But of course. What? You think my wife drives 1.25 hrs to work and 1.25 hrs back and spends 8 hrs there because she cares about the patients? If so, take away the paycheck and see if she does it. Probably not. You think I work because I like to work?

No.

Of course I agree with that.

I've also been trying to make the point that the illegal status of prostitution in most countries is the biggest CAUSE of the problems you're talking about.

If it were legalized, regulated, licensed, etc... then the profession would come out of the shadows for the most part, and make such extreme cases of exploitation much less frequent.

Mike

It always cracks me up when I see this from Libertarians...it's so inconsistent, one needs to investigate whey the "legalize, regulate, license" option is offered up. Same applies to the drug legalization argument.

No offense intended, Mike - I lean your way more often than not, but come on...a true Libertarian stance on either prostitution or drugs, would be complete lack of regulation. For what possible reason should the government be allowed to step into a private party transaction?

To put it in the same terms you offered up here earlier...transferring funds between two consenting people requires no regulation/licensing, nor does consensual sex. Why does the combination of the two suddenly require such government oversight?

Income Tax??

Same reason that cigarettes, alcohol, etc. are regulated. To insure that everyone involved is of legal age, etc.... I support the same type of legalization and "regulation" for drugs.

Also, considering the profession we're talking about, it would be nice to have regular testing for STDs, etc., eh?....

Come on, this is all common sense stuff, is it not?...

Mike

Marriage for anything but love. The devil is in the details

Surprisingly I find that here is a topic that I totally agree with Mikemover on. The illegal status does cause a host of the problems.

It is of course still nothing that I would want to do myself (use one) nor anything I would want for any of my daughters.

Tom W

Interesting point, now that I see it. It took a while!

This may sound lame but in my lengthy description of why humans marry (somewhere earlier-on), I was looking for objective points that separate marriage from prostitution. When I say objective, I mean a fact or process that an outside observer would notice. Raw emotions could be observed but I think determining whether folks are in love while they are copulating might be a tad difficult. So I focused on one aspect of marriage that is involved in an important socio-biological relationship and is also at the heart of an awful lot of conflict and murder -- monogamy.

Not to say that prostitution doesn't also involve the occasional murder or some other horrid depravity. As a proportion of the population I would guess that there is far more violent crime on and by prostitutes than married couples.

------------------------------------

Did anybody else catch that CNN hero of the week thingy in which an American woman was trying to help women leave prostitution? She was forced into prostitution at the age of 14 and hooked for a number of years under the control of her pimp. She opined that process and circumstance was very common.

B

If you are marrying for money, position, etc, etc, how is it different from prostitution? Sure, you may say that it keeps them monogamous but other than that, isn't it the same thing?

Sorry, I changed my comment after you answered this one. That was unintentional.

Aside from the emotional differences that I mentioned above, I think monogamy is a pretty darned big difference, don't you? Monogamy is huge commitment for men especially since we are biologically wired for multiple partners--something most women simply cannot seem to grasp, just as most men don't understand why women are all hung-up on the commitment thingie. We have different wiring and it makes it difficult for us to understand each other.

Does this mean that all men MUST always flit about like little butterflies -- searching for new partners -- and all women MUST be social boat anchors all of their lives? Of course not! A tendency is not a rule. Part of our humanity is that we have the ability to choose to follow a course counter to our biological impulses.

B

Don't be so sure! I've never studied any such figures... but I'd bet the difference is much smaller than you think it is....

Mike

I should open a Rub And Tug!

I see...so somewhow, adding regulation and licensing into the mix, will add more teeth to the existing laws we have concerning sex with minors? Or will somehow magically prevent it?

Now we're getting to the heart of the matter...your concern for the health of society, is a determining factor.

And, while many might applaud this concern, what you are advocating is Government health care intervention. For prostitutes.

Yeah, that'll fly...no politician would be afraid of that.

"My opponent has more concerns for the health of prostitutes, than the ...*gasp*...children!"

Concerning most matters, I'm about as Libertarian as it gets....

But I'm also aware of the reality that a certain MINIMUM amount of government regulation will unfortunately always be needed in certain aspects of our society.

I support a MINIMAL, EFFICIENT government, I've never advocated having NO government. Human nature simply will not allow such a utopia.

I also never said anything about providing healthcare... I just said testing and licensing. Much like a driver's license: You want a drivers license, you have to take the test, and pay for it. Want to be a prostitute? Take the test, and pay for the permit.

You're obviously trying to make this way more complicated than it is.

Mike