If proposition K on the San Francisco ballot passes, prostitution would not be legalized, but police would be forbidden from arresting prostitutes, saving the city $11 million that it currently spends annually.
For as long as I can remember, I've wondered why prostitution is illegal - it's really a victimless crime. As a matter of fact, it seems to me that it would be safer if it were legal. If brothels were licensed, employees could be tested for drugs and disease regularly, making it safer for everyone. Revenue could be verified by the government and taxes could be collected. Women, many of whom I presume are less fortunate, would be able to verify their income and get loans for cars or homes. It really seems to me that making it illegal creates more problems than it solves.
Even St. Thomas Aquinas spoke out in opposition of legislating against prostitution, describing it as a necessary evil and drawing parallels with prohibition of alcohol. He saw legislating morality in general to be ineffective and said that civil law cannot "forbid all vicious acts" nor can it prescribe "all acts of virtue." Aquinas goes so far as to say that God permits evil to exist and in a similar way human law permits some evil to exist in light of the common good.
My problem with prop K, however, is that it would not go with a regulated brothel system. It will lead to more street walkers, which will more than likely spread disease, violence (from pimps), and drug abuse. I assume that this is merely a first step in legalizing it, but it may backfire in it's current format. I'll be interested to see the result of this proposition, and if it passes, what effect it will have on the city. And if successful, if we will see it spread across the country like the proliferation of casinos in recent years.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
My guess is that if they can't harass prostitues, they'll go after the pimps........
There are a laughable number of reasons that prostitution should not be illegal. And even more hypocrisies among its most fervent opposition. I could go on, but I’ll list my three favorite below.
Why is it illegal for women to charge money for something they’re more then welcome to give away for free. (Sounds like a law a man made to keep from having to pay for sex.)
Why is it legal to pay for sex with houses and financing women’s child rearing addictions, but not to more directly/honestly pay for sex with a specific dollar amount? (Sounds like a rule women as a collective make to keep the price of sex more then free market economy would dictate.)
How can women’s organizations fight for a woman’s right to have abortions because it’s “my body,” but be against prostitution? Who the hell’s body is it at that point? Are you really saying some women shouldn’t be allowed to do what they want with their bodies because their decisions are different then yours? Or is it that some women shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy what they do, or make money doing what they enjoy? If anyone is getting taken advantage of in this situation it’s men; look at how advertising all uses sex to sell. And we are suckers for it (see again financing women’s child rearing addictions.) Besides, how sexist and demeaning is it to women to say they are equal, except they are powerless against men when it comes to making decisions about sex. :P
And don’t even get me started on drugs being illegal. If the government stopped fighting the war against drugs (heh, you want to talk about an endless war with no exit strategy) and instead made them legal and ran the racket like they do with alcohol, we’d make enough money to pay for socialized healthcare (not that I believe in that) and then some. It would also take away the huge moneymaker for all the drug lords and lowlifes that have all the illegal firearms and use them regularly in the streets.
This country is supposedly based on protecting people’s freedom; not imposing one’s morality on others, socially, politically, environmentally, or economically. In a free society, there’s no such thing as doing what’s best for someone else, only letting them do what they think is best for them.
Hmm. Perhaps I offered a bit more then your comment section was looking for. Sorry.
Post a Comment