Should Prostitution be Legal for Midgets and Handicapped People?
Yes. Libertarians the world over would and should praise the god given right for Midgets and Handicapped People to be able to have unconditional, full access, to prostitution. I believe there ought to be a FEDERAL LAW prohibiting the government from discriminating against Midgets and Handicapped People as far as having access to prostitution. Naturally, Midgets and Handicapped People do not have a fair and equal opportunity to fornication. In order to warrant this claim, a government or privately funded initiative to measure the average levels of fornication in the United States ought to be done; the design of the experiment being the sample population is separated into two control groups, as a double blind study. 1) Non-midgets and Non-Handicapped People. 2) Midgets and Handicapped People. If there is a significant statistical difference between the two groups in yielding the needed “P-value”, or whatever, it will establish two things: 1) There is a clear social inequality in fornication between the two groups. 2) Government can use these statistics in warranting Midgets and Handicapped People do not have a fair and equal opportunity to fornication.
In the United States, each state has the power to decide whether or not prostitution is legal in that state or part of that state. In all but one U.S. state (Nevada) the buying and selling of sexual services is illegal and usually classified as a misdemeanor.
So tell me forum, fight for it?
In Liberty,
Jonathan Raof
Jonathan,
Anyone who wishes to single out a group, further divide the people of this country, and pit groups against each other will surely follow your suggestions of getting the government involved and passing new laws. The government will encourage such things as much as possible. They do so because they know that a citizenry divide will fall while one united will stand.
You state in your article that each State can make the laws regarding prostitution. The federal government would love nothing more then to have the states give that right to them. It will be another feather in their design to gain control of a fully centralize government and do away with the states altogether.
If Libertarians wanted to fight for this, their tactic of going to the federal government will ruin them. Instead of fighting to create more legislation, the right tactic would be to get rid of the state legislation that already exists. In doing this, everyone, not just a certain group, will have the same benefits. When they all have the same benefit, there is no group pitting against another and the need for legislation becomes moot.
If you think more legislation is the answer rather then getting rid of current legislation, then why stop at midgets? Why not also create legislation for the people who want sex with animals too? Maybe even the ones who want special bondage also? Possibly we can create legislation for people to even have sex with trees, would that be good for you?
So, your question about whether we should fight for it needs to be defined a little better even though the end result will be the same. Yes, I agree midgets should have the right to prostitution. I think everyone aught to have it.
If I was to fight for it I would fight to get rid of the legislation that currently exists. I would not fight in favor of creating new legislation.
interesting post jonathan. jim k raises good response. it also seems that fornication access as well as frequency being highly variable among individuals is one of the drivers of demand and supply re prostitution–it is a service filling a market need. as such for the free market, for liberty, and as non-discrimination against anyone the current restrictions need to go. your take (jonathan) however is different in that it represents the distortions federal power center accumulators and other federal/state worshippers will go to any length necessary for inter- group infighting they can produce (as noted by jim k). in sum it is not properly a federal issue and states should ease up if not –preferably– eliminate the existing restrictions on consensual sex among adults.
Yes. Libertarians the world over would and should praise the god given right for Midgets and Handicapped People to be able to have unconditional, full access, to prostitution.
Agreed
I believe there ought to be a FEDERAL LAW prohibiting the government from discriminating against Midgets and Handicapped People as far as having access to prostitution.
This is your belief. No one can argue this. All they can do is try to persuade you otherwise. Jim made a good persuasive argument against this. Comment there is you want to argue about it.
Naturally, Midgets and Handicapped People do not have a fair and equal opportunity to fornication.
Naturally? Why is it naturally? Do they have some parts that cause them to be different in nature then other humans? Do there natural sexual functions differ from the rest of us?
In order to warrant this claim, a government or privately funded initiative to measure the average levels of fornication in the United States, separated into two control groups, as a double blind study.
1) Non-midgets and Non-Handicapped People.
2) Midgets and Handicapped People.
