- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 14,697
- Reaction score
- 5,704
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Feds are feds
1988?!?!?!?! I wonder who was in charge of the administration of the federal government at that time? :roll:
I disagree. To some people, because of their upbringing or religious beliefs, sex outside of marriage IS immoral. Whereas if you don't hold such beliefs, it may not be.
Sex outside marriage (when you are married) involves (in most cases) breaking a promise, violating a contract. Selling sex does not.
No, I understand of course that a lot (if not most) people mean "religious and tribal taboos" when they say "morality".
But that does not mean that real, objective morality does not exist. It is rooted in the very nature of human experience, and was formulated, probably independently, by Ancient Greeks, Indians and Chinese at least around the middle of the 1st millennium BC, in remarkably similar terms. "Do not do to others what you do not wish to be done to yourself". Nobody wishes to be coerced or defrauded, by definition.
No I mean ANY kind of sex outside of a marriage, even premarital sex.
Some people feel that everyone ought to live by their own personal religious/moral codes.
Feds are feds
Yes, I know. Some people think that it's always a threesome: he, she and God
Feeling - and trying to convince - is fine. When coercion begins, they violate the basic, "constitutional" moral law in favor of minor denominational or parochial regulations. (Every major religion does feature the Golden Rule prominently. Even the rules-obsessed Judaism. As Rabbi Hillel said in the 1st century BC, "That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary")
Obviously I hit a nerve with that observation that it was Republican Saint Ronnie who was the evil Destroyer of Freedom.
You are barking up the wrong tree. No nerve hit here, feds are feds and they don't like states defying fed authority.
What makes you think that "overwhelming majority" are from the EU countries? Oh, this quote from the first link you have provided, perhaps?
"A criminal investigation in Germany in 1998 found that 87.5 percent of the women trafficked into Germany were from Eastern Europe. Seventeen percent were from Poland, 14 percent from Ukraine, 12 percent from Czech Republic and 8 percent from the Russian Federation"
Well, in 1998 neither Poland nor Czech Republic were EU countries. Both joined in 2004.
According to a spokesperson of the authorities, women aged 17-22 were forced to work as prostitutes in the streets of Bonn and Colon for 12-15 hours daily. They were lured to go to Germany with promises for job and marriage opportunities.
The pimps would drive the forced sex workers to the streets and would collect them every day bringing them back to a place in a former train station in Hersel where the women slept in several small rooms.
- See more at: German Police Bust 9 Bulgarian Nationals for Human Trafficking - Novinite.com - Sofia News Agency
Further, if you look at the data, what you see is that up to 80% of prostitutes in Germany are non-German; Bulgaria and Romania (recent EU new members), indeed, providing most. But does it mean that all or majority of them had been forcibly "trafficked"? Especially if comparisons are made with women from Ukraine, Belarus or Russia?
Even the tendentious article in Der Spiegel freely admits that "Statistically speaking, Germany has almost no problem with prostitution and human trafficking. According to the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), there were 636 reported cases of "human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation" in 2011, or almost a third less than 10 years earlier. Thirteen of the victims were under 14, and another 77 were under 18"
(Human Trafficking Persists Despite Legality of Prostitution in Germany - SPIEGEL ONLINE)
636 is a tiny number for a country so huge, and the trend is downward. Gee, may that decrease in trafficking be, indeed due to a combination of prostitution being fully legal (since 2002, "coincidentally") AND freer labor movement, as EU is expanding?
You always can find a bunch of disturbing anecdotes, and always can claim that a lot of trafficking is going unreported. But a drop by a third over ten years in what is found/reported - surely it correlates somehow with the underlying actual situation?
When Germany legalized prostitution just over a decade ago, politicians hoped that it would create better conditions and more autonomy for sex workers. It hasn't worked out that way, though. Exploitation and human trafficking remain significant problems. By SPIEGEL Staff
The police can do little for women like Alina. The pimps were prepared for raids, says Alina, and they used to boast that they knew police officers. "They knew when a raid was about to happen," says Alina, which is why she never dared to confide in a police officer.
Has Germany's prostitution law improved the situation of women like Sina? Five years after it was introduced, the Family Ministry evaluated what the new legislation had achieved. The report states that the objectives were "only partially achieved," and that deregulation had "not brought about any measurable actual improvement in the social coverage of prostitutes." Neither working conditions nor the ability to exit the profession had improved. Finally, there was "no solid proof to date" that the law had reduced crime.
