotter.

19 comments:

  1. So we're all agreed then? I would enjoy hearing from someone who thinks that keeping the crime of prostitution in the books is a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So Jason, "Though the U.S. constitution does not, our state and local laws have made human sexuality sacred by reserving it for specific circumstances."

    So where is the law that would allow the prosecution of Miley Cyrus for her VMA performance? Simply put, there isn't one. And that's for a reason... The state has no broad, overreaching obligation or impetus to legislate "human sexuality's sacredness," (the First Amendment prevents that pretty clearly), and if it wanted to do so, there are a hell of a lot better ways than to criminalize prostitution (starting, for instance, not with criminal sanctions but with greater regulation of what is peddled to children by media companies as "hip" and "cool").

    No matter how well-intentioned, I think your view is one hop, skip, and jump away from the theocracy slippery-slope...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding Miley, I agree that there is no universal law banning her blatant and crude sexuality from being shared with the world though the FCC is probably interested in the indecency. Who knows? :)

      My point was state and local laws regarding marriage and sex made sexuality sacred. Just like we make life sacred by setting speed limits and banning murder among other threats to life. I'm not using "sacred" in a churchy way, but in a way to recognize that sex is important to us all...

      Delete
  3. I also think it's dangerous to equate "uncommon", "deviant" and "criminal" as if they are or should be the same things. For example, it is uncommon to be vegan, it deviates from societal norms, but I doubt we would feel comfortable saying it is "deviant" and therefore should be "criminal." There are a myriad of decisions people make that the vast majority of people don't do that only affect themselves for the most part; the second we start labeling and then state-sanctioning these behaviors as "deviant" and therefore "criminal" we're stepping into dangerous territory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very much agree with you. In my last paragraph I stated that because what is "common" changes over time we should not legislate based on what is commonly acceptable. But that the consequence of not doing so would be the sacrifice of sex's sanctity. I'm quoting myself here:

      "deviance from the standard of what is commonly acceptable should not be labeled criminal behavior"

      Also, I admit that I used the words "common" vs "uncommon", "deviance" and "criminal" too fluidly. If I had more time, I probably would have chosen more wisely my adjectives...and made clear my definitions for each word.

      Nonetheless, I would say that it is important to agree upon common standards of decency at a local/community level - even if it isn't something we should legislate. If not, these important principles may lose their value in the future. And where we cannot agree (regarding public intercourse, for instance), then we probably shouldn't partake in community with each other... I think we all agree on these things - even though don't think they should be labeled as crimes.

      Delete
    2. Jason, before i disagree with you too vehemently, maybe you should define community.

      Delete
    3. Beth, let's use "neighborhood" for the purpose of this separate discussion.

      And to illustrate my point, I'll offer this example. If we, collectively as neighbors, cannot agree on the type of sexual behaviors that should occur in our neighborhood, then we shouldn't attempt to live as neighbors. To me that means if you don't agree with prostitution (on moral grounds), then you shouldn't live in a neighborhood that allows it to occur. I do not want to live in a neighborhood where prostitutes make street-corner solicitations. So if such behavior were to occur in my neighborhood, I’d take action against it or move to another neighborhood. Very much Social Contract Theory. Obviously, certain activities are private so I have no business trying to establish moral consensus there. But still, if in my neighborhood some crazy moral standard is being applied against my private activity, then I know its time to move. As a nation, I believe we have advanced in our religious freedoms to such a point where I have options regarding these things.

      Nude beaches are another good example. If you don’t agree with this type of behavior, then just don’t go to the nude beach.

      Now that I've defined “community” and given example, please feel free to disagree with me vehemently. :)

      Delete
    4. Jason, i think that legalizing prostitution, and legalizing prostitution in the street, are two very different issues. I can still get behind a law against public lewdness for the protection of everyone else's eyes and innocence. But for the most part, the examples you mentioned are separate and can be solved with local zoning laws.

      Delete
    5. I assume the direction this is headed is that all laws must be based on factually proven harm - or where there is an identifiable victim. And that all laws attempting to regulate personal behavior where there is no victim (other than self) should be axed?