So, at what size do sexual functions cease to work naturally? What handicaps will you be considering here? Are you saying any handicap or just those that effect sexual functions? What happens if you find out the opposite is true and Midgets and Handicap actually get more to begin with?
If there is a significant statistical difference between the two groups in yielding the needed “P-value”, or whatever, it will establish two things:
1) There is a clear social inequality in fornication between the two groups.
2) Government can use these statistics in warranting Midgets and Handicapped People do not have a fair and equal opportunity to fornication.
So if there is an inequality in favor of the midgets and handicapped, will you pass legislation for the rest of us instead?
In the United States, each state has the power to decide whether or not prostitution is legal in that state or part of that state. In all but one U.S. state (Nevada) the buying and selling of sexual services is illegal and usually classified as a misdemeanor.
Ah, so now here is a good point. This is what Jim was talking about. So, what happens when you create this legislation? Do the states now have to listen to it or does this start a states right fight?
Even better, this is not addressed in the Constitution so what would give the government the authority to even create such legislation? Will you use the “general welfare” clause here? If so, will that open argument that it is not general its specific to only a select few?
Is this a valid example of what you mean by going through it line by line?
Jimk, Lptrbuce, Demosthenes,
Great responses. This article was inspired by a documentary on Prostitution I watched the other night, in which I learned Midgets and Handicapped People do in fact seek out prostitution and as such don’t want to be judged for it. Additionally, I thought this was a good way to present a DA article. I do not believe the Federal Government has the authority to really pass a Federal law ensuring Midgets and Handicapped People; I thought it was a good DA position to say the Fed would…one could invoke the Constitution and the 14th amendment, the equal protection clause. Prohibiting the government from discriminating against Midgets and Handicapped People as far as having access to prostitution does have interpretation rooted in the Constitution and genreral framework for out government, state and local alike. Yes, Demosthenes, you provided excellent line by line rebuttal. Obviously, as we all seem to recognize that all States except Nevada make Prostitution illegal, but I ask, is that right? When the State is acting without the best intentions for all types of people, then I would argue the Fed is justified to intervene, generally. If there were an inequality in favor of Midgets and Handicapped People, I would consider passing laws for the rest of you, but there ought to be some social and statistical justification in that – to show there is an unfair and unequal opportunity to access fornication.
Jonathan,
Ok, lets look at the Constitution argument you say one might use. Specifically, you said the 14th amendment. Section one is the only section that deals with “the people”. So I will limit the comment to that section. The others deal with Congress in some form.
The 14th, section one states (in the first paragraph) “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” There is a lot to discuss here but the gist comes down to a single point in the end – jurisdiction.
In previous articles, you talked about government public jurisdiction vs. the private sector. In other words, it is a question concerning the jurisdictional boundaries of the federal government. If I look at this correctly, then the midgets must have twp thing BEFORE they can approach the federal government for such a law.
They must be first be born or naturalized in the United States. That means all the midgets or handicaps people from other countries and living here do not fall within these bound and therefore cannot request the law.
Second, and perhaps most importantly, they must be subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government. The first part is easy enough to see right off the bat. The second, the jurisdictional question is a little more difficult.
Or your Constitutional argument to hold water they would have to prove such jurisdiction before lobbying for such a law. How will they do that? They have no birth certificate issued by the United Sates. The only ones that have proof, are the ones who came from foreign countries and were naturalized, they have federally issued papers. I would say anyone working for the government would fall into this category as well. After all, people who work for someone fall under that employer’s jurisdiction.
Now, with such a very limited number of people, who are handicapped or midgets, and who fall into this category, is it likely that the federal government would make such a change? I do not think so, since, under the federal government everyone already has the power to seek out prostitution. After all, they do not have any laws against such behavior. To create a law that says you can do what you can already do without the law does not make sense.
Yes, you could create a law to stop a federal government from discriminating, however, if they are not discriminating now (as noted above and in your article), why bother creating the law?
