U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-16-2009, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles View Post
If you want to call me a retard for having faith then maybe you're the one who needs to leave.

When dealing with an issue such as prostitution, religion will always enter into the debate as much of the issue is a religious one.
its only a religious issue in your church or amungst others of faith. when it comes to a debate on public policy a person's faith should not make any difference. that is why I hate religious people, they think by throwing bible quotes into a public debate they are helping by providing some factual backing to morality. Morality can be established without religion, so keep it to yourself or in the religious forum uber. if you have any real argument to make for or against prostitution feel free to post, but somehow I feel you are just going to make another point about religion
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2009, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Under a bridge.
3,196 posts, read 4,717,966 times
Reputation: 976
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
its only a religious issue in your church or amungst others of faith. when it comes to a debate on public policy a person's faith should not make any difference. that is why I hate religious people, they think by throwing bible quotes into a public debate they are helping by providing some factual backing to morality. Morality can be established without religion, so keep it to yourself or in the religious forum uber. if you have any real argument to make for or against prostitution feel free to post, but somehow I feel you are just going to make another point about religion
Outlawing stuff because it is "immoral" actually eliminates from the true beleiver the ability to make a moral decision. As such, laws meant to do no more than enforce a moral code, actually prevent the practice of religious based ethics. You cannot force someone to be "holy." That must come from free will. By eliminating the legal ability to choose, you are also eliminating the abilty to be moral--to "sin" and to become convicted of the sins and repent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 11:45 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcashley View Post
Outlawing stuff because it is "immoral" actually eliminates from the true beleiver the ability to make a moral decision. As such, laws meant to do no more than enforce a moral code, actually prevent the practice of religious based ethics. You cannot force someone to be "holy." That must come from free will. By eliminating the legal ability to choose, you are also eliminating the abilty to be moral--to "sin" and to become convicted of the sins and repent.
not really sure where you are going with this line of thinking, if you agree that religion should be kept out of debates on public policy then thanks. if you think we need to eliminate laws so we can all be free to choose to be holy or sin then you have lost my support.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,770,331 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
not really sure where you are going with this line of thinking, if you agree that religion should be kept out of debates on public policy then thanks. if you think we need to eliminate laws so we can all be free to choose to be holy or sin then you have lost my support.
Not sure about his line of thinking...since he mentioned "morals" instead of "religion" but MY thought is that the two are not the same. Morals can and should be a part of the law...religion shouldn't be.

I DO think that prostitution should be illegal but not because of religion. My feelings are that allowing prostitution eliminates the freedom of everyone else to live in communities where there are standards of decency. At the bare MINIMUM, there should be only specific, well-defined areas of towns where prostitution is allowed and/or there should be city/county ordinances against prostitution if the people there want it banned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 04:16 PM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,976 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Not sure about his line of thinking...since he mentioned "morals" instead of "religion" but MY thought is that the two are not the same. Morals can and should be a part of the law...religion shouldn't be.
Absolutely not.

Morals should never be apart of the law and they should not be in government. When you start defining what morals are, like defining religion, you have a set definition and those on the fringe are pushed out. The more you define them, the more fringe you have until you have one set of moral codes - or religion (they follow the same trend). In the end you have a state moral code (or a state religion) and that is not a good thing. Remember, we know that we are free because we can argue about morals/religion. Once we aren't able to argue over that anymore, then we have lost our freedom.

Besides, government is not supposed to have any moral leaning whatsoever. We don't define the term 'moral' because it is different for everyone (and once you start defining, you are on your way to a state religion or moral code of some sorts - Saudi Arabia anyone?). My morals aren't your morals and vice versa. I don't want - and don't need - a government official deciding for me what HE believes (imposing) is moral for me to do and not to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I DO think that prostitution should be illegal but not because of religion. My feelings are that allowing prostitution eliminates the freedom of everyone else to live in communities where there are standards of decency.


And aren't you imposing your views on everyone who might think prostitution is okay and not doing anything wrong? By the same token I can say we should eliminate all bums because they make things smelly and always ask people for money; I say that's not decent and should be outlawed.

There's a simple solution if you don't want to live in a town with a brothel: move.

What about the people who want a brothel in their town? They have no say in the matter because of others imposing their opinions on them to have it illegal. You DON'T HAVE to live in a town with something so 'indecent', but the people for it have to abide by what you think is right.

Don't you see the hypocrisy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
At the bare MINIMUM, there should be only specific, well-defined areas of towns where prostitution is allowed and/or there should be city/county ordinances against prostitution if the people there want it banned.
You mean zoning?

Cuz you know that is done in Nevada right now.

Your whole argument is a little moot right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,770,331 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
Absolutely not.

Morals should never be apart of the law and they should not be in government. When you start defining what morals are, like defining religion, you have a set definition and those on the fringe are pushed out. The more you define them, the more fringe you have until you have one set of moral codes - or religion (they follow the same trend). In the end you have a state moral code (or a state religion) and that is not a good thing. Remember, we know that we are free because we can argue about morals/religion. Once we aren't able to argue over that anymore, then we have lost our freedom. Besides, government is not supposed to have any moral leaning whatsoever. We don't define the term 'moral' because it is different for everyone (and once you start defining, you are on your way to a state religion or moral code of some sorts - Saudi Arabia anyone?). My morals aren't your morals and vice versa. I don't want - and don't need - a government official deciding for me what HE believes (imposing) is moral for me to do and not to do.
Would you agree that there should be SOME things that are against the law? Because morals are actually a basis for MANY things in our laws that I'm almost 100% sure you'd agree with.

