Wednesday, September 29, 2010

A Great Day For Prostitutes and Liberals

Stickers on a pay phone advertising the servic...Image via Wikipedia
Ontario judges, acting as usual on the basis of nothing more profound than personal likes and dislikes,  have struck down Canada's prostitution laws. Can cash-intensive government training grants, overseers, seminars, etc. etc. be far behind??

The ruling strikes down a law rooted in a high view of human beings. It represents a continuation of the slippery moral slide that Pierre Trudeau put the country on.  It will appeal to pimps, prostitutes,  johns, abortionists, and Liberals, who have been trying to make prostitution "just another career choice" for years -- hello, Hedy Fry?!

The great thing about Canada is you don't have to think about moral issues for yourself -- judges get paid to do it for you.  And we know they're uniquely qualified because they wear frilly robes and we don't.

And, hey, and what's with this politically incorrect "prostitute" talk -- it's "sex worker", bud.  Or, in the case of "it's just-another-job" Liberals, "mom",  "sis" or "daughter", maybe.

A good day for Liberals, a bad day for Canada.

Article here.

An alternate view from Canada's Barbara Kay.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


Anonymous said...

acting as usual on the basis of nothing more profound than personal likes and dislikes...

Holy socon projection, Batman!

Luca Manfredi said...

Disagree. Moral turpitude has hardly anything to do with arguments for or against the legal status of prostitution.

High views of human beings would lead me to assume human beings won't sell or buy sex, rather than the other way round. Driving prostitution into the gutter is assuming, falsely, that the behaviour will vanish if there's a law against it.

Amid the gutter gunk, episodes of human trafficking can not be spotted easily. If a client suspects it, one can't really call the police and go "I'm a john and I think a girl's being kept captive here".

Seminars, career choice? Aren't we over-reacting here a bit? No-one has even remotely suggested marketing prostitution in school career advice, or facilitating it in any way. I'd probably be the first to oppose such moves.

What's wrong with being able to hide behind a door with a big bouncer, and bad pimps or madams being thrown out of the business by market forces?

Moreover, every critic of the ruling cites "societal interests". Will not recognising climate change be criminalised next? Or serving alcohol after 11 pm? Not going to church? Not filling out the long form census?

Where does society's interest stop and personal liberty begin?

If this ruling helps get them off the street, off the clap and into the taxpayer cohort I'm thinking it's a positive development overall.

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"