Prostitutes and Politics Why is it still illegal to pay for sex?

Reason Online ^ | May 7, 2007 | Cathy Young

[Lusis]

The resignation of Randall Tobias, the chief of the Bush administration's foreign aid programs, for "personal reasons" following the revelation that he had engaged the services of two escort-service workers has provided rich grist for amusement on the punditry circuit. There was indeed plenty of material for humor in the situation, from Tobias's strong stand in favor of abstinence teaching in AIDS prevention programs to his "I didn't inhale"-style assertion that he never had sex with the women. But the predictable laughs have obscured a much larger issue than hypocrisy in the ranks of social conservatives. The reason Tobias's call-girl adventures became public is that the owner of the Washington, DC-based service, Pamela Martin, is facing prosecution and has turned her records over to news organizations to help pay for her legal defense.

Even those who feel a certain schadenfreude at Tobias's downfall should be asking the question: should there have been a criminal case in the first place?

[Hemingway's Ghost]

This is an extraordinarily trivial concern, frankly. A catholic influence works just fine. Society views things in such a way that the specific theology of right and wrong don't matter as much as what the church in general says.

You might think the concern trivial today, but it certainly wasn't trivial when this nation was founded. You can't quote the Founders as you've done here---John Adams in particular---as the final word on the subject without recognizing the historical context in which their words were written or spoken. There wasn't a "capital C" Christian church in Adams' day, and there's not one today.

Have you not been reading my posts???? I never said that. I said that the church's teachings on morality should be the influencer, the moral conscience of the nation. I didn't say they should write our laws. Actually read the posts please....

By "write," do you mean "dictate"? "Ordain?" Where, exactly, is the line drawn between "influencing" the laws and "writing" them, as you say?

In any event, if you prefer, we can return to the subject of the thread: should prostitution today remain illegal? If it should, why?

[Star Traveler]

You said — “First of all, government is not a GOD ordained institution; it was originally something men in their foolishness and idolatry demanded of GOD. He was the king of HIS chosen people but they wanted a man to look to instead of trusting in the LORD. HE warned them that they would lose their liberties and men would take their wealth but they didn’t listen and so we received “government” rather than Theocracy.”

You’re mixing up the theocracy of Israel with the governing authorities of Paul. The two are not the same. You’re talking about national Israel and what happened to that national entity has no bearing on the Gentile nations and their rulers. What Paul is talking about in speaking in Romans is to the rulers of the world, and even to the Jews, as they *no longer* had their national sovereignty any longer at that time.

They did in the past, when they asked for a King and God granted it, when before they were a theocracy. But, they sure weren’t then, when Paul was talking about the institution of rulers by God over the people and for the *terror* to evil and evil-doers.

But, in any case we can see *directly* what it says in Romans —

—

Romans 13:1-4

1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.

2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same.

4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

—

Here we see that Paul is talking universally as he says “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities.”

And that means that the governing authorities who operate *within* the strictures of the governmental system, that this governmental system is also appointed by God. The “authority” is a governmental system and a person operating within that governmental system. I only say that because there can’t be an official of the government which operates *outside* of the governmental system, of which he is a part.

“For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.”

Furthermore we see that God tells us — “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil.”

Therefore as prostitution is one of those many kinds of *evil* which is told to us in the Bible. The authorities are a *terror* to these *evils*. That’s the “government” and the agents of such government (in our case, the elected officials in carrying out the laws).

And thus if one does *evil* — as in the evil of prostitution, for example — then “But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.”

—

That pretty much says it for the government and it going after evil and evil doers. No mention of “instilling morality” but simply going after evil and evil-doers and instilling *terror* — not morality.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “So.... you support giving government more power and precedent to control more and more aspects of it’s citizens’ lives?”

—

I support the government in doing what the Apostle Paul said that governmental authorities are supposed to do — which is go after evil and evil-doers and instill *terror* into them, for their *evil deeds*. That’s all. Just do what the Apostle Paul said, no more and no less...

We know what is “evil” from what the Bible tells us. Prostitution is in that list. Instill *terror* into those evil-doers for their evil deeds....

—

You said — “You contradict yourself here. If govt. is going to be used as a tool of the Antichrist shouldn’t we be doing all we can to deny it power and scope? Kinda like what Libertarians have been trying to do?”

The Antichrist is going to come to power because God has *granted* him the ability to do so. If it were not for God granting that, he would not be able to do that.

In opposing the Antichrist, we oppose *evil* and *evil deeds*. We already have those evil deeds defined by God. There’s no question of what God says about prostitution. So, do as Paul said and instill *terror* into those evil-doers of prostitution...

[Star Traveler]

You said — “If you see monsters under your bed, man, that’s your problem, not mine. From where I sit, God loves us and wants us to be happy.”

—

The only monsters that are there, from God’s perspective, is that list you saw in Romans 1, which also includes the prostitution promoters. So, decide who is the promoter of prostitution and there you’ll find your depraved monster.

The ones who are not promoting it, are obviously standing on God’s side of the ledger...

[kidd]

Those diseases are much more apparent on college campuses than any where else.

I highly doubt this. Do you have a reference that demonstrates that STDs are more common in college students than prostitutes?

If the argument against brothels is based on STD’s then you’d do more to eliminate these by shutting down colleges, dorms, fraternities/sororities and mixed sex classes.

Idiotic.

The purpose of a college is to gain instruction and career development. A brothel is purely recreational.

[JamesP81]

By "write," do you mean "dictate"? "Ordain?" Where, exactly, is the line drawn between "influencing" the laws and "writing" them, as you say?

I mean exactly what I said. Or perhaps you need someone to define 'is' for you...

