Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments
- Thread starter gustave55
- Start date
Wishful thinking... granted, it would be nice if it happened, but keep in mind, what one says before the election, and what one does afterwards are usually two very different things. Look what happened with Wynne... turns out she was just blowing a lot of hot air...
Traditionally, the Liberals campaign as socialists, but govern as conservatives.
I think the only reason he said they were looking at the Nordic model was because it sounded cool; I mean, everything coming from Scandinavia is cool, like Saab cars and Ikea. I don't think he had any notion of the issues. That speaks volumes about how naive he is. Of course, anybody is preferable to Harper and his moralistic zealots. Trudeau panders to a populist agenda: whatever looks cool. That's strictly for votes and not for some deep seated ideological principle. Don't hold your breath on this one: doing nothing may be better for the party than sticking its neck out and, in their analyis, putting at risk the support of a segment of the electorate.
Exactly! However, where does that leave us? Caught in a vacuum - There has not been an immediate court challenge to the new law as some have predicted. Yes, such an endeavor takes time... lots of it. Moreover, some have said a court challenge will not be possible until someone is charged. So, the new law is on the books, yet not being enforced. (Gee, I wonder why?) It would seem that even LE have more common sense than our hapless Conservative overlords... So, it seems we are now sitting ducks in a shooting gallery, waiting for the proverbial axe to fall... Not a very entertaining prospect by any stretch of the imagination. Don't hold your breath waiting for anyone in government to come to the rescue - as Wilbur alluded to, it would be 'political suicide' from their perspective, so they will opt to play it safe and do nothing. Sad as it is to say ladies and gents, we may well be stuck with this oppressive law for many years to come... better get used to it.
There may be a chance if BC petitions the Federal Government for a Judicial review of the law. A far as Ontario, Wynne already committed herself with the review of the law by her Attorney General.
Well, she may have read the part about Mary Magdalen?
In any case, I believe it's the Anglican Church that announced that it was opposed to Bill C-36.
So who knows?
In the Bible "common" prostitutes are often mentioned with no negative inference. The "sin" was the idiotry of the sex goddess prostitutes worshiping the fertility gods in the Temples.
In biblical times, a man could have as many wives, concubines and maidservants as he could afford.
Pre-marital sex was never an issue after the bride price was paid (betrothal). The had to wait until age 12/13 to marry, but sex was not a problem during this period since father been paid so no long less of a value for "used goods".
Marriage was about ownership - man owning his wives, all the resulting children, etc. Divorce was bad since they ex-wife wound have to rely on her father for any support and, of course, again the man always owned the children.
Yes, lets go back to biblical principles at least regarding nothing wrong with non-goddess worshipping prostitution.
Better than an ignorant Christian based on indoctrination with no understanding of the original languge and culture.
For example, any honest theologian would agree "fornication" is a total lie in the English translation of the ancient greek "porneia" More honest translations say, "sexual immorality" which is more accurate but has nothing to do with singles or sexuality other than the degrading defeated enemies by forcing male-male sex on them. Also says nothing about homosexuality which is a nature god given orientation and never addressed... separate topic.
The New Era of Canadian Sex Work - with Video Trailer
This week, we'll be releasing a documentary on the new paradigm for sex work in Canada. Last year, the government passed Bill C-36, which criminalizes johns who patronize sex workers. These new laws also limit the abilities for sex workers to advertise their services. The government argues that this helps protect women in the trade from human traffickers, but others say that it makes sex work more dangerous for women who are consensually working in the industry.
We sent Lowell, a pop singer and former stripper, to meet with the policy makers and police to discuss C-36. Lowell also went down to Nevada to see how a regulated, legal sex industry functions. She also met with one particular john to see how he feels about his behaviour becoming newly illegal.
Watch out for the full length coming this week.
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/video/the-new-era-of-canadian-sex-work-trailer?utm_source=vicetwitterca
This week, we'll be releasing a documentary on the new paradigm for sex work in Canada. Last year, the government passed Bill C-36, which criminalizes johns who patronize sex workers. These new laws also limit the abilities for sex workers to advertise their services. The government argues that this helps protect women in the trade from human traffickers, but others say that it makes sex work more dangerous for women who are consensually working in the industry.
We sent Lowell, a pop singer and former stripper, to meet with the policy makers and police to discuss C-36. Lowell also went down to Nevada to see how a regulated, legal sex industry functions. She also met with one particular john to see how he feels about his behaviour becoming newly illegal.
Watch out for the full length coming this week.
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/video/the-new-era-of-canadian-sex-work-trailer?utm_source=vicetwitterca
Many reasons
They are 100% sure their way of living and their view of the world is the only valid one.
They are ashamed and afraid of their own and everyone else's sexuality.
They think they have the right to control how others live their lives.
They interpret the Bible in a way that agrees with their attitudes.
I think most followers of conservative religious groups do not want to put the effort into thinking for themselves. They want to be told how to live their lives.
I am a member of a liberal christian denomination. Our members are not only allowed to think for ourselves, it is encouraged.
Actually, selling sex is indeed illegal. However, the law gives those selling sex immunity from prosecution from selling sex. That doesn't mean immunity from being detained, arrested, booked and processed and released the next day from a night in jail. And it does not give immunity from prosecution for drug possession; they can arrest for prostitution and then arrest them and prosecute them for other offenses. I'm not saying that all police forces are going to do that, but I'm thinking of Calgary, where its (ex?) police chief stated that the new law gave them more tools to deal with this issue.
Well. if prostitution is illegal, then how would anyone expect to mount a constitutional challenge? The courts would simply say 'well, it's an illegal activity.' As such, a plaintiff would have no grounds. Just replace 'prostitution' with 'drug dealing' and you get the idea. Also, why then have I heard nothing but "sex is legal to sell, but illegal to buy" in all the media coverage on this issue since day one? It makes no sense...
Thanks! From what I've read so far, the wording of the law is so convoluted that it leaves much to interpretation by the courts. That said, aside from true exploitation cases, I find it hard to believe that the justice system would willingly prosecute consenting adults under a flawed (and likely unconstitutional) law - it would waste a monumental amount of time, money and resources when they could be going after real criminals. IMO it's tantamount to harassment by the state. I remember years ago, being on here and reading a comment about a citizen who had complained to police about a morality based issue, and wanted LE to 'arrest the perpetrator' - the specifics elude me, but I do recall that when police responded to the call, they declined to do anything, stating 'Ma'am, we enforce the law, not morality.' Funny, but under C-36 wouldn't they be doing just that? The irony...:frusty:
