I think prostitution and drug use are very bad choices, so I do not engage in or advocate them.

Sigh..

I have to ask.. Do you perchance consume alcoholic beverages?

How about foods/beverages with caffeine?

Caffeine is in a tremendous number of food items these days and it chemically quite similar to cocaine and more addictive than cannabis or LSD.

Try crushing up some No-Doz and snorting it, you'll get a surprisingly strong rush.

http://www.caffeinedependence.org/caffeine_dependence.html

Unless we are talking about suicide, the entire purpose of a weapon is for it to be used against another person, against his or her will.

We haven't killed all the animals yet:)

They legalized it in the Netherlands. It did not lead to any improvement. Quite the contrary; many pre-existing problems worsened.

Everyone should read 10 Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution, which is larded with illustrations from the Netherlands.

Sorry, forgot the link:

http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/issues/prostitution_legalizing.html

However, the drive for some sort of personal power and self-esteem endures in almost all living humans, however distorted it may be.

I agree, but I also see that outlawing prostitution does NOTHING to prevent child abuse and does not to help young sexually abused women and men. Absolutely nothing.

It just places the prostitutes even more in danger and forces them to work in the shadows if they do make the "choice".

BTW, I have known someone who was a prostitute and a few women and men that were dangerously promiscuous. Some of them I think (guess) might have been abused, seem to have the red flags, the others, not so much. The prostitute I knew was a shyster, a scammer, I have no idea what her "backstory" was, only found out what she was after the fact. She waited tables with me while I was in college and was very attractive.

you've written the most intelligent thing I've read all night.

Even though I have military training I personally don't own any firearms, I don't feel the need for them and it is my opinion that they generally make one less safe rather than more for several reasons which I will go into if anyone is interested.

A very old friend of mine is a world class machinist, he has made his own .50 caliber sniper rifle, machined from stainless billet and burl walnut. It is a beautiful work of art.

There is really no purpose to a sniper rifle other than the killing at extreme range of human beings. And yet, I feel no need to tell my friend that he may not have the sniper rifle even though I think he is a complete wack job (over the hill and around the bend fundie Christian now, we stick strictly to technical subjects and family matters when we talk nowadays).

I must admit that I had not given this a lot of thought until today. However, has anyone noticed the shell game that goes on here? Proponents of criminalization always point to the "damage" done to the prostitutes. We are basically told how they are the victims. However, the criminal laws do not treat prostitutes as victims instead they are treated as perpetrators. To be a perpetrator of a crime one must willingly engage in the crime. So if they are willingly engaging in the crime how are they victims. The proponents of the law present us prostitutes as hapless victims and then the law assumes that prostitutes make a free choice to break the law. See what I mean by shell game.

Apparently I have to type this slowly for you. I can't imagine other VALID purposes for a government (and neither can you).

Words have meaning, a republic does not mean the same as a democracy, no matter how much it'd be convenient for you.

Republics can HAVE democracies, but aren't necessarily democracies, as you imply.

Republic is not an antiquated term, it's a term you don't understand the need for.

The purpose of laws SHOULD be personal freedom, including the freedom to disagree with reeceo. You have the right to your opinions, indefensible as they are, but you don't have an objective right to making them into law.

--Ron

<<@lemecdutex

Ugh, not this crap again. Do you really still think you can get some mileage out of the meaningless It's-a-republic-not-a-democracy line?

Real quick, Ron: republics are democracies. You're making a distinction without a difference. The fact that there are constitutional limitations on a democracy doesn't mean that it's not a democracy. The fact that we elect people rather than voting on provisions doesn't mean it's not a democracy. "Democracy" is a broader term than includes the antiquated term "republic."

Furthermore, contemporary use of the term "democracy" implies constitutional limitations. That is because the term "democracy" is now short for "liberal democracy." Liberal democracies are composed of limited governments that have respect for individual rights.

So, please, please don't accuse me of not adhering to definitions when you choose to use out of date concepts.

I'm sorry you can't imagine other uses for a government. The rest of us can.>>

Via TPM et al.

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/judiciary_immunity.pdf

or

http://tinyurl.com/2y6xb3

Statement of Undersigned Members of the House Judiciary Concerning the Administration’s Terrorist Surveillance Program and the Issue of Retroactive Immunity

As a result of our review of classified as well as unclassified materials concerning the Administration’s Terrorist Surveillance Program, we have concluded that blanket retroactive immunity for phone companies is not justified.

Well-stated, sister blueraven.

Tina S. -- and others here carrying on about how prostitution degrades women who purportedly have no actual choice in the matter -- ANSWER THAT, or STFU. What about the vast male sex-worker trade, hmmm? Strangely, from the moralistic and more-feminist-than-thou pro-criminalization crowd, one still hears crickets chirping on this aspect of the sex-work business.

Who is talking about solving anything? You can no more solve this issue that you can "solve" human sexual urges. There is a reason that its called the oldest profession. The issue is not "solve" the issue is manage.

What's the difference between a lap dance and a handjob?

That's easy..

One gives the guy blue balls and the other does not..

I've never understood the attraction of lapdances and that sort of thing.

Self abuse with some carefully selected pr0n is far more satisfying and far less expensive.

Next question.

Well keeping prostitution illegal should at least keep underaged girls from being used as prostitutes. I contend that buying underage prostitutes is a form of child abuse. Every man who had sex with a prostitute who looked like she might be under 18 (or 16 in some states) and did not card her is engaging in sexual abuse with a child. To me, such johns should be imprisoned for that act. Instead, it is more likely to be the prostitute who is arrested and not given the help that she (or he) needs to do the things that "normal" children go: graduate high school, go to college, have normal courtship experiences, work at a fast food restaurant. Yes this last could be held to be exploitative but not in the same way.

If we are going to keep prostitution illegal, then we need to at least stop being hypocrites about its involvement in the sexual misuse of minors. If we should decide to make it legal, then the first defense against its negative impacts should be to start strigently prosecuting and imprisoning johns who do this.

I will go further, as someone who has taught 19 year olds, I have found them extremely adventuresome but sadly lacking in the commonsense that only comes with age. I contend that sex work (of all kinds) should be restricted to those people over the age of 21. I would be willing to legalize prostitution to get that done. Too many young people pay far too high a price for bad judgment and too many old people these days want to say, "Well that's tough!"