In your article, you point out that the federal government does not have such laws right now. You indicate those laws are handled on a state level. As such, would it not be better to go to the states and get those laws changed? Maybe, if your study shows what you want it to show, then you get a law to stop the STATE government from discriminating.
Of course, once you do that, then you have the discrimination of everyone else up against the freedom of the midgets and handicapped. This brings in jim’s argument. Since justice is blind, it is not supposed to know groups. Once you pit group A against group B you have a divided citizenry. If you remove the laws altogether, you end any possibility of discrimination against any group.
Jonathan,
All right, let’s see where we stand so far. I have just posted the rebuttal to the basis of the first part of comment. Now let us look at the other part. States acting without best intentions and the federal government stepping in, is this right for them to do? I want to be sure I understand your argument. If I paraphrase what you state then you are saying in general terms is that when the governments of the various states do not agree on the laws that the federal government should step in and make the laws uniform across all states.
For instance, the prostitution law you are referring to. Here Nevada does not discriminate but the other states do. Now you want the feds to step in and tell the other states to stop discriminating against midgets and handicap people. You also say that, since thee is an inequality, the federal government should step in and basically even the playing field. OK, I am going with those ideas in mind. If I am wrong in what I see as your points you will need to correct me.
Now, lets first take the original point and see why it is wrong. The goal is to get rid of the inequality of the use of prostitution against midgets and handicap people. You want the federal government to step in and create a law for such. Since getting rid of the inequality is the goal, creating the new law will cause more inequality to exist. With the new law, you now have people in Nevada, who were free to do stuff before, being prosecuted. You pitted groups against each other in Nevada now. Also, in all the other states, you now have prostitution legal for only group. How long before all the other groups build a case for it to be legal for them?
Well, the federal government should see this coming ahead of time. They will have asked themselves how to be equal to everyone before the barrage of lawsuits start. Perhaps to alleviate that problem, instead of a midget/handicap law, they simply create a law that says prostitution is legal everywhere. That makes it equal for everyone and if you do not choose to partake you have nothing to complain about since it is available if you want it.
Of course, now that the feds have stepped in and tried to even the field, the states are going to claim jurisdiction. Each state was guaranteed a republic form of government where in they were in control of their local laws. Now your new fed law is encroaching on their territory. Will they sit idly by? I don’t think so; they will begin a barrage of states rights lawsuits against the feds.
To eliminate the states rights lawsuits, the feds would then have to create a constitutional amendment to make prostitution legal. I do not think I have to get into how ridiculous that sounds. Not withstanding how difficult it is to get constitutional changes, we have already seen the effects of trying to legislate morality with the constitution during prohibition. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now either. You cannot effectively legislate morality, no matter how many times it is tried.
None of what was discussed thus far had anything to do with the courts. Rest assured, these cases will get kicked out of federal courts as fast as possible and sent back down to the states. Why, because the federal courts know that all law is local. Unless it has something to do with what the federal government is doing the federal courts will not want to be involved. They cannot be dealing with every teeny tiny little thing that comes along. If they did, imagine yourself in front of a federal judge because you had a speeding ticket.
I do not think the idea of the federal government getting involved in local issues is a good track for them to take. If they actually went down that track, there would be no need for any state governments. When taken to its ultimate, everything would be federal. Is this really the end result you are looking for?
Demonsthenes,
Fair enough, your arguments seem as good standards for my arguments to proceed.
Yes, you understand my argument about the States correctly.
I understand your critique about law, and how a law would perpetuate the inequality, however, I do not believe the government endorsing the direct act of a Midget or Handicapped Person to lawfully seek out prostitution would do such a thing. The reason is because Prostitution in and of itself is illegal. Prostitution is oldest profession in the world, and as such, one of the most out-lawed professions. I really don’t think there will be any changes to the fact. As such, the federal government endorsing Prostitution as a legal act for Midgets and Handicapped People will be a legislative initiative that hedges against discrimination, rather than perpetuate it.
