We can debate the relative morality of prostitution until the cows come home. Illegal does not necessarily equal Wrong.

There is a term "Equal Justice Under The Law" - perhaps you've heard of it?

Mr. Spitzer, sworn to uphold the law, broke it. Mr. Clinton, having taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, lied under oath.

In both cases, regardless of the reason for it, they lied and violated laws, rendering their word worthless when it comes to any future oaths they might ever take. It's called dishonesty.

Spitzer is a hypocrite whose form of crusading justice has resulted in the incarceration of many people who probably felt that they were really doing nothing "wrong" when they broke the laws that resulted in their arrest and prosecution.

Messers. Bush and Cheney probably thought they were doing nothing wrong when they compelled the telcos to wiretap without a warrant.

If you don't like the a law, our form of government allows you to publicly petition or lobby to have it changed. There is also an American tradition of civil disobedience, where you publicly and explicitly break a law in order to emphasize its injustice.

Once people in power decide arbitrarily which laws to obey and which to ignore, and do so surreptitiously, we are faced with a situation whereby there is no real respect for law by the people sworn to uphold it.

When you are empowered with enforcing and representing the word of law, you cannot choose to violate those same laws with impunity and expect to be taken seriously by intelligent people.

We don't live in a perfect world, and politicians lie and break the law every day.

However, if we are to continue to move towards the ideals established by our founding fathers, the law cannot tolerate dishonesty on the part of those people empowered to create and enforce it.

A lawyer is merely a politician in larval form...

Prostitutes are sexually/physically assaulted in the course of their work on average of once a month.

But, in GG world, being raped or beaten once a month does not traumatize you or cause any problems in your life.

According to the literature that GG touts, even "high class" prostitutes are never safe from violence. Not to mention, many men hire women to intentionally degrade them because that is their particular kink. The prostitutes must service these clients as well as others.

Wives get beaten up as often? Not even close.

I find particularly amusing the argument that Glenn's position is purely "liberal," as if the only opponents of prostitution are conservative, and as if the liberal community does not have factions that ardently oppose prostitution and pornography. And these assumptions that Glenn is staking out this position only because Spitzer is a Democrat are particularly amusing.

Precisley. The standard American Libertarian Party platform position is completely legal and totlly unregulated.

And your Socratic method was quite good, or was that an examination technique?

As I'm sure you're aware, there's a vast literature on whether the state has a right to punish so-called victimless crimes solely on the basis of morality (for starters, look up the "Hart-Devlin debate"), and most of it, I'll admit, sides with you. Of course, there are all kinds of non-moralizing reasons to ban prostitution - it's exploitative, often leads to violence, contributes to the slave trade, etc. But putting that all aside, I would point out that, on your logic (anything consensual between adults goes), the state couldn't ban sex between brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters (if they're of age), people and dead animals (it actually happens sometimes*), or people and corpses. Not to mention statutory rape laws, which some would argue are silly because you don't really have to be 18 to give meaningful consent. The argument that I would give for regulating stuff like this is that "victimless crimes" is a misnomer. Just because someone does something voluntarily doesn't mean that they're not harming themselves. Bestiality, to take an extreme example, is patently debasing and dehumanizing. Selling your body is as well. All of these activites can result in profound psychological harm. If we can illegalize suicide, illegalize using drugs that are bad for your health or mind, I'm not sure why we can't ban unhealthy sexual practices that might scar a person for life.

*http://volokh.com/posts/1203542780.shtml

Prostitution, even the "high class" type Mr. Spitzer appears to have solicited, ultimately feeds the demand for human trafficking, which is hardly a victimless crime.

Making prostitution illegal has certainly worked to almost completely eliminate the practice, eh?

It has also greatly improved the working conditions for prostitutes and put the pimps out of the picture, has it not?

Going by your logic making alcohol illegal will eliminate drunk driving..

Ever wonder why the twenty first amendment follows the nineteenth by a mere thirteen years? An incredibly short time for such a dramatic reversal in public opinion.

I doubt it, that would require actual thought.

I can't believe people still make a big deal out of prostitution. OK, if the prostitute is being forced or something, it's bad. But the idea that somehow an adult is not free to do with his/her own body whatever he/she wants is just...bizarre. Especially when those railing against it are also in favor of free choice in matters such as birth control and abortion. So it's not okay for the government to tell me I can't have an abortion, but it is okay for the government to tell me I can't have sex for money? How does that add up, exactly?

It makes no sense to me, and it never has. People should be free to do as they please, so long as no one is getting hurt. Myself, I think the sex trade should be regulated in the same way any other industry is, no more, no less. Fair and decent working conditions, with rules and benefits just like any other job. Remove the stigma and let's get on with more important things!

(I also agree about Spitzer and others like him being a hypocrite. If you're going to bust people under these ridiculous laws, you shouldn't be flouting them under cover of authority. That's definitely not on.)