I'd hit it. She's making a good points but I don't think she'll find a sympathetic audience outside of gummint busybodies and religious crusaders (wait, that's all one needs).

I tend to think the pr0n people would fight against legal prostitution.

>> ^burdturgler:
I am actually on your side when it comes to legalizing prostitution, in fact I'm the one who brought it up in the thread .. but you have to turn it into something stupid like kids should be exposed to it.


I'll ignore the ad hominem attacks and just go right into what's important. If you go back and reread my comment, you'll see no instance where I said children "should be exposed" to prostitution. The issue is you're trying to expunge the world around you of anything you find objectionable for your kid, and that's a very popular yet dangerous attitude.

You're essentially saying you feel it's okay to police people's behavior. Think about that. Then think about same sex marriage bans and the war on drugs and any number of other violent affronts on people's personal and civil liberties throughout the course of human civilization. You are no different than those who didn't want 'colored people' going to the same schools as their pure, snow white, impressionable children.

It's a scary notion to have people like you and that cameraman feeling justified in dictating the morals we should abide by or else face violence. And all of this done for the sake of whatever fear-driven hyperbole they parade as a victim at that moment: children, family, homeland security, sanctity of marriage, etc.

Just look at the language of disdain you use when referring to prostitutes, burdy. Things like "slut" and "fat skank" are terms that show bigoted hatred, in my opinion.

I considered reasonably responding to you. I wanted to because I like you. But you have LOST YOUR FUCKING MIND blankfist.

"you should consider never letting your child out of the house, because there are a lot of horny people and Burger Kings in the world."

You must be stoned.

You're such an asshole sometimes man. I am actually on your side when it comes to legalizing prostitution, in fact I'm the one who brought it up in the thread .. but you have to turn it into something stupid like kids should be exposed to it.

sometimes I think you're like a choggie wannabe

maybe that's why you ban him all the time

i read those arguments. they are compelling. i think the problem is that you cant legalize prostitution without having the paradigm shift. attitudes must change for their to be a market for cruelty free prostitution. this means we have to have the discussion that women own their bodies and feminine sexuality lives in the minds and bodies of women, not a patriarchal cultural construct. it seems like in the case of trafficking into the netherlands it only attracted perverts and predators to the netherlands because then they could exploit girls legally. exploitation has to be taken out of sexual desire. this probably ties in alot with the overwhelming misogyny we're sold through marketing. also, what kind of men frequent brothels? its a thorny subject.

prostitution needs to be legalized. When it is monitored, indoors, and not on the streets, the safety of women goes up, STIs go down (actually in countries where prostitution is legal, prostitutes spread the LEAST amount of STI's because they have mandatory check ups once a month, while demographics such as teens spread the most), and pimps are eliminated. How many times has a prostitute been beaten and abused, and she cant even go to the police! How many times are they murdered and no one cares? Still people. A woman's body is her own, let her decide what to do with it. The oldest profession in the world..and all you Christians, dont even bother saying its against you religion because guess what... THE CATHOLIC CHURCH used to own brothels in Europe and cash in on them!!!!

I like his answer, and you'll feel more comfortable with it if you consider his idea of government.

Ron Paul's views on religion or evolution aren't relevant because as President he would follow the Constitution and not any set of scientific paradigms. It doesn't matter whether he accepts the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, or evolution, or general relativity.

The whole libertarian platform defends that the federal government should let people govern their own lives because it recognizes that politicians and bureaucrats aren't experts in most subjects, and are thus unqualified to make expert decisions. The federal government can't adequately regulate education, healthcare or scientific research on a nationwide level, and should delegate this responsability to local governments.

Limited government is designed to prevent prejudices or special interests from interfering with our lives. This applies to beliefs regarding evolution, or religious beliefs. If you watch the Candidates@Google interview you'll see that Ron Paul defends legalizing prostitution and drugs. He doesn't approve of them, but he thinks it's not the federal government's responsibility to interfere, and that these decisions should be made locally (if that).

Its all yers mate, a better man than I shall now steer us all closer to oblivion......way to pimp that bitchassa yers , from the land of legalized prostitution to the Videosift, in a few short weeks, like Charles freekin Atlas on the back of a comic book at a newsstand where you shouldn't be hangin' out.
Booooyah!