If you feel people should be allowed to do absolutely ANYTHING they want, that's fine. But I don't want to live in that world and I think you'd bite your tongue on that one.




Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post


And aren't you imposing your views on everyone who might think prostitution is okay and not doing anything wrong? By the same token I can say we should eliminate all bums because they make things smelly and always ask people for money; I say that's not decent and should be outlawed.

There's a simple solution if you don't want to live in a town with a brothel: move.

What about the people who want a brothel in their town? They have no say in the matter because of others imposing their opinions on them to have it illegal. You DON'T HAVE to live in a town with something so 'indecent', but the people for it have to abide by what you think is right.

Don't you see the hypocrisy?



You mean zoning?

Cuz you know that is done in Nevada right now.

Your whole argument is a little moot right now.
My idea to restrict it to certain areas gives OTHERS the freedom to not have to deal with such smutty behavior going on around them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Under a bridge.
3,196 posts, read 4,717,966 times
Reputation: 976
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
not really sure where you are going with this line of thinking, if you agree that religion should be kept out of debates on public policy then thanks. if you think we need to eliminate laws so we can all be free to choose to be holy or sin then you have lost my support.
I think religion should be kept out of debates on public policy. I was attempting to "say" that.

I was also saying that we need to eliminate some laws so that people could choose freely. For example the laws against drinking were found to be unsustainable in the early 20th century. Other laws that do not have direct victims may be: prostitution, gambling, watching porn (not child porn--that must remain illegal --the kids are victims), begging (largely legal now--quite a change from the 1970s), ... and possiblly more. Crimes where people become direct victims must remain crimes. Crimes where people become indirect victims must remain crimes. Crimes where people do merely immoral (or stupid) things should not be crimes.

I think prostitution is of the last variety--a crime where people do merely immoral and/or stupid things. --that does not condone sexual slavery, violence, children in prostitution, or pimps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 10:51 PM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,976 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Would you agree that there should be SOME things that are against the law? Because morals are actually a basis for MANY things in our laws that I'm almost 100% sure you'd agree with.
Morals aren't an actual basis of law, what are a basis of laws is what can be done to maintain society. You can't allow people to kill, rape, and steal without any consequences and expect to have some sort of fabric of society left. Morals have nothing to do with that. All government is is an organised use of force to maintain the order of the society; that's it, nothing more nothing less. If locking people up who kill, rape, and steal to maintain the bare minimum of the order of the society works then hey! We're doing pretty well. Prostitution does not negatively effect society and bring anarchy if legal like killing, raping, and stealing would do. All it does is create a profitable business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
If you feel people should be allowed to do absolutely ANYTHING they want, that's fine. But I don't want to live in that world and I think you'd bite your tongue on that one.
I think you should be able to do whatever the hell you want so long as it does not infringe on another's right (life, liberty and pursuit of happiness - feelings are not protected-just to be clear) is consensual and does not cause bodily harm to others (which ties into infringement upon rights).

A robber is infringing on the rights of the robbed because the robbing was not consensual and was violated the rights of the person being robbed.

A murderer is infringing upon the rights of the victim because the act of killing was not consensual and violated the rights of the person being murdered.

A rapist is infringing upon the rights of the victim because the sex was not consensual and violated the rights of the person being raped.

Prostitution?

Well, it's an exchange of money for sex between two consensual adults. No where in there are people being robbed, raped, or killed against their will; they are just having sex. It's only when prostitution is illegal that the aforementioned things come into play (i.e. an unregulated underground market). I don't give a damn what two people do in there bedroom and who they do it with; when people can get out of other people's bedroom's and sex lives, then I think we can see a time when prositution is legalized.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
My idea to restrict it to certain areas gives OTHERS the freedom to not have to deal with such smutty behavior going on around them.
That is what is called zoning my friend. Can't have em in school zones and such? Yep, that's zoning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2009, 07:02 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,770,331 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
Morals aren't an actual basis of law, what are a basis of laws is what can be done to maintain society. You can't allow people to kill, rape, and steal without any consequences and expect to have some sort of fabric of society left. Morals have nothing to do with that. All government is is an organised use of force to maintain the order of the society; that's it, nothing more nothing less. If locking people up who kill, rape, and steal to maintain the bare minimum of the order of the society works then hey! We're doing pretty well. Prostitution does not negatively effect society and bring anarchy if legal like killing, raping, and stealing would do. All it does is create a profitable business.
Our founding fathers decided that adultery, fornication, sodomy, etc. should be crimes. Where do you think that those come from? Like it or not, the laws at the time our country was founded were based on morals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
That is what is called zoning my friend. Can't have em in school zones and such? Yep, that's zoning.
I meant the entire CITY could choose to ban it. Ideally, I'd like to see it be voted on by the people who live there. So, prostitutes could get the freedom to do what they please in Town A, for example. But those of us who don't want to have it around us could live in Town B where it is banned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2009, 07:10 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,976 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Our founding fathers decided that adultery, fornication, sodomy, etc. should be crimes. Where do you think that those come from? Like it or not, the laws at the time our country was founded were based on morals.
Okay...

Our founding father's also thought that slavery was okay. That it was moral and just to do so.

Your point?

As you said, the laws at that time were founded on morality (and religion - most states had a state religion before the constitution) but that does not make it right to do so today. You know how the constitution is a living document and all that jazz? Yea, I think you missed that part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I meant the entire CITY could choose to ban it. Ideally, I'd like to see it be voted on by the people who live there. So, prostitutes could get the freedom to do what they please in Town A, for example. But those of us who don't want to have it around us could live in Town B where it is banned.
Fair enough, it'd be the same with alcohol (whether to be wet or dry).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top