Its not about government getting involved in local issues, its about making sure force, fraud, discrimination, does not occur. I am not looking for the federal government to get involved in everything, just in places that are warranted. Protecting people from discrimination is well within the fed’s bounds.
Jonathan,
OK, if they want to get rid of such discrimination, let us say you get the law passed. Now there is a federal law that says you must allow midgets and handicapped people can legally seek out prostitutes. What happens next?
The likely scenario, whether you want to admit it or not, is that another group will claim discrimination. Since blacks are disproportionately susceptible to seeking these alternatives over say white or Asian people, they begin to cry. They scream and yell it is unfair. The government says the stats indicate otherwise but the blacks claim that’s because it is illegal for them to do so.
Now you have the original stats in question because what now is being claimed is that the midgets and handicapped were doing illegal things and made a stink that it was illegal and the government fixed that problem for them. So, if it fixed it for them then why not for the blacks. It is unfair and unequal for the government to treat the midgets and handicapped differently then the blacks. The blacks file suit to get a law in their favor.
You see how this will perpetuate through out the groups. I am sure you see this in everyday life. Gays want marriage now. Poor people bitched so loud about Medicare for the elderly that they got Medicaid. Homeless people bitched so loud that they can get food stamps just like people on welfare even though they still make money. Even though you don’t think it will happen, it will.
You made a great comment to back up your justification, which actually negates itself if the law gets passed. You said, “The reason is because Prostitution in and of itself is illegal.” If you pass your law that makes it only illegal some of the times, not all the time, then you will have people trying to redefine the boundaries. Maybe, if they cant get it passed for everyone they start with things like the definition of midget. Maybe the get the height requirement changed from 4 feet to 4 feet 6 inches and increase the size of the group.
Maybe they redefine handicapped to include mentally handicapped. Then anyone can take and fail a mental test to get away with prostitution. There are all sorts of things that could happen that you seem to not be considering.
You also say that you don’t want the feds to get involved in local issues. That is exactly what prostitution is at the moment and you are saying they should be involved. Your idea here is that they are protecting people from discrimination. Currently the law is not discriminatory toward any single one group. It is against everyone.
If the feds really wanted to get involved they should have the states enforce their laws. If the midgets and handicaps are seeking out the prostitutes more then anyone else, then they should be arrested more then anyone else. Well, at least until you get rid of the stupid law. Once you get rid of the damn state law against prostitution, there wont be any need for the fed government to step in because it wont be illegal.
Demosthensis,
You say:
“……blacks are disproportionately susceptible to seeking these alternatives over say white or Asian people, they begin to cry. They scream and yell it is unfair. The government says the stats indicate otherwise but the blacks claim that’s because it is illegal for them to do so.”
Black people will never have an unfair advantage in achieving full, free, fornication. So this isn’t a decent warrant for your claim.
I agree, maybe they should increase the height, but shorter Midgets would probably be disgruntled. I think your right, if government didn’t make it illegal in the first place, then we wouldn’t have this discussion…but they don’t.
No, I am not saying the fed should get into the local issue of prostitution because thats what it is….I am saying the fed should get involved in hedging against discrimination, force, and fraud.
You say:
“If the feds really wanted to get involved they should have the states enforce their laws.”
Well, No, thats force. And in fact, I think they may be doing that already. I bet the fed gives the States funding, like the drinking age for alcohol, to keep prostitution illegal.
You say, finally:
“If the midgets and handicaps are seeking out the prostitutes more then anyone else, then they should be arrested more then anyone else. Well, at least until you get rid of the stupid law. Once you get rid of the damn state law against prostitution, there wont be any need for the fed government to step in because it wont be illegal.”
Well, No. Your If Then statement has a flaw. You assume Midgets and Handicapped People will break the law to fill their sexual desires.
Jonathan,
Is prostitution a local issue now or not?
If you answer yes, as you should since you specified that its controlled by state law currently, then asking the federal government to do anything about it is getting involved in local issues – even if it is in the name of hedging against discrimination, force or fraud – a rose by any other name will smell as sweet.
