[biblewonk]

I totally disagree, I see them as identical issues. There used to be anti-prostitution laws in the books that meant something. Their used to be anti adultary laws. All have gone the same way but all are on the same topic. Other than the bible, not one of those laws had a leg to stand on and since we are doing away with Christianity in our government, all are gone.

[republicofdavis]

"There used to be anti-prostitution laws in the books that meant something. Their used to be anti adultary laws."

None of which were effective, but I'll give you that they may have social value.

Do you think that Nevada should be able to have legalized prostitution or should it be banned nationally. If the latter, what would be the constitutional basis to do so, or would you not care whether there was one?

[jimt]

Their used to be anti adultary laws.

Actually there's a very good non-biblical justification for anti-adultery laws.

Marriage (besides its sacramental nature) is a contract. Breaking the terms of a contract, especially while engaging in fraud and deceit, is criminal. Assisting someone else to break a contract, while practicing fraud and deceit, is criminal.

A criminal law regarding adultery is quite defensible from a secular viewpoint.

[antiRepublicrat]

There used to be anti-prostitution laws in the books that meant something. Their used to be anti adultary laws.

There were also Sabbath laws, laws allowing only people of accepted denominations to be considered free (Quakers banished, death upon return), or laws preventing wearing of fancy or expensive clothes. These actual laws appeared in the same list as your beloved anti-adultery and fornication laws, written by the religious in power in this country.