According to a report on human trafficking recently presented by European Commissioner for Home Affairs Cecilia Malmström, there are more than 23,600 victims in the EU, and two-thirds of them are exploited sexually. Malmström, from Sweden, sees indications that criminal gangs are expanding their operations. Nevertheless, she says, the number of convictions is declining, because police are overwhelmed in their efforts to combat trafficking. She urges Germany to do more about the problem.
If you are correct - why then os prostitution in Nevada still operating ?
The bottom line, which none of you can argue against, is that prostitution occurs whether it is legal or illegal, and that making it legal and regulating it makes it safer for all involved.
This is an empirical question that can be answered by looking at jurisdictions where prostitution is already legal.
Yes I can. And I have. You're simply choosing to ignore the evidence that is right in front of your face.
Lots of people were persuaded by the very argument you're making. Hell, that used to be my position on prostitution too.
But now actual data is coming in since a number of nations have legalized it in the past decade and it turns out that prediction is wrong. Legalization does almost nothing to reduce the occurrence of sex trafficking or abuse and actually appears to be making it worse.
I'm sorry, Chris, but you can't just wave off the evidence because the conclusion doesn't fit your world view. The appropriate response is to try to understand WHY and adjust your opinions in light of new evidence, not to engage in willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.
Human Trafficking Persists Despite Legality of Prostitution in Germany - SPIEGEL ONLINE
http://www.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEn...elopment-_prostitution_-anonymous-REVISED.pdf
German's legalized prostitution brought more exploitation than emancipation to women - National Human Rights | Examiner.com
Study: Legalizing prostitution increases human trafficking | War of Ideas
No, you are being willfully ignorant.
I said we should look at what worked and did not and go from there.
:roll:
Great. Legalization hasn't worked. Now let's go from there.
Yes I can. And I have. You're simply choosing to ignore the evidence that is right in front of your face.
Lots of people were persuaded by the very argument you're making. Hell, that used to be my position on prostitution too.
But now actual data is coming in since a number of nations have legalized it in the past decade and it turns out that prediction is wrong. Legalization does almost nothing to reduce the occurrence of sex trafficking or abuse and actually appears to be making it worse.
I'm sorry, Chris, but you can't just wave off the evidence because the conclusion doesn't fit your world view. The appropriate response is to try to understand WHY and adjust your opinions in light of new evidence, not to engage in willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.
Human Trafficking Persists Despite Legality of Prostitution in Germany - SPIEGEL ONLINE
http://www.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEn...elopment-_prostitution_-anonymous-REVISED.pdf
German's legalized prostitution brought more exploitation than emancipation to women - National Human Rights | Examiner.com
Study: Legalizing prostitution increases human trafficking | War of Ideas
No, other countries regulations obviously didn't work. How can you think regulating it would make it more dangerous. Please explain.
Chris. Read the damn articles. They explain it much better than I.
To answer your question, sex traffickers either
1) Don't follow the regulations
2) Find loopholes to abuse the intent of the regulations
Yes, but legalizing it makes it more difficult for that to occur, when there are paper trials as opposed to how it is now with absolutely NO regulations whatsoever, and the women don't go to the police for help because of the fact that it's illegal, and they are frightened to go to jail.
And I don't feel like reading any links right now. Maybe later.
Well, look at it this way: we DO regulate it in the US. The regulation is "Don't do it". If everyone followed the law, we wouldn't have any sex trafficking at all. But that's the problem - some people don't follow the laws. If we legalize it and regulate it, we'll still have that problem - sex traffickers will continue to do what they do now and simply ignore the law/regulations.
And according to what has happened in Germany, Denmark, and Sweden legalization actually appears to INCREASE the number of cases where the laws are violated and women are forced into prostitution against their will.
Fair enough. I do suggest you read a bit on the topic when you have the time. Like I said, I used to be of the opinion that legalization it was the solution. But now I disagree.
Are you serious? Don't do it is not a regulation. We do NOT regulate it. Everyone does not follow the law quite obviously. They will be easier to track and catch.
How? Explain that to me please.
How? Explain that to me please.
As I said, how will they be easier to track and catch if the traffickers don't follow the regulations?
The primary reason is economic. Legalization increases demand for prostitutes (because more men are willing to purchase prostitutes if they're not going to be arrested for doing so). It also increases supply (because more women are willing to work as prostitutes voluntarily if they're not going to be arrested for doing so). If there aren't enough women willing to prostitute voluntarily (the supply) to satisfy the number of men who want to purchase prostitutes (the demand), sex traffickers stand to make money by stepping in to make up that difference by forcing more women into prostitution.
In the case of Germany and Denmark, it appears that legalization has produced a larger increase in demand for prostitution than supply for prostitution. So it gives sex traffickers an even bigger hole to fill (and money to be made) with forced prostitution. Does that make sense?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?