bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index bumrejects.myfreeforum.org
Open discussion on just about any topic
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The Oldest Profession
Page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> We the People
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 11:24 pm    Post subject: Re: The Providers  Reply with quote

Nigel wrote:
As such, the state or federal government has no standing telling two consent[ing] adults what they can or cannot do in private with their own bodies.


And when you read the excerpt I posted, that's exactly what SCOTUS ruled in the Lawrence case, until the prostitution exception!

I have now found the legal rationale for why the states' prostitution laws have not [yet] been ruled unconstitutional like the state's contraception, abortion, and sodomy laws have been.

The current federal position is that prostitution is not a private act, but rather is a commercial transaction. And it is not victimless.  Therefore the federal government has a compelling government interest which takes precedence over individual privacy rights.

The compelling government interest is to preserve traditional moral values, akin to moral laws banning incest, polygamy, and obscenity.

Furthermore, the fact of economic motivation in the commercial transaction mitigates against prostitution being a truly consensual act; in fact prostitutes are exploited, and connected with organized crime and the spread of infectious diseases.

So, not only are traditional moral values preserved, but also the scondary anti-society results are prevented - in toto the compelling interest to continue to criminalize prostitution.

Each challenge to a state prostitution law argues against one or more of those government claims - thus far none have prevailed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
scrutney
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 1535

PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:21 am    Post subject: Re: Why Yes I Have Reply with quote

Nigel wrote:

"right of the people to be secure in their persons"

How is a woman's body doe snot fall under "secure in their persons"?  Her sexual proclivity and her consort's generosity is non of the government's business.  

Who exactly is the injured? The victim?


why doesn't it fall under the first amendment which has been remorselessly bent to include freedom of expression?

and what better way to express oneself than...ya know...thingy?

if it sounds like i'm being glib...perish the thought.

i've been told online line many times, by the artists who were given the old st george street shuffle (here's your hat, what's your hurry?) that they were engaging in 1st amendment protected activity, despite the fact that they were remunerated, which isn't commerce...(go figure...) it's something else entirely...and they've got some kangaroo court case from new york to prove it.

hey...if commerce is free speech, if corporations are people and if a right to abortion is based on a right to privacy...why can't being a professional mattress dancer be "freedom of expression"?

ahhh...art...it feeds the soul.

edited to add:
"or the right of the people peaceably to assemble".....



_________________
one man's terrorist is another man's folk hero
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nigel



Joined: 02 Nov 2013
Posts: 56
Location: A Beach Somewhere

PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:51 pm    Post subject: Falling Down Reply with quote

"Furthermore, the fact of economic motivation in the commercial transaction mitigates against prostitution being a truly consensual act; in fact prostitutes are exploited, and connected with organized crime and the spread of infectious diseases. "


That argument is an unmitigated failure and not remotely grounded in reality.

Commercial and consensual are not by any stretch of the imagination mutually exclusive.  The vast majority of commercial transactions are consensual.

The only reason it is connected with organized crime is the fact it's illegal. As to social disease rates, in the parts of the western world where prostitution is legal the social disease rates are much much lower. Which is common sense sense because the working girls are regulated and have frequent checkups.  Further the prostitutes themselves are 1000 times less likely to be victimized and exploited by violent pimps. Not to mention it's millions of dollars in the legitimate economy.  

Laws against prostitution are clearly based entirely on religious grounds. Which actually violates the 1st Amendments "endorsement clause"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The argument, however, has not yet been found a failure in a federal court through the appelate process to SCOTUS.

Thus, the "compelling governnent interest" prevails.

Personally I share your opinion, and if the Mann Act was actually applied and enforced, or if New Mexico's prostitution laws were, I would join an effort to get rid of them (like we have re the anti-contraception, anti-cunnilingus, anti-anal intercourse, etc. laws during my lifetime).

Indeed, laws based upon religious doctrine violate the "endorsement clause".  But that is different fron laws based upon "traditional moral values" (like laws banning incest, polygamy, pornography and obscenity). Again I share a concern about religious doctrine masquerading as moral values in the legal government position regarding prostitution, but I acknowledge that prostitution is opposed by people of many religious and/or moral beliefs.

In the news today: http://abcnews.go.com/Internation...on-france-punish-clients-21014321
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nigel



Joined: 02 Nov 2013
Posts: 56
Location: A Beach Somewhere

PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 1:30 pm    Post subject: Interesting TImes Reply with quote

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25468587

How interesting,..............

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> We the People All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum