Have you signed the petition to decriminalize sex work?

Ksjack - Prostitution is not actually illegal in Japan; in order to please the Americans it was technically made illegal in the '50s, but defined as penis in vagina sex ONLY. Every other sexual activity for pay is legal in Japan, and nobody pays attention to PIV prostitution either.

You are incorrect about federal law; there is also a statute regarding "prostitution near a military base". Furthermore, what the federal government can legally do and what it does are two separate things; since 2001, millions a year have been pumped into local police sting operations (which are also given FBI agents on loan) in the name of "fighting human trafficking", but their real purpose is just busting plain old adult voluntary hookers.

Ksjack - Prostitution is not actually illegal in Japan; in order to please the Americans it was technically made illegal in the '50s, but defined as penis in vagina sex ONLY. Every other sexual activity for pay is legal in Japan, and nobody pays attention to PIV prostitution either.

You are incorrect about federal law; there is also a statute regarding "prostitution near a military base". Furthermore, what the federal government can legally do and what it does are two separate things; since 2001, millions a year have been pumped into local police sting operations (which are also given FBI agents on loan) in the name of "fighting human trafficking", but their real purpose is just busting plain old adult voluntary hookers. Originally Posted by AngelOK

So in other words, I was right, prostitution is not legal in Japan. I don't care how, why, or the circumstances, fucking for money is illegal in Japan (and a good part of the rest of the world).

WRT your comments about law vs what they can do, well, duh. If that's your issue then what do you think signing a petition will accomplish if they're just going to do what they want anyway? That's right, nothing.

Hoke was a Supreme Court ruling and they actually got it right. Look up the case, they were very clear in their decision that prostitution was none of the federal government's business. It's true that they attempted to limit prostitution near military bases just prior to WWII but IIRC that law was either overturned or repealed.

The simple fact is that because this is not given to the feds to deal with under our constitution then the feds have absolutely no business whatsoever criminalizing it or de-criminalizing it.

"Keep big brother out of our bedrooms!" Right, until we want them there? No, we can't have it both ways. Whether it be gay rights or prostitution this has nothing to do with the constitution and therefore should not be an issue for the federal government.

Jack

No, you were wrong; prostitution is "legalized" in Japan, that is sex for pay is legal but certain activities (in this case PIV) are banned. It's the same broad legal status as in Nevada, India, Canada or the UK but the restrictions are different (and I believe unique).

I agree the feds need to mind their own business about prostitution; however, they've proven they won't unless a court slaps them down. I don't believe a petition will have any effect whatsoever, but there's nothing wrong with people making a statement. Furthermore, the feds decided over 150 years ago that US constitutional protections prevent states from abridging civil rights (we fought a war over it in case you've forgotten). Constitutional scholars can argue whether that was right or wrong, but it's now an established fact and the social momentum is toward greater recognition of individual rights, and the legal momentum toward the federal government prohibiting state and local governments from abridging those rights.

Wow, some people just can't stand being wrong.
P4p in Japan is legal but piv isn't?
Maybe if you're clinton this is a distinction
you can appreciate; but to normal people
Penis In Vagina is SEX. All the other stuff
is erotic foreplay. So heavy petting and
deep foreplay is legal in Japan.
BUT INTERCOURSE FOR $$$ IS UNLAWFUL.

Hmmmm, and you can't discern the difference?

Your position is weak.
And sorry but you got a severe pimp fixation.
Uncle Sam would be no better a 'boyfriend'
than the last heavy of yours.
At least you could ditch that dead weight
with a little effort or moving.
Pimp Daddy Sam won't play that game.
He'll want his money,
and there is no where to run.

If you do a little research on the history of prostitution, you will find that:

1.) Before 1910, prostitution was legal in the United States;

2.) In 1910, the Mann Act was passed;

3.) After 1910, the states started enacting laws making prostitution illegal. For instance, Michigan enacted their law in 1931 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(zai...1931-LXVII.pdf)

Outside of the Mann Act, there is not a federal law regarding prostitution. However, the Federal government has deemed prostitution illegal.

Our federal government has told The Bureau of Indiana Affairs the act of prostitution is not allowed on any reservation.

Let's not forget the Federal government's "anti-prostitution pledge": (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-prostitution_pledge)

Funny, 1910-1920 was the start of
the progressive movement/party.
All the crap you're bitching about
are the result of just the type of
crap you're asking for.

