Posted on 01/07/2014 12:47:22 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
OTTAWA - Conservative MP Joy Smith hopes to convince her colleagues on both sides of Parliament the so-called Nordic model is the best way to replace Canada’s prostitution laws.
The Supreme Court of Canada on Dec. 20 struck down as unconstitutional the laws prohibiting communication for the purposes of prostitution, living on the avails and running a brothel, but stayed the decision for a year to give Parliament time to come up with a new law.
The Nordic model, which was implemented in Sweden and Norway after both countries experimented with legalization of prostitution, targets the market for prostitution by punishing those who buy sex or victimize women in the sex trade. It also helps women get out of the business.
When Sweden tried legalized prostitution, violence against women jumped 67 per cent, Smith said. Since the Nordic model targeting the johns or customers was introduced, the number of women involved in street prostitution dropped by 30-50 per cent, Smith’s research shows. The ban on purchasing sexual services produced a change in attitude towards buying sex, her research indicates.
Smith, who is one of Canada’s foremost experts on human trafficking, said she was successful in getting a resolution in support of a made-in-Canada Nordic model passed at last fall’s Conservative policy convention in Calgary, but she admits anything to do with this issue is “an uphill battle.” Convincing caucus may be a harder sell, especially considering the short time frame of getting new laws passed, Smith said.
“We have to get away from this aspect of prostitution is the oldest profession,” she said. “It’s the world’s oldest crime against women.”
She said she will be working with Justice Minister Peter MacKay and Public Safety Minister Stephen Blaney to craft a legislative response to the court ruling.
Prior to the Supreme Court decision, MacKay had told Sun Media the government was focusing on defending its existing laws.
"I'm not entirely convinced that the direction that has been attempted in other countries, and this Nordic model being one, is the right fit for Canada," he said in December.
Some have suggested the Nordic model might also run afoul of Canada’s constitution, but Smith said that’s why she is stressing a “made-in-Canada” solution. Part of that would also target pornography over the Internet because research has shown a link between pornography, prostitution and human trafficking, she said. She would like to see Internet service providers block pornography to all customers unless they specifically opt in, similar to a British proposal.
“We have to not let women be taken advantage of and exploited,” she said. “I can’t imagine any parent going to a high school career symposium and having prostitution one of the things girls aspire to be. It’s so harmful and dangerous for young girls to be exposed to this.”
Women have worked for years to “get through the glass ceiling,” to be educated and achieve, but prostitution “degrades women in so many ways,” she said.
“It’s going to be a battle, that’s for sure,” she said. “There are many people who believe there is nothing wrong with this. That’s sad.”
She said it’s a myth that legalizing prostitution keeps women safe. Having worked with victims for more than a decade, she said “there’s no safe place.”
Smith says she has the support of a widespread coalition of groups that advocate for prostitutes, trafficking victims, battered women’s shelters, feminist organizations and religious groups for the Nordic model.
Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott came out in support in a news release Jan. 3. He pointed out the Netherlands, Germany and New Zealand are “rethinking” their approaches of “legalization, decriminalization and efforts at regulation,” while Israel, Ireland and Scotland changed their laws to target the purchase of sex, he said.
“We need to shift the focus of our laws toward those who exploit,” he said. “There is no justice served by further victimizing individuals who have been abused and marginalized.”
Vellacott noted, "Currently in Canada, prostitution itself is legal, but virtually all activities surrounding it are not. There's something terribly incoherent about such an approach."
I still have a hard time understanding how it is illegal to sell something that is perfectly legal for a person to give away.
What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is none of our business... unless it involves money, then we can stick our noses in?
Not that I am FOR it, but wouldnt taking the criminal aspect out of it lead to LESS exploitation?
It is like the war on drugs- the reason drugs are so expensive is because they are illegal and hard to get. So, a low-life has to break into your house to get enough money to use drugs.
I see nothing in the federal contstitution that covers the federal government doing anything about drugs... Can someone list the ‘enumerated power’ that covers it?
So what you’re trying to say is, you think the problem with prostitution is that it’s so expensive and hard to get.
Nordic model prostitution?
I think I could go for some of that!
