Sex for hire: A 1st amendment right.

[imawhosure]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Stormy, Stormy. I think you must not be a woman but a man posing.

Why?

Because no woman is going to try and make that legal, because guess what you just did-----------> lost women 60% of the leverage in any negotiation with their spouse, boyfriend, anyone male that they do not work for, or are not related to.

Now, you would say that I am suggesting women are dumb. No I am not! What I am suggesting is-----------> not only are they smart, they use their female bits to help get their way.

And finally, I ask you this Stormy-----------> Why do you think prostitution is NOT legal? Do you think men are the ones pushing that agenda, or rather women-)

 

[deltex1]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Consensual act between adults

How about blow jobs on the corner of 42nd street and Broadway? Have the kids gather around. Occasio leading the cheers...

That would be a criminal act of public lewdness

Consensual sex in a private location is a victimless crime

What's lewd about a bj. Public lewdness is religious oppression!

 

[rightwinger]

Trump pays $130,000 for his hookers and they throw in a spanking

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Consensual act between adults

How about blow jobs on the corner of 42nd street and Broadway? Have the kids gather around. Occasio leading the cheers...

That would be a criminal act of public lewdness

Consensual sex in a private location is a victimless crime

Women want to be able to get their tits sucked in public and don't like it being thought of as lewd. No difference.

 

[Billy000]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Apparently this is issue is why you joined the Republican Party which I find very odd. The RNC doesn’t give a shit about your libertarian beliefs. It would have made more sense to register as an independent...

I disagree. I think the repetitive habit of Republican officials to hire working girls demonstrates that they are indeed the party of transactional sex.

So why what exactly did they do? I mean come on, this is the party of “family values”. None of them have this on their platform. Their nutty Christian base is too important to them.

 

[Billy000]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Apparently this is issue is why you joined the Republican Party which I find very odd. The RNC doesn’t give a shit about your libertarian beliefs. It would have made more sense to register as an independent...

I disagree. I think the repetitive habit of Republican officials to hire working girls demonstrates that they are indeed the party of transactional sex.

Also, don’t you think the public health concern of legalizing it is an issue?

 

[rightwinger]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Consensual act between adults

How about blow jobs on the corner of 42nd street and Broadway? Have the kids gather around. Occasio leading the cheers...

That would be a criminal act of public lewdness

Consensual sex in a private location is a victimless crime

Women want to be able to get their tits sucked in public and don't like it being thought of as lewd. No difference.

You are one sick fuk

 

[sparky]

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I was reading an article from Politico Magazine about the case against the owners of Backpage and the free speech implications. I just can't see how the law that put them out of business can be upheld in court. But it got me thinking about something else. In this day and age spending money itself is legally equated with free speech.

With that foundation already laid, I now submit it's a first amendment right to get paid to get laid, even if it's not on camera. Years ago we showed that paying someone to have sex on camera was protected free speech. It's about time we extend that off camera, too.

Consensual act between adults

How about blow jobs on the corner of 42nd street and Broadway? Have the kids gather around. Occasio leading the cheers...

That would be a criminal act of public lewdness

Consensual sex in a private location is a victimless crime

Women want to be able to get their tits sucked in public and don't like it being thought of as lewd. No difference.

Jealousy is an ugly shade of green on you.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

How did you go from wanting prostitution legalized to getting the vapors over exhibitionists?

 

[Dschrute3]

If folks wanna pay for sex, so be it. It's not a Government issue. No one should go to jail for paying for sex. Another completely outdated religious zealot law.

 

[Some Guy]

This is a really simple issue to determine where you stand on individual rights. If you're going to make the argument that getting paid for sex should be illegal, then you really have no grounds to claim that someone should be able to say whatever they want free from governmental penalty.

 

[Crepitus]

Why is paying for sex a 'Crime?' It's a logical fair question. I suspect it has something to do with religious zealots of the past, forcing their agendas on others. If parties agree on a business transaction pertaining to sex, so be it. It's not a Government issue. As long as their adults, let them decide.

The issue as far as government goes, is that it is so intimate, and private; that they cannot be certain to recieve a cut of the profits. And the profits would be rather substantial. They simply cannot allow that much money to change hands without getting a piece of the action, so to speak...

This is actually a very real possibility......

 

[Crepitus]

Prostitution does not easily accept legalization. Like the legalization of drugs, the legalization of vice only gets more vice and lawlessness.

Amsterdam 'lawless jungle' at night, ombudsman warns

If Vice moves over to other lawlessness then prosecute that lawlessness

Vice lends itself to lawlessness. There are just some acts and transactions that cannot be made fully legal. It might be better if robotics improves to the point where human interaction is taken out completely.

So you think that it's somehow healthier for society to buy fuckable love robots than to pay other humans for sex? You're one of those Apple nerds, aren't you?

I never said it was healthier or not healthier. It would be foolish to disregard the superiority of mechanical robots for any kind of relationship. In prostitution they are ideal.

Whoa, wtf did you just say?

The "superiority of mechanical robots for any kind of relationship"?

There is something very wrong with that statement.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Should women who refuse legal sex work be penalized?

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'

After all, it's legal, gainful employment.

 

[danielpalos]

Vice lends itself to lawlessness. There are just some acts and transactions that cannot be made fully legal. It might be better if robotics improves to the point where human interaction is taken out completely.

So it’s Ok to get a blow job from a robot but not from a human?

Interesting.

You miss the point completely. it has nothing to do with being okay or not okay. A robot cannot be exploited like humans can. it cannot be hurt or mistreated.

get your really really serious relationship from a Stepford Husband?

 

[danielpalos]

Should women who refuse legal sex work be penalized?

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'

After all, it's legal, gainful employment.

No! Equal protection of the law applies in Any at-will employment State!

 

[westwall]

Prostitution is demeaning to women but supported by liberals. What does that tell you?

Cleaning bedpans and working in a sewer are demeaning
But people get paid to do it

To bigots maybe. But to those who do those jobs they feel they are helping those in need (in the case of the bedpan cleaners) and society as a whole (in the case of the sewer workers) and they are correct. Funny how you progressives always look down your noses at those who keep society functioning.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Vice lends itself to lawlessness. There are just some acts and transactions that cannot be made fully legal. It might be better if robotics improves to the point where human interaction is taken out completely.

So it’s Ok to get a blow job from a robot but not from a human?

Interesting.

You miss the point completely. it has nothing to do with being okay or not okay. A robot cannot be exploited like humans can. it cannot be hurt or mistreated.

get your really really serious relationship from a Stepford Husband?

Why yes. It would be ideal.