This was the start of the nanny state.
Mann act, Harrison act, Volstead act
govt overstepping because of slackers
wanting the govt to make them and others
do what they think is best.
Liberty? Freedom? Independence?
Means nothing to some,
trade it away for more false security.

It was govt intervention that created this mess.
Exactly how is more govt intervention
going to solve it?

get a clue sis & wise up
quit your slave chatter

No, you were wrong; prostitution is "legalized" in Japan, that is sex for pay is legal but certain activities (in this case PIV) are banned. It's the same broad legal status as in Nevada, India, Canada or the UK but the restrictions are different (and I believe unique).

I agree the feds need to mind their own business about prostitution; however, they've proven they won't unless a court slaps them down. I don't believe a petition will have any effect whatsoever, but there's nothing wrong with people making a statement. Furthermore, the feds decided over 150 years ago that US constitutional protections prevent states from abridging civil rights (we fought a war over it in case you've forgotten). Constitutional scholars can argue whether that was right or wrong, but it's now an established fact and the social momentum is toward greater recognition of individual rights, and the legal momentum toward the federal government prohibiting state and local governments from abridging those rights. Originally Posted by AngelOK

By your logic, then, it's also legal on a federal level in the US. If not, then how do you explain the legal brothels in Nevada? They're not violating any federal laws.

Angel, you have no idea on my background, education, or knowledge of US history and if you're trying to make a point by making condescending statements and talking down to me the point is going the wrong direction. When you have to resort to that tactic it only shows the weakness of your position.

Sorry, you're wrong.

Jack

If you do a little research on the history of prostitution, you will find that:

1.) Before 1910, prostitution was legal in the United States;

2.) In 1910, the Mann Act was passed;

3.) After 1910, the states started enacting laws making prostitution illegal. For instance, Michigan enacted their law in 1931 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(zai...1931-LXVII.pdf)

Outside of the Mann Act, there is not a federal law regarding prostitution. However, the Federal government has deemed prostitution illegal.

Our federal government has told The Bureau of Indiana Affairs the act of prostitution is not allowed on any reservation.

Let's not forget the Federal government's "anti-prostitution pledge": (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-prostitution_pledge) Originally Posted by Grace

I don't understand how you and others can blur the distinction between federal law and state law, Grace.

1) There were MANY municipalities that outlawed prostitution before 1910. It wasn't a free-for-all EVERYWHERE. It was just that before the Mann act the feds didn't have the slightest thing to say about it and what they were trying to do was make it illegal to traffic humans across state lines. The overly zealous brought about the abuse of the law trying to make it apply to things it was never intended and that's what brought about the Hoke decision three years later when the Supreme Court ruled that the feds have no business making laws regarding prostitution.

2) Yes, the Mann act was passed in 1910 to try to stop the flow of human trafficking for "immoral purposes", but it had nothing to do with local laws and regulations regarding prostitution, only moving them across state lines.

3) There were laws in many localities before 1910 regarding prostitution. Some making it completely illegal, some confining it to certain areas of a town or outside city limits, some limiting the size of brothels, and so on. That is not a matter for the feds, however. The states, cities, and counties are all free to govern prostitution as they see fit. Again, I give you Nevada as an example.

The government can tell the Bureau of Indian Affairs whatever the hell it wants, the reservations are sovereign nations and as long as they don't violate a US Federal law they can tell them to go to hell, and have. Suggestions and instructions do not equal law.

The anti-prostitution pledge is NOT a law. If I want federal money then they get to make the rules as to what I have to do to get it. If I don't want their money then in theory, I should be able to do what I want (and for the most part, can).

Even though not a law, from your own link:

"The U.S. federal government requires non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that receive federal anti-HIV/AIDS or anti-trafficking funds to adopt an organization-wide policy opposing prostitution and sex-trafficking. This requirement, known as the anti-prostitution pledge, has been in place since 2003. Initially it was only applied to foreign-based NGOs, but in 2005 the administration began to apply it to U.S.-based organizations as well, resulting in ongoing court challenges on First Amendment grounds. The policy has also been criticized as counterproductive."

The Feds have an uphill battle with this "pledge" in that it is directly opposite a decided Supreme Court decision that they cannot and should not have any say in the legality of prostitution.

