Decriminalizing indoor prostitution leads to fewer rapes and STDs

[Catholic Crusader]

.......letting government interfere with marriage takes a divine institution (Genesis 2:24) and allows a human authority to define and redefine it. The purpose of this originally was to prohibit interracial couples from marrying.........

My Lord, Rush Limbaugh really is correct: Kids these day really ARE "minds full of mush".

Dude, you would have made a great little Hitler Youth, swallowing every lie your socialist masters feed to you.

 

[bybee]

http://www.nber.org/papers/w20281#fromrss

If you support keeping prostitution a crime then you are creating more rape victims. You are part of the problem and not the solution.

And you are guilty of faulty thinking if not worse.
Rape is a crime of aggression, power, anger, misogyny and lust.
Men who consort with prostitutes are guilty of appallingly inept morality, overly zealous self indulgence, extremely narrow interests focusing mainly on sex. They are not usually rapists.

 

[Tinark]

And you are guilty of faulty thinking if not worse.
Rape is a crime of aggression, power, anger, misogyny and lust.
Men who consort with prostitutes are guilty of appallingly inept morality, overly zealous self indulgence, extremely narrow interests focusing mainly on sex. They are not usually rapists.

And you are guilty of not thinking of the other possibilities and of not reading the paper:

First, it is possible that the ruling caused rapes to fall through an indirect effect involving inframarginal reallocation of police resources. If police stop arresting indoor sex workers (which we find), then these same police resources could be reallocated elsewhere in the agency including the policing of rape and other sex crimes.

...

Second, we investigate whether changes in data definitions or data collection over this period could explain the findings, and fail to find evidence for this.

...


Thirdly, decriminalization could reduce rapes among prostitutes by improving the bargaining position of female sex workers relative to clients. Recent work in economics has shown that changes in female bargaining threat points has the potential to reduce violence against women (Aizer, 2010; Stevenson and Wolfers, 2006). Several studies note that indoor sex workers report considerably lower risks of victimization relative to outdoor street walkers, who themselves report extremely high rates of victimization.

...

The last hypothesis is related to the idea that some violent males think of rape and
prostitution as substitutes (Posner, 1992; Dever, 1996). When the judicial decision caused
supply to increase and prices to fall, violent males at lower segments of demand could
have shifted towards purchasing sex indoors and away from violence toward women. While
speculative, there is anecdotal evidence for this. In the 2010 documentary Happy Endings
which is about the efforts of Rhode Island to re-criminalize indoor sex work, there is a
scene where a sex worker claims that she believes the men she services would have raped
other women had they not come to see her.

Link to download the paper here:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2467633

 

[Catholic Crusader]

And you are guilty of not thinking of the other possibilities..........

Here is a possibility: Knowing right from wrong, not that an atheist would know that

 

[Tinark]

Here is a possibility: Knowing right from wrong, not that an atheist would know that

Your religion, like many other religions, has blinded you to the only moral thing that really matters: the well being and general flourishing of humans.

Luckily, some things are so brutal and obviously counter to the interests of humans in your holy book that even most Christians find them abhorrent (stoning, death penalty for non-murder. etc).

Your side has nothing other than "It is my belief that the particular God I happen to believe in says so. And I really, really believe it, no matter what negative impact it has on humans." - and reasonable people are thankfully rejecting this as any basis for law and morality. There are still more battles to be won against the religious right, but we are moving in the right direction.

 

[resurrected]

Your religion, like many other religions, has blinded you to the only moral thing that really matters: the well being and general flourishing of humans.

and is this enhanced or degraded by the acceptance of perversion?

 

[GFR7]

and is this enhanced or degraded by the acceptance of perversion?

Once the religion is cast aside, the idea of "perversion" goes hurtling down into nothing.

 

[resurrected]

yep - tin's post makes clear - he wants to tear it all down and start from scratch based on.....??????

...and reasonable people are thankfully rejecting this as any basis for law and morality.

 

[Eeset]

Outlawing prostitution is good. It drives up the price.

 

[resodko]

one of death snorkel's finest! :chuckle:

The reason why modern men are not getting enough lawful sex is because of the rebellious state of the western feminist woman.

:darwinsm:

 

[WizardofOz]

In another study, it was determined that decriminalizing killing lead to fewer murders

 

[aCultureWarrior]

In another study, it was determined that decriminalizing killing lead to fewer murders

This coming from someone who started a thread entitled:

"Is legalization approval?"
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92862

 

[WizardofOz]

This coming from someone who started a thread entitled:

"Is legalization approval?"
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92862

You stalking me is creepy

You really are too dense to grasp the argument. Legalization = / = approval.

Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes? Obviously those are the only two options you are capable of comprehending :hammer:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes? Obviously those are the only two options you are capable of comprehending :hammer:

(Poor Aaron, still on his cigarette criminalization bandwagon).

 

[WizardofOz]

(Poor Aaron, still on his cigarette criminalization bandwagon).

:doh: What cigarette criminalization?

Are you honestly this incapable of grasping arguments? Which is it? (this is where aCW says something he thinks is witty and tucks his tail :chicken:

Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

:doh: What cigarette criminalization?

Are you honestly this incapable of grasping arguments? Which is it? (this is where aCW says something he thinks is witty and tucks his tail :chicken:

Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes?

For those of you that haven't followed the rants of Libertarian in denial WizardofOz, aka Aaron, aka Captain Obvious over the years here at TOL, he believes that in order to reccriminalize homosexuality, you must first criminalize cigarette smoking.

(Can you believe that some people actually compare the two?).

Seek spiritual and psychological help Aaron, you desperately need it.

Oh and by the way: I agree with your earlier (sarcastic) post:

In another study, it was determined that decriminalizing killing lead to fewer murders

Decriminalizing immoral acts (homosexuality, abortion, pornography and prostitution) leads to an increase in those acts/behaviors.

 

[WizardofOz]

For those of you that haven't followed the rants of Libertarian in denial WizardofOz, aka Aaron, aka Captain Obvious over the years here at TOL, he believes that in order to reccriminalize homosexuality, you must first criminalize cigarette smoking.

The only person talking about homosexuality is you. Everyone is shocked by this, I am sure lain:

Second, I believe no such thing. Seeing as how I've corrected you on this point numerous times you're either being deceitful or you really are this dense.

For those of you that haven't followed the rants of homosexual in denial aCultureWarrior, aka Connie, aka keyboard commando, over the years here at TOL, there is a reason why he won't just address the simple question.

It exposes the self-defeating nature of his argument.

But I'll try again in slightly larger font:
Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes?

As I said, this is where aCW says something he thinks is witty and tucks his tail :chicken:

Come on, all your 'fans' are watching....:rotfl:

 

[Rusha]

But I'll try again in slightly larger font:
Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes?

As I said, this is where aCW says something he thinks is witty and tucks his tail :chicken:

Come on, all your 'fans' are watching....:rotfl:

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[WizardofOz]

Inquiring minds want to know.

Inquiring minds needsta know. [/acw creepy talk]

 

[WizardofOz]

Since I didn't see an answer to my question ole drama queen, I'll ask it again:

Do you want to criminalize smoking cigarettes or do you approve of smoking cigarettes?
:juggle:
:chicken: