Should prostitution be legal?
Ari Armstrong
Published March 15, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated March 18, 2008 at 9:20 a.m.
Photo by Andrew Harrer / Bloomberg News
Eliot Spitzer, New York governor, appears on the front page of the New York Post at a newsstand in New York on Tuesday. Spitzer, who spent the last nine years pursuing malfeasance in government and on Wall Street, resigned this week following reports linking him to a prostitution ring.
Sometimes governments ban activities that are not vices, such as practicing homosexuality, coloring a pooch pink, taking marijuana for medical purposes or buying alcohol on Sundays. Widespread support exists for ending such uses of political force.
But prostitution is a vice. Should government therefore ban it? The proper purpose of government is to protect people’s rights, not prevent vice beyond that context. Legal vices include drinking too much alcohol, smoking, overeating, watching too much TV, engaging in indiscriminate sex and cheating on one’s spouse.
Which is worse — that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer hired a prostitute or that he cheated on his wife? I regard Spitzer’s infidelity as the far worse moral sin, yet that’s not what triggered a criminal investigation, wiretaps and possible criminal charges.
You may legally buy an adult a $300 dinner and then take the person home for sex. Or you may legally take the person on a $4,300 weekend getaway for sex. But it’s a crime for Spitzer to pay $4,300 directly for sex.
Prostitution is a vice for the same reason that indiscriminate sex is a vice: sex properly involves a connection of consciousness as well as bodies between two people who genuinely admire one another. Purely physical sex undermines the distinctly human dimension of it (and, besides, there is a good, safe and free alternative to prostitution for those who lack a worthy partner).
Yet neither prostitution nor indiscriminate sex between consenting adults should be legally prohibited because neither violates anyone’s rights. Banning some vices is unjust, and banning all vices produces a police state.
Critics of legal prostitution typically make four objections. Prostitution results in physical abuse of women, it spreads sexually transmitted diseases, it corrupts people’s character, and it diminishes neighborhoods where it it is practiced. None of these objections justifies a prohibition of prostitution.
Just because prostitution is outlawed doesn’t mean that it goes away, as recent news stories about Spitzer, a federal judge and a Highlands Ranch mother demonstrate. What gives rise to physical abuse and disease is precisely the fact that prostitution operates on a black market. On a legal market, both prostitutes and their solicitors would be screened and monitored much more carefully, and prostitutes who suffered abuse would have legal recourse.
Obviously, involuntary prostitution and sexual abuse of children must be outlawed and diligently prevented by the legal system. Making prostitution legal for consenting adults would free up law-enforcement resources to protect children and nonconsenting adults.
The mere presence of something does not corrupt one’s character. For example, the fact that most of us live minutes away from liquor stores does not turn us into alcoholics. Nor do we need to mandate the wearing of burkas, as many Muslim regions do (often on pain of physical harm) to prevent men from turning into sexual monsters around women. We do not impose criminal penalties in order to socially discourage adultery, nor do we need them to discourage prostitution.
People are responsible for their own characters. Prohibiting vice (beyond the violation of rights) does not improve people’s characters; instead it makes people dependent upon the state for their behavioral guidance, which undermines the rational underpinnings of moral character.
To protect neighborhoods from legal prostitution, some advocate such restrictions as zoning laws. I favor alternatives that are consistent with property rights. For example, voluntary homeowners’ associations can rightly prohibit harmful activities. Newspapers can choose not to advertise prostitution. And people are free to socially shun and criticize houses of prostitution.
To preserve a free society, people have to be willing to put up with some things they don’t like. Teetotalers must allow bars and liquor stores. Right-wingers must allow socialist bookshops and vice versa. Evangelicals must allow premarital sex, homosexuality, abortion and dirty movies. We need not condone prostitution, any more than we condone infidelity, to allow that prostitution should be legal.
Ari Armstrong, who is nearing his ninth wedding anniversary, writes for FreeColorado.com. He is a resident of Westminster.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
March 15, 2008
6:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Armie writes:
Should prostitution be legal? YES!
It is now, in the real world.
If legal it would be safer,
cleaner less disease and less attention paid to sex.
And the Government could tax it!
REMEMBER anyone can be a prostitute! MAN OR WOMAN.
March 15, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
a_watcher writes:
This page has a problem. I could read everything but the text.
March 15, 2008
8:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
LaszloPanaflex writes:
If it is not causing a nuisance, yes. Legalize it, regulate it, and tax it -- just like marijuana -- and it would balance budgets and free up law enforcement resources for dangerous crimes.
March 15, 2008
8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
gs writes:
Yes
March 15, 2008
9:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
roger44 writes:
waste of money to chase them around. get in the real world, it will go on no matter what the law says.
March 15, 2008
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Theoldguy writes:
At last. A real conversation about something hidden in a closet. Bring on the women. Now I can be lied to by a professional.
March 15, 2008
12:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
No keep it illegal, that way I even feel naughtier; I also enjoy a good slap when pinching a doll...
March 15, 2008
6:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
redwhiteandBLUE writes:
Oh!!! Now make it legal ..just to suffice Eliot (the John) Spitzer ?? We're really a country of laws aren't we, flip- flopper's!
We don't say what we mean and mean what we say in anything, do we?