Once again, the examples you folks are citing demonstrate over and over how when the government gets its nose in something things almost never turn out better and NEVER the way you expect them. Why on earth would you want them involved in this in any way, shape, or form??

Jack

The terms "decriminalization" and "legalization" have specific meanings in prostitution law, Jack; if you're going to make up your own there's very little point in continuing the discussion, especially if you're going to ignore that federal civil rights dictates trump state laws.

I understand that there are no federal laws specifically against prostitution in general; I've made the same point myself. That's not what I'm talking about and I think you realize that.

Not signing.

Not trying to have 18-22 year old women who could be in the work force serving latte's and waiting tables with humility have an easy and legal way out as far as making $$ and developing a skewed view of the world.

most of you 20 something providers if walking into a college football locker room won't find much attraction in the zero % body fat, 6 pack rocking young, "fuck all day" players but rather the middle aged assistant coaches who all have 5 figure salaries. Originally Posted by coefficient

Ummmm.. ok This line of work is not easy. In fact I have worked in many jobs in the past, and I have to say this job is by far the hardest. Sorry to burst anyones little fantasy bubble but it is. You want to think it is easy because to think otherwise would ruin your fantasy with a paid escort.

Wtf? Other than the fact your response
was in legible english it made no coherent
sense. You are clearly out of your league.
Your circuitous argument just keeps
parroting a hollow argument.
j-u-v-e-n-i-l-e
Scary that you can vote.

There is no distinction between federal laws
and civil rights laws. One does not trump
the other. Civil rights laws are a subset
of overall federal laws. Who enforces civil
rights violations? The federal fuggin govt
that's who. Sheesh, it is glaringly evident
that your shadow never fell across the
doorway of a govt or civics class.
Let me raise the ante and hazard that
goes for economics or chemistry.
Meaning you probably think we
can afford the womb to tomb welfare.
And anthropogenic climate change is real.

Your vaunting of fiat imposed
supercitizenship to new protected classes
will not last. Rights by nature are right.
Infanticide, faux marriage, and homophilia
are not right and will crumble
Who wants their child to murder their children?
Who wants their child to be a fag?

Our Founding Fathers never intended
the citizens to succumb to this level
of wickedness. To be fair it was unlawfully
imposed on the people and held in place
by a compromised and corrupted
political system. The Founding Fathers
did leave us with instructions of what
to do when our govt has got this tyrannical.
It involves the 2nd Amendment.
Directions are in the
Declaration of Independence.
Read it for yourself.

No, you were wrong; prostitution is "legalized" in Japan, that is sex for pay is legal but certain activities (in this case PIV) are banned. It's the same broad legal status as in Nevada, India, Canada or the UK but the restrictions are different (and I believe unique).

I agree the feds need to mind their own business about prostitution; however, they've proven they won't unless a court slaps them down. I don't believe a petition will have any effect whatsoever, but there's nothing wrong with people making a statement. Furthermore, the feds decided over 150 years ago that US constitutional protections prevent states from abridging civil rights (we fought a war over it in case you've forgotten). Constitutional scholars can argue whether that was right or wrong, but it's now an established fact and the social momentum is toward greater recognition of individual rights, and the legal momentum toward the federal government prohibiting state and local governments from abridging those rights. Originally Posted by AngelOK

japanese are a funny people when it comes to prositution. its sort of a yes and no answer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Japan

The terms "decriminalization" and "legalization" have specific meanings in prostitution law, Jack; if you're going to make up your own there's very little point in continuing the discussion, especially if you're going to ignore that federal civil rights dictates trump state laws.

I understand that there are no federal laws specifically against prostitution in general; I've made the same point myself. That's not what I'm talking about and I think you realize that. Originally Posted by AngelOK

What is it, exactly, you think I'm making up?

I say that it's NOT the federal government's place to do either. They have no power to de-criminalize it in the forum of placing sanctions on a state or locality to do what they will with the activity, nor do they have the authority under the constitution to make prostitution a federal crime.

If you understand that then why on earth do you want the feds involved on any level?

Jack

Our Founding Fathers never intended
the citizens to succumb to this level
of wickedness. Originally Posted by anaximander

Are you one of those fucking nut job religious peeps who thinks sex for money is evil? wow..

Tax the willing.