Should Anyone Get Fired Simply For Hiring A Prostitute?

[Šñøü†ê®]

Obama has nothing to do with this.

BULLSHIT you stupid 'tard!!! OBama had EVERYTHING to do with his associate paying for BJ's! I mean come on. If Hussaine cannot influence his associates, how can he influence ANYTHING?

[Malcolm Wright]

BULLSHIT you stupid 'tard!!! OBama had EVERYTHING to do with his associate paying for BJ's! I mean come on. If Hussaine cannot influence his associates, how can he influence ANYTHING?

Snouter - how do you even begin to believe that statement?
You want to blame the president for some fornicating contractors? You might as well blame him for every transgression made under his watch... How is that remotely intelligent? And you call someone else stupid in the very same breath!

M

[Misteria]

Should Anyone Get Fired Simply For Hiring A Prostitute?

If during woking hours YES

If off duty NO

Whatever a grown adult does in her/his free time is their business.

[Truth Teller]

Well,I am refering to the Secret Service ,but I'm also refering to the workplace in genral.

Now,I found out the Secret Service is told prostitution is verbotten,even in countires where it is legal,so since they know that going in , then they should be fired for breaking their agreement.

I question if that rule is correct,but as long as it exists ,and they agree to it going in,then they should know better.

Howver,so many wingnuts are saying employers should have the right to decide on their employees birth control,well ,should they fire someone for prostitution too?

In my area ,a basketball coach got fired for getting caught with a hooker,but the school was a private school(Catholic) and IMO private schools, etc. can do what they want,that's why they are prviate,but I don't think that should go for the public marketplace.

[Lulu]

I mean reacting in shock to a little bit of titty showing at the Superbowl, while gore and violence goes virtually unnoticed? That's a pretty sick choice of focus for one's disgust, and whatever mind set causes such a reaction needs rethinking.

Concretely, if as a woman, prostitution is revolting to you, all you have to do is be clear about that with the men you meet. Then you must trust - which remains the case regardless: we always have to trust, whether temptations is legal or not.

As a man, the idea of intimacy with a woman who sleeps around is unappealing. So all I have to do is be clear about this in my choice of a life partner. Then I must trust.

Wanting the state to condemn temptation seems childish to me, and I think consensual sexual activity is an area the state should never be involved in.

M.

I completely agree on the hypocrisy of freaking out over a nipple but not batting an eye over the wars, death, carnage that goes on here and overseas.

I should be clear too... I have zero concern that my boyfriend would ever go to a hooker. Some things don't need to be explicitly said and are simply understood - when you know where someone stands on a lot of issues, it can be assumed that hookers are a deal breaker. We actually were talking about the secret service brouhaha last night - his view was similar view to mine (yes, you may think he says what I want to hear, but he's too blunt to finesse that). He focused more on how stupid the guy was not to pay the hooker and the issue of possible blackmail, but overall a similar viewpoint. However, I do believe women view prostitution very differently than men do for a number of reasons.

I don't view it as the state condemning temptation per se (although we do have alienation of affection laws etc)... it's all the other issues that are associated with prostitution that need to be condemned by the state as well. Pimping, sex trafficking, underage prostitution, runaways, drug and alcohol abuse, rape, adultery, etc. etc. I'll grant you that legalizing might help fix some of these issues a little, but not enough. This is why prostitution is illegal and pornography is not because pornography can be much better controlled.

Interestingly enough I found that many countries where prostitution is legal, soliciting a prostitute is not - so it's really a catch 22. Ugh, I can't find that link again... found it on BF's computer since he didn't believe prostitution was legal in Columbia or France. Maybe I can find it later.

[Lulu]

Well,I am refering to the Secret Service ,but I'm also refering to the workplace in genral.

Now,I found out the Secret Service is told prostitution is verbotten,even in countires where it is legal,so since they know that going in , then they should be fired for breaking their agreement.

I question if that rule is correct,but as long as it exists ,and they agree to it going in,then they should know better.

Howver,so many wingnuts are saying employers should have the right to decide on their employees birth control,well ,should they fire someone for prostitution too?

In my area ,a basketball coach got fired for getting caught with a hooker,but the school was a private school(Catholic) and IMO private schools, etc. can do what they want,that's why they are prviate,but I don't think that should go for the public marketplace.

Birth control is not illegal, prostitution is. The issue is HOW does anyone know that a person solicited a hooker? Because they got caught. So you now have someone who has broken the law (whether or not one agrees prostitution should be legal or not). Or coworkers know because someone blabs about their escapades in the workplace - now you have potential sexual harassment/hostile workplace issues. So I completely understand why someone would be fired for what they did either on company time or not. Of course, the SS are 10 times worse than your average schmo going to a hooker because of the high level of their positions.

The idea of what you do on your own time is your own business has been proved outdated, again whether anyone likes it or not. You cannot slam your employer on facebook or as that little blond racist waitress in Chicago did rant epithets about blacks on twitter and expect to have your job the next day. Same thing with being a john. It's life.

