"No doubt that's true, but is that a reason to restrict their liberties? I mean, the reason they take these jobs is that they are the best alternatives in their shi**y lives, I don't see how restricting their alternatives helps them."
I honestly don't believe that liberties our founding fathers and soldiers fought for include the sale of sex for money. Sex shouldn't be considered free speech. It certainly would save them from getting into a horrible lifestyle where they are seen as nothing more than objects of sexual pleasure.
"Well sure. People take jobs they don't like when they can't get better ones. I'd bet if you asked every McDonalds employee if they would like to get out of hamburger flipping that they would all say yes. Does that mean we should ban hamburger flipping?"
Hamburger flipping is not demeaning or exploiting. It's mroe a normal job in our capitalistic society and there is nothing wrong with it. Let me put it this way, would you prefer your child to flip burgers or become a prostitute/porn star? Or would you prefer your child to marry someone that flips burgers for a living or is a prostitute/porn star?
Perhaps, but how did that answer my question? You said that these women were abused. I asked if that was a good reason to restrict their liberties. What you said above does not answer that at all.
Hamburger flipping is not demeaning or exploiting. It's mroe a normal job in our capitalistic society and there is nothing wrong with it.
OK fine. However you used the argument that prostitution should be illegal because most women wouldn't do it if they could get better jobs. I pointed out other jobs that people don't want to do. So, I am just pointing out that the desireability of a job in and of itself is not a good reason to ban it.
Let me put it this way, would you prefer your child to flip burgers or become a prostitute/porn star? Or would you prefer your child to marry someone that flips burgers for a living or is a prostitute/porn star?
It's obvious what the answer is. It's fine that you think prostitution should be banned because it is immoral, harms people, etc. etc. In the post I first responded to, however, you threw up all sorts of arguments that really don't stand up to sunlight, as evidenced by the fact that you don't even attempt to defend them, you instead resort to the mainstream view (which is fine, I'm not really arguing with) that its immoral, harms the ho's, etc.