AOC Promotes Prostitution: ‘Sex Work Is Work’

[Mesaclone]

As a Libertarian, I have to say that any consensual acts between a man and a woman that do not directly harm others...should not be rendered illegal via government. In nations such as Germany and Switzerland ...this has been legal for many years and sex trafficking and related crimes are LESS of a problem. Additionally, as health conditions are monitored it is less likely to result in mass transmission of sexual diseases.

Not everything that is wrong, or that we disapprove of, must be illegal. We should take care that no one is forced into any such business...but if people chose freely to do so that must be their right IMHO.

[roamer_1]

As a Libertarian, I have to say that any consensual acts between a man and a woman that do not directly harm others...should not be rendered illegal via government. In nations such as Germany and Switzerland ...this has been legal for many years and sex trafficking and related crimes are LESS of a problem. Additionally, as health conditions are monitored it is less likely to result in mass transmission of sexual diseases.

Not everything that is wrong, or that we disapprove of, must be illegal. We should take care that no one is forced into any such business...but if people chose freely to do so that must be their right IMHO.

As a libertarian and conservative, I think your pointing to nations is not very libertarian. And as a federalist, I think it perfectly normal and sane for folks to enact laws in the communities they live in that promote the lifestyle they want for their children to be raised in. To take that right away from them is not libertarian, conservative, or good.

[Knox27]

As a libertarian and conservative, I think your pointing to nations is not very libertarian. And as a federalist, I think it perfectly normal and sane for folks to enact laws in the communities they live in that promote the lifestyle they want for their children to be raised in. To take that right away from them is not libertarian, conservative, or good.

You cannot enact laws that you and your neighbors like if it infringes on other peoples rights.  That was forcibly demonstrated when the national guard had to make sure black kids could go to 'white" schools.

You can set the tone for your kids in your own home, but that's it.  The Constitution is supreme over a locality. This is an issue of govt restricting the free market and telling women what they cannot do with their bodies.  Its an outdated law from when religion reigned and it should end.

[Hoodat]

I think it perfectly normal and sane for folks to enact laws in the communities they live in that promote the lifestyle they want for their children to be raised in. To take that right away from them is not libertarian, conservative, or good.

Amen, amen, and amen.  People of a society should always have the right to come together and enact laws that suit their society.  When that right is taken away, tyranny ensues.

[roamer_1]

You cannot enact laws that you and your neighbors like if it infringes on other peoples rights.  That was forcibly demonstrated when the national guard had to make sure black kids could go to 'white" schools.

You can set the tone for your kids in your own home, but that's it.  The Constitution is supreme over a locality. This is an issue of govt restricting the free market and telling women what they cannot do with their bodies.  Its an outdated law from when religion reigned and it should end.

And that is why we will fail as a nation - Folks confusing liberty with libertine.

[roamer_1]

Amen, amen, and amen.  People of a society should always have the right to come together and enact laws that suit their society.  When that right is taken away, tyranny ensues.

That IS the penultimate point! 

[Hoodat]

The Constitution is supreme over a locality. This is an issue of govt restricting the free market and telling women what they cannot do with their bodies.

Can you please show me that specific part of the Constitution that addresses this?  Thanks in advance.

[sneakypete]

Can you please show me that specific part of the Constitution that addresses this?  Thanks in advance.

@Hoodat


Please tell me how YOU define "individual freedoms".

Unless of course it is "All the freedoms *I* am willing to ALLOW you." I already understand that.

[Hoodat]

@Hoodat

Please tell me how YOU define "individual freedoms".

Unless of course it is "All the freedoms *I* am willing to ALLOW you." I already understand that.

Individual freedom would encompass taking any action or expressing any thought without restraint of any kind.  Want to drive on the wrong side of the road?  Individual freedom.  Want to rape your school teacher?  Individual freedom.  Want to rob a bank?  Individual freedom.  Hope that helps.

[libertybele]

You cannot enact laws that you and your neighbors like if it infringes on other peoples rights.  That was forcibly demonstrated when the national guard had to make sure black kids could go to 'white" schools.

You can set the tone for your kids in your own home, but that's it.  The Constitution is supreme over a locality. This is an issue of govt restricting the free market and telling women what they cannot do with their bodies.  Its an outdated law from when religion reigned and it should end.

We have all kinds of laws; drinking age, forbidding of selling alcohol to minors, speed limits, traffic lights, stop signs, school zones, voting age, etc, etc., ALL could be considered infringing on one's rights. 

Setting the "tone" for your kids ... so perhaps a parent thinks incest is ok in their own home -- does that make it legal??

Our Constitution was founded upon principles and morals related to Christianity; like it or not. 

Too many dingbats believe that our Constitution is "outdated" -- that is only the beginning of what's wrong with our Republic today.  Too many disregard the Constitution when it IS one of the greatest documents ever written and has served this country very well for many decades; problems only arose when people, including our politicians decided it was ok to circumvent the Constitution to fit their agenda and nobody held those idiots responsible. 

It is MY duty and IMHO the duty of ALL Americans to obey and defend our Constitution!!!

[roamer_1]

Individual freedom would encompass taking any action or expressing any thought without restraint of any kind.  Want to drive on the wrong side of the road?  Individual freedom.  Want to rape your school teacher?  Individual freedom.  Want to rob a bank?  Individual freedom.  Hope that helps.

BRAVO!

Liberty has responsibilities.
Freedom has consequences...

So many do not understand the difference.