      Delete
    6. And protecting everyone's eyes and innocence is often based on commonly held moral standards. My position here is that communities need to be able to establish informal moral standards for these things that don't translate into offenses punishable by law. And if someone doesn't like those standards, then so be it. We can disagree on morality without disagreeing on the law...

      We have the tendency of thinking so individually...but the community is an increasingly important component of our personal development and growth process. I contend that removing personal behavioral standards imposed by the community would, in fact, result in greater harm than we intend.

      Personal, moral freedoms are available to us now because we know restraint and exercise prudence. But we learned those qualities by having moral behaviors forced upon us by others (our parents, family and friends). Though it may not work on the national level, I think we benefit too much from community moral standards to remove them from our conversation altogether.

      On the alternative, what would happen if we removed morality from our communities and from the process of child-rearing?

      Delete
  4. I really feel that it was a mistake of our government to make sex or marriage or the governance thereof within its purview at all. That would have been an appropriate separation of church and state.
    Side note, as soon as i saw the reference to food, i knew it was you, Amanda Esq. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ha ha, pretty funny. Why do I love food so much?! Maybe food is a metaphor for life!

    I agree with you that sex and marriage being regulated by the state is not appropriate. It's really just a relic of having to make sure land and wealth stayed within families, were taxed appropriately, etc. I think at this point, we could probably do away with it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I've heard you use food before as a comparison to other issues. Can't remember exactly what.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it was on the topic, "Why Do We Smoke?". I regret changing comment-systems back in the day...all those old comments are gone now.

      http://sixperspectives.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-do-we-smoke.html

      Delete
  7. Yep. That's the one. Put down that drumstick! :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow. I was encouraged recently to re-engage this blog/board. What's the point?

    This is blog full of like minded Conservative/Libertarians that jack off to porn or better, yet, fuck ho's when they can get away with it.

    Why reply to you? Your answers are either in the bible or between you idiots in a cluster fuck of ideology/policy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reply or don't reply. Nonetheless, I think we may all benefit from the conversation. Maybe not though, because some people are already so wise there is no need for continued learning. Still, we can only hope those who are wise will disrupt our idiotic, like-mindedness and try to enlighten us with rare wisdom.

      I think its interesting that so many ideologically different perspectives have such unified outlooks on these recent topics. Obviously, I would prefer more opposing perspectives, but it just hasn't happened yet. Maybe the topics aren't polarizing enough...

      And here’s one such topic I might try out soon - “Why do we assume the worst of those with whom we disagree?” Maybe it will generate deeper conversation…or it will just offend those who can’t engage in civil conversation.

      Delete
  9. Corny white guys crying and reminiscing about how good it was when White Men (not women) had *all* the power.

    This is sad.

    This is the 21st Century, man. You are Legacies of Dinosaurs. OOPS!!! I forgot. You don't believe in them because the Earth is, what, 6 or maybe 7 thousand years old?

    Honestly? You look in the mirror and believe that?

    Damn. I. What is the point of posting my Liberal point of view?

    I know. This is America. Free speech. You feel like Satan is picking on you.

    Have at it, Crazy.

    America is far from perfect....but I prefer it to the America of 180 years ago....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am9BqZ6eA5chttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am9BqZ6eA5c

    Let's talk about the similarities between prostitution and slavery.

    Shall we?

    Are there any?

    Are there any distinctions?

    Women selling their bodies for money vs Human slavery.

    Let's talk about that, man!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How odd, I think this comment was intended for another blog…one where the people ignorantly hold to antiquated religious beliefs and try to force their ideologies on everyone else. Or maybe it was intended for a blog where the writers are actually all white men “crying and reminiscing…”. Better yet, maybe this comment was meant for religious literalists who truly think the Earth is young.

      Khalil, this last response reflects poorly on your tendency to make incorrect assumptions about other people. Still, you are welcome to rant on…unless you feel like “Satan is picking on you”.

      In the end, you made a statement about the similarities between prostitution and slavery. An interesting point. I would have liked it if you actually stated your opinion afterward. Or would you just prefer that we talk about it so you can safely tell us how idiotic we are?

      (FYI, the YouTube link didn't work...)

      Delete