[Malcolm Wright]

Pimping, sex trafficking, underage prostitution, runaways, drug and alcohol abuse, rape, adultery, etc. etc. I'll grant you that legalizing might help fix some of these issues a little, but not enough.

So why not legalize it, if it can help?
Are you condemning legalization because it is not a perfect fix? There's no such thing as a perfect fix. But why not do it if legalizing can make people's lives safer, and remove some of the stigma that prostitutes have to deal with (on top of the disdain many people already have for their activity, they also get to call them criminals).

M

[Lulu]

So why not legalize it, if it can help?
Are you condemning legalization because it is not a perfect fix? There's no such thing as a perfect fix. But why not do it if legalizing can make people's lives safer, and remove some of the stigma that prostitutes have to deal with (on top of the disdain many people already have for their activity, they also get to call them criminals).

M

Legalizing doesn't help enough and it doesn't get rid of those problems. It isn't necessarily the govt's job to make unsavory and immoral practices safer (I realize you don't think it's immoral, but I do). I'm not the one making the laws, but this is one that doesn't need to be changed. Maybe if we had prostitution legal here I wouldn't argue that we needed to make it illegal, but overall prostitution isn't something that benefits society (although some men might argue against that) nor is it something that is in the public's best interest.

I would interpret what some countries are doing by legalizing prostitution but making brothels and soliciting illegal, they are simply creating a system where women are able to come forward to police when something bad inevitably happens and the prostitutes are viewed as the victims in the equation.

[Malcolm Wright]

Legalizing doesn't help enough and it doesn't get rid of those problems. It isn't necessarily the govt's job to make unsavory and immoral practices safer (I realize you don't think it's immoral, but I do).

This is dangerous territory. If you want the government to start valuing the safety of some citizens more than others based on a perceived, subjective level of morality, you're asking for trouble.

Besides, in our clearer moments, we are all aware that risk has a habit of not being something so easy to quarantine to those other people we disapprove of. Many monogamous people get AIDS from partners who have slept around. Part of legalizing prostitution would enforce regular testing for prostitutes which reduce the risk of disease transmission.

For an example that could strike closer to home, if you have children, just imagine that one of your children falls into prostitution. I somehow doubt you would be so quick to claim the government shouldn't be concerned with the safety of those who behave immorally in YOUR eyes.

I'm not the one making the laws, but this is one that doesn't need to be changed. Maybe if we had prostitution legal here I wouldn't argue that we needed to make it illegal, but overall prostitution isn't something that benefits society (although some men might argue against that) nor is it something that is in the public's best interest.

Well we're back to square one: regardless of how we feel about whether its in society's interest or not, it is here and it is not going to go away. So arguing it should remain illegal because it doesn't benefit society is not a rational response to the situation. Practically speaking, it is here to stay and the only relevant question is how to make society better with prostitution in its midst.

I would interpret what some countries are doing by legalizing prostitution but making brothels and soliciting illegal, they are simply creating a system where women are able to come forward to police when something bad inevitably happens and the prostitutes are viewed as the victims in the equation.

Makes sense, but I still believe making those things illegal is a waste of resources at best.
Now more than ever, we face challenges that are going to need every last drop of energy, money and time to overcome them. Economic problems. Environmental problems that specifically require us to rise to a new level of community, national and international cooperation to focus on the things that matter. And meanwhile we cling to criminalizing people who pay or get paid for sexual pleasure? Really?

Our grand children will look at the world they inherit from us, and look at the things we were worried about while we did the damage, and conclude what they will conclude.

M

[Lulu]

I tell you what. I have to clean my house and do laundry right now but I will look for data that would show there is less crime and victimization against women, less child sex trafficking, less sexual and physical abuse of prostitutes in countries where prostitution is legal. If there's data to strongly support the why of legalizing, I could be inclined to ease up on my opinion. Maybe. I don't see a why of legalizing at this point in the discussion without anything concrete to support it.

Re: if I had a child that fell into prostitution: you can't rely on authorities to do jack about it whether legal or illegal. You would have to hire a private investigator, track them down, and then deal with the emotional/substance issues they may have that drove them to prostitution in the first place. Kids fall into prostitution because they are desperate and they either have to escape their family or they have no family.

[Truth Teller]

So why not legalize it, if it can help?
Are you condemning legalization because it is not a perfect fix? There's no such thing as a perfect fix. But why not do it if legalizing can make people's lives safer, and remove some of the stigma that prostitutes have to deal with (on top of the disdain many people already have for their activity, they also get to call them criminals).

M

100% agreement.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Legalizing doesn't help enough and it doesn't get rid of those problems. It isn't necessarily the govt's job to make unsavory and immoral practices safer (I realize you don't think it's immoral, but I do). I'm not the one making the laws, but this is one that doesn't need to be changed. Maybe if we had prostitution legal here I wouldn't argue that we needed to make it illegal, but overall prostitution isn't something that benefits society (although some men might argue against that) nor is it something that is in the public's best interest.