If you say no, then you are lying and your argument is meaningless because it is impossible to be a local issue and not a local issue at the same time.
Since prostitution is currently illegal, when you make it legal for one group other groups will want in on he action. Black people have a propensity to push the envelope of the law. They understand what the law does and scream, fight argue etc until they get what they want. Yes, if you give it to the midgets and handicap, the black people are the most likely group to fight and receive the blessing next.
My point with the fed saying the states should enforce their laws was a point that they should not create new federal legislation and should stay out of states business. The best that they can do is to tell the states to do their job.
Yes, it is force; everything the government does is force. That’s why I said the stupid laws need to go away.
You made mention in one of your comments why you didn’t think governments intervention would do any of this and your reason was “ The reason is because Prostitution in and of itself is illegal.” How is the fact that its illegal, and then you make it legal for only one group NOT going to cause anything to happen?
I did ask the question if you made it legal for only the midgets and handicapped, what would happen next? You didn’t answer that question. I gave you a possible scenario and all you did was try to tear mine apart. Not bad for the advocate, except, you still didn’t answer my question, what happens next?
You are not naive enough to believe that nothing will happen. When you create new laws there is always the lawsuits that follow. If my scenario is wrong then what is the correct scenario?
“Yes, if you give it to the midgets and handicap, the black people are the most likely group to fight and receive the blessing next.”
Are you kidding me? Your whole argument is ridiculous because there is no other group of people to complain after little people and physically challenged groups. Blacks are no more likely to complain than Whites, Asians, Latinos, Native Americans, Jamaicans, etc. I usually don’t say things like this but your claim is just stupid. Members of each of these racial groups are able to have sex within and outside their lot. There is nothing any of them can “scream” about.
Had you said, “The next group to complain and demand an exception be made for them would be the obese,” I could understand it. I think obesity might fall under “physically challenged” but I think you get the point.
And for the record, I believe prostitution should be legal for everyone and regulated nationwide.
Avy,
Good to see you here. Thank you for your rebuttal to Demosthenes’ latest comment. I agree with your argument, as the article does as well. Keep the comments coming!
Avy,
Hi, glad to see you here. Sorry to be long in replying. You are of course angry that I chose to use black people as an example. Of course, you are also correct, it doesn’t matter what group it is; I just simply chose one. Substitute obese for black. It doesn’t matter; you just prove my point. Some group, somewhere, of some kind, will complain and want equal access.
Once they do, the whole crap hits the fan, over time as exception will be made and laws changed etc. etc. The cycle described will become apparent. It is no different then what the gays are arguing for now. You just change the subject from “marriage” to “sex” and you see the parallels.
I agree with you, I think prostitution should NOT be illegal. I don’t think the government should have any say into what two or more consenting adults do with their time. I disagree with you only on the part that you think it should be regulated. I don’t think there should be any governmental regulations. If I chose to pay for it I should get what I want not what some government bureaucrat says I can have.
@Jonathan – Thanks and howdy
@Demosthenes – You didn’t simply choose one. You chose Blacks because you feel “the black people are the most likely group to fight and receive the blessing next.”
Far be it from me to tell you what to think but it sounds like BS to me so it irritated me enough for me to reply. I’m over it.
As for regulation, my opinion is that there needs to be someone making sure sex workers are regularly tested. That’s all I care about. You can’t force everyone to do but it would be in the best interest of everyone (even those not using the services of a prostitute) if they were tested regularly. The costs would count as a business expense and be tax deductible in a perfect world.
Avy,
I agree that they should be tested. I disagree that government should force the test on them.
I think it should be industry standard. After all, who wants to go to a brothel where they know they will get diseased. Those houses that do not test will be out of business fairly quickly.
yo man, this post is straight up whack homie. midgets and retards get it on like anybody else dog. and forget the government legislation and obama, we dont need none of the hood drama, power to the people baby! oherwise, every trick gunna want some handout from the ugly folks to the uncut boi
Mike B,
What do you think?