[Hemingway's Ghost]

I mean exactly what I said.

Then I'll assume you mean it in the sense of "dictate," and where, exactly, is the line between that and "influencing" the law?

Or perhaps you need someone to define 'is' for you...

A pretty poor attempt at deflection, friend.

[JamesP81]

In opposing the Antichrist, we oppose *evil* and *evil deeds*. We already have those evil deeds defined by God. There’s no question of what God says about prostitution. So, do as Paul said and instill *terror* into those evil-doers of prostitution...

There is a problem with your argument.

It is a foregone conclusion that government will never perfectly fulfill the role God has decreed for it due to the fact of mankind's imperfection. It's a simple unavoidable fact. So, what we must strive for is the best rendition of government possible. If it can't be perfect, let's get the best we can.

The best we can does not include handing the government more power than it needs. Ideally, the civil authorities could prosecute morality crimes such as drug offenses without violation of due process. Ideally isn't going to be happening any time soon. The government can prosecute crimes that involve clear victims and restrain much evil, but history has shown that a government with enough power to police a litany of 'morality crimes' is one that inevitably perpetrates far greater evil than the crimes its policing against its own citizens.

We will not reach perfection in civil government before He returns. Let us set up government in such a way that perpetrates the least evil itself and restrains the most it can. Frankly, the government already perpetrates greater evils in the name of the drug war than the evils it is supposedly restraining (and failing considering how unrestrained drug use is).

It is not acceptable to trade one evil for another (in this case, stamping out certain morality crimes only to get an overbearing and unjust government).

[JamesP81]

Then I'll assume you mean it in the sense of "dictate," and where, exactly, is the line between that and "influencing" the law?

You can assume anything you want so far as I'm concerned. That doesn't mean you're right. It's already clear that you're either unable or unwilling to read my posts for comprehension, so I see no reason why I should try to explain myself until I'm blue in the face (red in the joints since I'm typing).

[JamesP81]

There’s no question of what God says about prostitution

Indeed, it is. An out of control, tyrannical govt is far, far more evil. I propose we guard more thoroughly against the greater evils and worry about the lesser ones later.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “There is a problem with your argument.”

—

And you miss something here. Look at the title of the thread...

“Prostitutes and Politics Why is it still illegal to pay for sex?”

Very simply because it’s an evil deed and it’s something that evil-doers engage in and it should *remain* illegal...

It doesn’t get any simpler than that...

[Star Traveler]

You said — “Indeed, it is. An out of control, tyrannical govt is far, far more evil. I propose we guard more thoroughly against the greater evils and worry about the lesser ones later.”

—

Ahh...., in the business of “creating a problem where none exists...” I see...

Just in case you’ve missed it, prostitution is already illegal and has been for a long time. There are some exceptions, but it’s pretty much the rule around here in this country.

As I said up above, the question is — why is it *still* illegal. The question is not — “why don’t we do something more that the government is not doing right now?”

So, it remains illegal because it’s an evil deed and only evil-doers engage in it...

Simple...

[JamesP81]

Very simply because it’s an evil deed and it’s something that evil-doers engage in and it should *remain* illegal...

Fine. In that case, let's outlaw alcohol production. Then tobacco. Then let's impose censorship. Pretty soon you're stoning people for acts of impropriety.

Prostitutuon is a great evil. A government that intrudes as much as one you're suggesting is a far greater one. Keep your priorities straight. When Christ comes back, it won't be an issue since He can always make the right judgment...but that amount of power in the hands of even a group of elected men is dangerous and unacceptable.

[goldstategop]

NO - prostitution is a victimless crime and I see nothing wrong with exchanging sex for money. What two consenting adults do in private is NONE of the government's business. Their contractural arrangement isn't hurting any one else.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Star Traveler]

Oh, a follow-up to this one...

If you’re concerned about a tyrannical government — I might be starting with the “Patriot Act” — first — before I would go to the *already illegal* prostitution, which has been in effect for a long time.

The Patriot Act is far more sinister and tyrannical than punishing evil-doers for the evil acts of prostitution...

[goldstategop]

I tend to be libertarian where the bedroom is concerned. I want the cops to stay out of it!

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[goldstategop]

Sex slavery can be prosecuted without criminalizing sex. No one has ever died from it. I don't understand how the same act, which is legal if there's no cash involved, is suddenly different when cash is brought into it.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Star Traveler]

You said — “Fine. In that case, let’s outlaw alcohol production. Then tobacco. Then let’s impose censorship. Pretty soon you’re stoning people for acts of impropriety.”

—

Again, like I said — creating a problem where none has existed before. And like I said, earlier, prostitution has been illegal for a very long time. So, it’s changing *absolutely nothing* by continuing to have it *remain* illegal. The people who wish to *change things* are the ones who wish to *promote evil*. They are the ones who are really gunning for a change....

As far as cigarettes are concerned, that’s already happening. No news here. And for alcohol, that’s been done and the people didn’t want to go there, so it was repealed.

So, you’ve got two other examples of “changes” while the prositution example involves *no change* — if it remains the same.

Cigarettes are changing to illegal right now, as we speak and write. Alcohol will always be heavily controlled, as it is now, in the various states. And that’s the way it will probably remain.

So, what did you say you were going to do about the big tyranny right now — the Patriot Act, something of much greater consequence than all of the above examples???

[goldstategop]

Agreed. You're talking about outlawing pleasure, which is deep-rooted in human nature. One might as well ask water to run backwards.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[goldstategop]

There's already pornography, which also involves selling sex for money. If the moral busybodies were principled, they'd outlaw that particular financial transaction, too. There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus