Anyone else not cool with being called a Trick or a John

That explains the cat
avatars, you love animals.
A man with a big heart
trying to save the world.

(...) when it comes to crime I'm conservative when it comes to prostitution I'm liberal

(...) Originally Posted by Zanzibar789

I get where you were going with this, but do you see where I'm going with it? The perception of what it is right or wrong MORALY is within you, ultimately... Doesn't change the legality of it, though. A crime is a crime is a crime.

I don't call clients "Johns" or "tricks", but I have no issue with words being used as they may fit. After all, if a wife finds out you were with one of us, I find it highly unlikely she will say: "so you are telling me you spent $10,000 last year on providers?!?"

That explains the cat
avatars, you love animals.
A man with a big heart
trying to save the world. Originally Posted by siberia

Not even close...

Follow Preferred 411's lead: Client and Escort. Then no one is offended.

Which means you would regulate and tax the shit out of it, prohibit BBBJ, "allocate" ho's on the basis of seniority, institute affirmative action to give the whales and fucktards whom some hooktards just don't want to fuck "a fair shot", and zone the whorehouses in a manner that funnels johns through a robbers' gauntlet just to get their ashes hauled. In short, a typical government solution.

The libertarian way would be to remove all government from the transaction and just leave it all to individual liberty. Originally Posted by Don T. Lukbak

^ Come on man I know we disagree fundamentally but meet me half way on this thing. Absolutely I would regulate and tax because 'Regulation and Tax' is what makes America the greatest place in the world. Ever lived in a 3rd world country and saw their construction and building standards? No? - well I have. Ever ate at a restaurant in a 3rd world country with absolutely no food inspections or standards and got dog sick as a result? No? - well I have. Taxes (while reforms are needed) actually help pay for things that private business won't. I'm not saying we should be regulated and taxed to death but we do need them both and equally.

If I had my way I would legalize prostitution and apply sales tax at 8.25% so for a provider charging $300 they would lose ~ $24.75 for each session. Next I would regulate it for safety and security. Pimps and "benefactors" would be outlawed with severe federal prison penalties for those would be pimps, managers, or high-level benefactors who operate behind the scenes. I would ensure no human trafficking is involved and that everyone participating is doing so of their own free will. I would certainly allow NBA policies to remain as everyone has a right to choose something so personal, just as I believe in a woman's right to choose on abortion. However, if I outlaw pimps I suspect that NBA polices would be reduced to less than .1%

Officially advertised "Whore" houses like in the old days would not be allowed to exist. Private and discrete In-call's, notels, hotels, apts, and residences like in use today would be ok.

Cool,
I'm don't want to see any kids suffer and die but if their parents don't care enough to keep that from happening please explain to me why should I be forced to become the freeloader's kids keeper.

I'd rather support innocent animals, They get put down all the time and you don't hear a word about it because people turn their backs on it everyday. We rarely even talk about it, like it's a dirty little secret.
If you want to support innocent kids, go right ahead. I'm actually good with that and would thinck more of you as a person, but shouldn't it be a choice instead of a mandate?

Or do you thinck that because you choose to support deadbeat's kids that you have a higher moral ground and everyone should thinck like you? Originally Posted by boardman

I've been helping the less fortunate for 10 yrs strong now with recognition from certain agencies due to my donations and I also donate to a particular dog shelter for the breed I'm fond of. Why do I do it because I feel morally obligated to do so. It doesn't matter if you're poor and white or poor and black. If you need help you need help. I'm not religious but I have read the gospels and what I read resonated with me.

No disrespect to you but yes - YES I do think I have a higher moral ground than you but that's just my opinion. However, being morally obligated and forcing that obligation on someone are two different things for me. For example if I saw a guy fighting a helpless kid or an old woman in a wheelchair I consider myself morally obligated to help and in my view only a coward wouldn't feel any obligation to assist because he's afraid.

Helping the less fortunate is a personal lesson for me. For a time as young kid I was also on food-stamps / welfare and even as a kid I was embarrassed to be given hand-outs but it was needed for me at that time I had no say in the matter. I went to an integrated school so I would get mocked by the privileged kids for not having the nice clothes and getting the free government lunch. On one occasion I got a shirt from the good-will and another kid told the class that his mother had just donated that shirt and it was his old shirt. As I got older I worked harder and harder to ensure I had the best as an adult. I don't want to claim rags-to-riches but I don't forget where I come from and the lessons of helping others who are helpless (not the lazy) has never been lost on me. While I would have certainly changed what I went through as a kid I'm also kinda glad I went through it as it taught me a valuable lessons along the way.

There are many philosophical views to moral obligation but the one I tend to follow for the truly helpless (e.g - kids, sick people, the elderly, dogs ;-) ) is this:

Look at obligations to others as a matter of debts. A person is born into an established human civilization built on thousands of years of human effort. Since each person arrives as a helpless infant, each person’s survival is dependent on others. As the person grows up, she also depends on the efforts of countless other people she does not know. These include soldiers that defend her society, the people who maintain the infrastructure, firefighters who keep fire from sweeping away the town or city, the taxpayers who pay for all this, and so on for all the many others who make human civilization possible. As such, each member of civilization owes a considerable debt to those who have come before and those who are here now.

If debt imposes an obligation, then each person who did not arise ex-nihilo owes a debt to those who have made and continue to make their survival and existence in society possible. At the very least, the person is obligated to make contributions to continue human civilization as a repayment to these others.

^ if able bodied men won't conform or contribute to this standard then no obligation toward them should exist.

A morally superior fucktard?

cathousecat1.jpg

Thanks for sharing...

I get where you were going with this, but do you see where I'm going with it? The perception of what it is right or wrong MORALY is within you, ultimately... Doesn't change the legality of it, though. A crime is a crime is a crime.

I don't call clients "Johns" or "tricks", but I have no issue with words being used as they may fit. After all, if a wife finds out you were with one of us, I find it highly unlikely she will say: "so you are telling me you spent $10,000 last year on providers?!?" Originally Posted by Camille Fox

Good points but honestly I'm more interested in knowing how you knew how much I spent last year.

A morally superior fucktard?
Thanks for sharing... Originally Posted by boardman

However, I didn't say I was above reproach or perfect. Many religious people wouldn't think I'm moral at all. It's all about context and perspective I guess. ;-)

However, I didn't say I was above reproach or perfect. Originally Posted by Zanzibar789

No. you didn't.
You just claimed moral superiority on a SHMB.
That's way better...

Zanz ..... you're gonna need a better shovel to dig much deeper.




.

Check that .....



.

glad my groupie finally showed up ;-) I need some love. (no homo)

No. you didn't.
You just claimed moral superiority on a SHMB.
That's way better... Originally Posted by boardman

Meh - your association (consenting sex vs obligation to the poor) is a false equivalence. It doesn't matter where I claim it right?

I'm not associating anything.

You're the one that claimed moral superiority...Own it!

I'm not associating anything.

You're the one that claimed moral superiority...Own it! Originally Posted by boardman

Consider it owned! Just don't forget the context of helping the helpless who need help.