Just make everything legal huh? prostitution, drugs, what else? (sarcastic)
March 15, 2008
9:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
LetsThink writes:
Is there any morality left in America?
We condone homosexuality, premarital sex, and now prostitution.
Pray for America.
It is on the verge of moral collapse.
March 16, 2008
7:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
vudumom writes:
Make it part of the higher education courses at CU and other universities.That way all young men and women can get on a fast track to making quick and easy money.It would be safe too.The universities can charge thousands of dollars for a one semester course in the basics of prostitution to get them started.Then they could follow up with a BA in prostitution on the business part of it and finally offer a PHD program so someone could have the distintion of saying they are a Dr. of prostitution.
It is after all the world's oldest profession.So all the people that are for legalizing and taxing it will have another career option for their children.
March 16, 2008
12:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
mtnboy75 writes:
I think society has a lot bigger problems to be concerned about- other than who's paying for or who's getting paid for sex. If you think about it though, money and sex seem to always be intertwined...so should we all be fined/imprisoned for any sort of sexual engagement?...That may be a great way to get more money for the politicians...somebody try and sell that thought to their congressman.
The more time and energy wasted over this concern means less time and energy put forth towards the larger problems.
March 16, 2008
5:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
It is a bit hysterical to cry that our poor children will be seduced by the lure of fast, easy money if prostitution is legalized.
Is the drawback of legal status, and the fear of punishment what keeps vudumom and her kids off the street?
I think not.
If the law is all that prevents good, moral people from turning to prostitution, then we have a bigger problem.
The fact is, that prostututes and johns think less about the law, and more about what they are doing with thier own lives. The drawback of possible prosecution is merely a facet of the business, not a deterrent. Look at the numbers folks. Even as we speak, the open market is regulating the brothels in Germany. People are what make a business sink or swim.
Making it legal will not change the moral implications of the sex for money trade, but it will make sense fiscally, and will remove organised crime from the equation, and will go a long way toward improving the heath and safety of women in that field.
Some people care more about thier own moral hang ups than they care about the actual lives of others. That's ok...Let them protest and spew their hate, but the rest of us can take that with the grain of salt that it is worth.
March 17, 2008
8:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
vudumom writes:
I have no moral issue with prostitution.I am just saying go ahead and make it legal so the children who grow up with not many career options can take advantage of their looks and sexual talents to make money.Tax it and clean it up.You will still have an underground of people paying for sex because they won't want to file 1099 forms with the government.I do not have a problem with prostitution.I have a problem with people who say legalize it and then don't want their children to become prostitutes.If their is nothing wrong with it ,why not allow or encourage yor own children to be prostitute.Or are you a hypocrite?
March 17, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
gary writes:
Should the Rocky Mountain News be a newspaper??
Nuff Said!!
March 17, 2008
9:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
Legalize paid sex between consenting adults? Why not? I've worked many jobs that were more degrading, stinkier, and messier than any sex I've ever had. Coal miners endure horrid conditions and face death and debilitating injury every day, yet nobody talks about saving them from their fate. Aside from the "moral" considerations, sex is one of the cleanest jobs around! Let's legalize it and put the vice cops to work on more important things.
March 17, 2008
1:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
I wouldn't encourage my children to seek employment as prostitutes. Nor would I encourage them to seek employment as lion tamers, lawyers, 7-11 clerks, or stay at home parents with nothing better to do than sit in judgement of the rest of society from thier comfy suburban ranch style.
I do, however, encourage my children to think critically and independantly. They respect authority, but do not follow blindly, like good little indoctrinated drones. They question power, and its uses. As do I.
Your point is absolutely devoid of meaning, vudumom.
I argue that if you rely on the law to dictate your morals, you in fact have no morals. Not your own, anyway.
Sad that such a simple concept is so lost on some people.
March 17, 2008
7:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
EastVail writes:
Prostitution IS legal.
March 18, 2008
6:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
warrengfunk7 writes:
It's already legal - it's called strippers. Order strippers to a private party, pay them for lap dances, then after words, get a free sex bonus, if you tipped them well enough for all the entertainment.
March 18, 2008
9:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
mark79trans writes:
I do not believe in any law that has the effect of the government trying to protect people from themselves. To keep such a law because the act of prostitution is morally wrong is not the function of government. It is impossible and wrong to legislate morality. Morality is based on the beliefs of the citizens; our beliefs are far more divergent then they were two hundred years ago. To declare prostitution wrong belongs solely with the individual and their sworn religious beliefs. Two people having sex paid or otherwise is the responsibility of the participants. It doesn't effect me or anybody else but those involved therefore it is not the responsibility of government to socially engineer what the citizens do in private. In fact, a person(s)' body belongs to them, it is their right to do with it what they please.
March 18, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
aaaadude writes:
The writer complains, "You may legally buy an adult a $300 dinner and then take the person home for sex. Or you may legally take the person on a $4,300 weekend getaway for sex. But it’s a crime ... to pay $4,300 directly for sex." Sounds like someone didn't pick the $300 option.
March 18, 2008
1:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
mark79trans writes:
The writer says,
"But prostitution is a vice. Should government therefore ban it? The proper purpose of government is to protect people’s rights, not prevent vice beyond that context. Legal vices include drinking too much alcohol, smoking, overeating, watching too much TV, engaging in indiscriminate sex and cheating on one’s spouse."
I couldn't agree more!