I would interpret what some countries are doing by legalizing prostitution but making brothels and soliciting illegal, they are simply creating a system where women are able to come forward to police when something bad inevitably happens and the prostitutes are viewed as the victims in the equation.

Yoohoo. We have brothels in Nevada and soliciting is illegal. The setup works fine. There is more interest in changing the state law that prohibits it in LV and Reno than there is in limiting it where it is practiced.

There's no need to speculate about legal prostitution. We have legal prostitution. Just look at it and decide what you like or don't like about it.

[Lulu]

Yoohoo. We have brothels in Nevada and soliciting is illegal. The setup works fine. There is more interest in changing the state law that prohibits it in LV and Reno than there is in limiting it where it is practiced.

There's no need to speculate about legal prostitution. We have legal prostitution. Just look at it and decide what you like or don't like about it.

1 county and 1 brothel does not an argument make. Most of the countries where prostitution is LEGAL, brothels are ILLEGAL. Go figure.

[Malcolm Wright]

I tell you what. I have to clean my house and do laundry right now but I will look for data that would show there is less crime and victimization against women, less child sex trafficking, less sexual and physical abuse of prostitutes in countries where prostitution is legal. If there's data to strongly support the why of legalizing, I could be inclined to ease up on my opinion. Maybe. I don't see a why of legalizing at this point in the discussion without anything concrete to support it.

See you in a while!
Just remember that if the net effect of legalization is positive, there is no good reason to not support it. I really think your resistance comes from the hope that disapproving somehow helps the situation on the ground. It doesn't.

Re: if I had a child that fell into prostitution: you can't rely on authorities to do jack about it whether legal or illegal. You would have to hire a private investigator, track them down, and then deal with the emotional/substance issues they may have that drove them to prostitution in the first place. Kids fall into prostitution because they are desperate and they either have to escape their family or they have no family.

That wasn't the point. I was saying if you had a child in that situation, we likely wouldn't read the following from you:

It isn't necessarily the govt's job to make unsavory and immoral practices safer.

If you couldn't stop your daughter from turning tricks, I think you'd become better attuned to the practical blessings of a government that DOES design policy around safety, regardless of questions of morality.

M.

[Chachma v'Oz]

1 county and 1 brothel does not an argument make. Most of the countries where prostitution is LEGAL, brothels are ILLEGAL. Go figure.

Actually, it's 16 counties with around 30 brothels, but the fact remains that where it exists, it works, and where it's prohibited, there are problems.

Connect the dots.

[queenlillian1962]

Should Anyone Get Fired Simply For Hiring A Prostitute?

If during woking hours YES

If off duty NO


Whatever a grown adult does in her/his free time is their business.

I agree the question for me is were these guys considered off duty at the time. IMO no because it was a business trip and they are representing the USA. If they were on vacation then I'd say it's thier business.

[Truth Teller]

I agree the question for me is were these guys considered off duty at the time. IMO no because it was a business trip and they are representing the USA. If they were on vacation then I'd say it's thier business.

They weren't really working,so IMO they were off duty.

Still,they agree when they take the job not to engage in prostitution.

Still,I question the morality of that rule.

The fact is that this job makes it hard to have relationships ,I see nothing wrong with someone in that circumstance paying for sex.

And this goes for women as well as men:

[Lulu]

Ok I now consider myself more educated on hookers and the debate of legalizing prostitution. It's not something I'd thought much about before this debate and it's not a topic I'm emotionally invested in. My initial reaction is one of morality - yes, I recognize the hypocrisy of imposing my morality on an issue when I get annoyed when others do it on other issues (ie. gay marriage, abortion, birth control). I see the rationale of legalizing, it would be safer for the women, brothels make sense because they can be easily regulated, and women would have a lot more protection. Some of what I read also talked about murder rates and incarceration rates being abnormally high for prostitutes. I still have a moral issue with it but since I am opposed to individual morality dictating law, I have officially eased up on my opinion regarding legalizing prostitution.

I found some interesting articles, not what I was looking for exactly, but they certainly make a compelling argument for legalizing prostitution.

http://www.independent.org/publicati...le.asp?id=1300
http://voices.yahoo.com/prostitution...96.html?cat=17
http://voices.yahoo.com/should-prost...87.html?cat=17

[Lulu]

And the first male prostitute/prostidude looks and sounds like the missing link. He's not the brightest bulb on the porch, not the sharpest knife in the drawer... bless his heart.



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583680,00.html

[Šñøü†ê®]

You want to blame the president for some fornicating contractors?

Contractors? Those are the security team assigned by HUSSAINE to protect HUSSAINE, and as horrible as HUSSAINE is, him being incapacitated on their watch would have a negative impact on THE WORLD. Are you getting the picture!

You might as well blame him for every transgression made under his watch...

He is the chimp-in-chief is he not? If he appoints INCOMPETENT IDIOTS or cannot LEAD effectively and command respect, than yes, you should blame him also!

How is that remotely intelligent?

It is not remotely intelligent, it is incredibly intelligent!