Originally posted by: ELP
This is why I asked why doesn't the government ban all sex out of wedlock. It's also safe to say that there is far more promiscuous sex happening then prostitution, therefore, the spread of STD's can be more attributed to promiscuous sex. Hmmm, that's a big danger to society, better make that illegal too.Originally posted by: ryzmah
Originally posted by: ELP
...and by your logic, alcohol would be illegal too. The difference between prostitution and drugs is that if you use the drugs, while intoxicated you could be a social hazard i.e. driving, operating machinery, generally endangering others. I've never heard of someone who visited a prositute and proceeded to harm or kill someone as a direct result of paying for sex. Let me know if you have any information on any instances of that.
I'm sure there are numerous instances where people have gotten STD's and then spread them to their spouse.
By the way, what's the social hazard of selling organs? Incest?
I only referred to drugs.
No one else claimed to make a standard for laws - they only noted the absurdity of the notion that the constitutional standard is that the only possible laws are those that one's rights only end when they intrude on those of another. You can debate whether that's a more valid standard, but to say that laws that don't meet it are unconstitutional (as the poster who started this thread did) is complete bs.
