[BlueNgold]

The argument would follow that if I have absoolute right of choice over my body then I may use it as I see best fit when not coercing or harming another. Therefore, if I may use my hands, my head, my feet etc. to perform direct acts of commerce, the government may not refuse me the right to use other portions of my anatomy to perform direct acts of commerce simply because they find it distasteful.

[BlueNgold]

Apologies for the typos. Additionally, the government (federal) does not regulate commerce, but interstate commerce. Thus far the federal government has left prostitution within the realm of the 10th ammendment and further interpreted the regulation to fall within the power of the individual state. If Lawrence and Roe are interpreted to hold bodily rights above states rights then that power to regulate would be superseded by the application of the 9th Ammendment to name bodily choice and privacy as unnamed rights which the state, even under the 10th Ammendment, cannot usurp.