There's really nothing funny about opposing laws that protect children.
a tad difficult after some of the erroneous attacks, the argumentium ad homenium replies, ad nauseam.
What exactly do you expect on a conservative forum when you are advocating a policy where "some children will be beaten, seduced, raped, even killed"?
Not owning a whore house, not even a “ho” house, I never really considered the issue. I would assume the legality of prostitution to be a matter for the local community, as clearly the Constitution says nothing about it.
So, communities should be allowed to outlaw prostitution, but "government intervention is worse" than laws which protect children from being molested and murdered?
Once again, very slowly (yes, I am trying to inject a bit of humor) - “Given that government has proven that it can not reduce child abuse by passing laws, what next?”
I can assure you that ANY SOLUTION that involves liberals and libertarians will be a disaster.
“What exactly do you expect on a conservative forum when you are advocating a policy where “some children will be beaten, seduced, raped, even killed”?”
Do realize I am not advocating such a government policy, I am questioning it?
Note carefully, I described a state wide program which was in failure mode. Then I asked “What should be done?”
That is hardly advocating or support of such a failed program. Ditto for the laws under discussion.
Regarding your opinion of Liberals, I concur. Libertarians I don’t know about.
The previous poster was misinformed by a soi dissant “Libertarian” on the subject of marriage. In the Western world, laws give advantage to marriage, and restrict it to male/female couples because such marriages most reliably produce the best acculturated next generation.
Any other coupling does not deserve societal advantage, as it does not benefit society.