The laws that were struck down had some justification, beyond just the exchange of money for sex. However, the Supreme Court (of Canada) determined that these laws put prostitutes in too much danger. Ever since "Willy" Pickton killed at least 49 prostitutes (and fed their bodies to pigs), it's been apparent that the current laws needed to be reviewed. The new laws will have to protect women (all prostitutes actually, but really it's all about protecting women), not endanger them. The SCOC gave the government a year to come up with new legislation. The alternatives range from complete deregulation all the way to complete prohibition -- so long as they don't put the women in greater danger.
The sex trade is just that: a trade. Unfortunately the commodity that the owners are trading is lives. If you think that the majority of prostitution is simple contract between two individuals, you are either purposely blind or incurably ignorant.
Oh wait; it’s another ‘victimless’ crime like drug use. No one has ever been hurt by drugs, pimps or henchmen, and they all make their own choices, right? I once considered myself a small l libertarian, but the incessant, ignorant, libertine rants on FR restored my senses.
I do not support the WOD, but neither do I support your pipe dreams that destroy lives or your utopian propaganda regarding human trafficking that promotes the most vicious crimes...
I made a comment about the legal principle of the matter. Whatever negatives come about as a practical consequence or side effect of prostitution don’t have any impact on the basic legal principles involved.
If someone is being exploited or forced into prostitution, then that is a crime in and of itself. It’s a non sequiter to say that the practice should be illegal because some people would be forced into it. Otherwise, if we applied that line of thinking, since some might be forced into slavery, all labor would be need to be outlawed.
No. It leads to more.
The average age for entry into prostitution is thirteen.
There are not enough actual adults willing to enter the trade to meet the demand and there never have been.
Often when they catch whoever is peddling young people the pimps or madams can show there was a good fake ID, but selling sex is still selling sex.
So no, it won’t help and it will make it a damned sight harder to make charges stick with the creeps who get a lot of people into that life.
Whatever negatives come about as a practical consequence or side effect of prostitution (fill-in-the-blank) don’t have any impact on the basic legal principles involved.
The world that you would create exists only in your mind. Utopians and Zealots are all totalitarians at heart.
Sorry, but I’m not the one bringing out irrational arguments here.
The fact is, prostitution has always existed, and will likely always exist (at least until Jesus comes back). Making it illegal doesn’t stop prostitution, nor does it stop anyone from being exploited and forced into prostitution. It’s funny that you condemn utopianism when you yourself express this quite utopian idea.
In fact, I’d wager that the exploitation you worry about is less of an issue in jursidictions where prostitution is legally regulated, versus those places where it is outright banned. Do you think there are more child prostitutes per capita in Reno or in Newark? If you are a pragmatist, and not a utopianist, then you do need to take into account such practical realities, don’t you?
Prostitution is one of those things that civilization needs to stand against (at least officially). Like drugs and other sleaze.
The same argument to legalize everything?
Stupid idea
“No. It leads to more.”
Got any data to back that up?
The post you are responding too consists of facts.
Their being inconvenient to your advocacy of prostitution does not obviate them.
If you can come up with some source trying to assert that prostitution is something adults are generally willing to enter into you can try posting that.
You aren’t going to have much luck though.
You have not backed up one assertion that you have made, but you get all
whiney when others point out the fallacies in open prostitution.
“You have not backed up one assertion that you have made, but you get all whiney when others point out the fallacies in open prostitution.”
What assertion have I made that you would like backup for?
How is it “whiney” to ask if you have any data to back up an assertion?
Oh yeah, and, at the risk of being called “whiney”, I still would like to know if you have that data.
In Nevada, in legally regulated brothels, you have to be an adult to work there. How they initially got into prostitution is another story, but in those legally-regulated brothels all you have is adult prostitutes.
I knew a girl who went into prostitution as a teen. She wasn't kidnapped into it. She decided to run away from home, and there really aren't many ways for teenage runaway girls with dysfunctional personalities to make enough money to live on. Finally, she decided to go back home.
One contributing factor is age-of-consent laws. Passed with the best of intentions, raising the age of consent to 18 (in most states it used to be lower, but got raised to combat teenage pregnancies) does not mean that guys won't have sex with underage girls. It just means that the only guys who will have sex with them are guys who don't give a damn about the law.
The leftist solution to this problem is to eliminate parents and promote prostitution.
The thing I have a hard time understanding is that
these are the same people who want to bring muslims
into their country?????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.