[Mesaclone]

As a libertarian and conservative, I think your pointing to nations is not very libertarian. And as a federalist, I think it perfectly normal and sane for folks to enact laws in the communities they live in that promote the lifestyle they want for their children to be raised in. To take that right away from them is not libertarian, conservative, or good.

In part, I agree with you. This should be left to states and municipalities to decide. No need for national legislation whatsoever. As for citing other nations, there’s nothing wrong with looking at how well a “libertarian” path is working for those nations. Doesn’t mean we must do what they do, just that we are making an educated and informed decision.

[Cyber Liberty]

In part, I agree with you. This should be left to states and municipalities to decide. No need for national legislation whatsoever. As for citing other nations, there’s nothing wrong with looking at how well a “libertarian” path is working for those nations. Doesn’t mean we must do what they do, just that we are making an educated and informed decision.

Is there a National Statute prohibiting AOC from plying her chosen occupation? 

[Mesaclone]

BRAVO!

Liberty has responsibilities.
Freedom has consequences...

So many do not understand the difference.

This is a misstating of Libertarianism. Libertarianism does not make citizens free to harm each other...that’s a straw man. It does discourage government from intervening in private contracts and actions between consenting adults...as long as that does not directly harm 3rd parties.

[Mesaclone]

Is there a National Statute prohibiting AOC from plying her chosen occupation?

If only!

[roamer_1]

As for citing other nations, there’s nothing wrong with looking at how well a “libertarian” path is working for those nations. Doesn’t mean we must do what they do, just that we are making an educated and informed decision.

I think I may have been overly blunt in my reply. 'Looking at nations' implies imposing at the national level. This whole argument is about federal imposition... There are already localities where hooking is legal, and where even if it is not legal it may as well be for lack of enforcement. I will not tell those folks how to live their lives. They can have at it so long as my taxes are not made to support it.

But I will draw a hard line on telling me from on high what me and mine must do. It is the national legalization that I would strenuously oppose, just as I would oppose local legalization where I am. What y'all do over there does not concern me (beyond a bit of preaching).

I have no problem with localities (States respectively, counties, etc) looking at how nations may do things. So long as it stays republican and representative.

[roamer_1]

This is a misstating of Libertarianism. Libertarianism does not make citizens free to harm each other...that’s a straw man. It does discourage government from intervening in private contracts and actions between consenting adults...as long as that does not directly harm 3rd parties.

No, it is not a misstatement of libertarianism. It was simply a general principle - And it applies to libertarianism as it does to everything else.

[Cyber Liberty]

If there is no Federal Statute prohibiting prostitution, there certainly is none under consideration. This conversation over what the mental midget from Brooklyn says is 100% academic.

[roamer_1]

If there is no Federal Statute prohibiting prostitution, there certainly is none under consideration. This conversation over what the mental midget from Brooklyn says is 100% academic.

Yeah... So was homo marriage till it wasn't. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Yeah... So was homo marriage till it wasn't. 

Slightly different.  One is a fabrication of a "right" out of thin air, the other is a "prohibition."  I'll grant you this:  the corrupted tyrants in black robes may very well discover a right to be a whore, as they did with abortion and gay marriage.  And that would be met with adoring reverence by the usual suspects.

[libertybele]

Slightly different.  One is a fabrication of a "right" out of thin air, the other is a "prohibition."  I'll grant you this:  the corrupted tyrants in black robes may very well discover a right to be a whore, as they did with abortion and gay marriage.  And that would be met with adoring reverence by the usual suspects.

Those in black robes are no longer relevant to me anymore.  They may rule however they want.  They however will NOT change my morals, integrity or my principles.  Most are a bunch of hypocrites and they all deserve a big giant middle finger. 

I don't believe in abortion, gay marriage or stealing elections...that's their rules...not how I opt to conduct my life.

[roamer_1]

Slightly different.  One is a fabrication of a "right" out of thin air, the other is a "prohibition."  I'll grant you this:  the corrupted tyrants in black robes may very well discover a right to be a whore, as they did with abortion and gay marriage.  And that would be met with adoring reverence by the usual suspects.

No doubt... It is all abut legitimizing and legalizing sin... And shoving it down folks' throats. Can't be havin no Mayberry anymore. Them evil bigoted Christian sonsabiches...

When in reality Mayberry is what most folks long for... That's where they want to put their house for their wife, and raise a family.

Try putting a hooker in a Norman Rockwell scene... See how that goes.

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe

IIRC,the guy that owned it died,and his will was pretty much useless. In addition,he had unpaid taxes,and they took over management while it was up for sale to try to pull in the tax money.

You do have a point,though. Soulless goobermint accountants are NOT the people to be running a pleasure business. After all,their natural tendency is to give you less while charging you more.

Funny, but the IRS couldn't run a brothel at a profit.
Think about that.
"Goods" aren't sold, and services only rented, and they couldn't make money--in the oldest profession.

[libertybele]

No doubt... It is all abut legitimizing and legalizing sin... And shoving it down folks' throats. Can't be havin no Mayberry anymore. Them evil bigoted Christian sonsabiches...

When in reality Mayberry is what most folks long for... That's where they want to put their house for their wife, and raise a family.

Try putting a hooker in a Norman Rockwell scene... See how that goes.

I love your descriptions and I think you are absolutely right. The chaos in the streets, is because they long for Mayberry and are too cowardly to say so or live their lives honestly.

[Smokin Joe]

She is an unskilled unattractive woman without skill.
What other occupations are open to her besides those that are cash in advance.

She would come in last in the trophy wife classification.

In the trophy wife classification, she'd be the booby prize.