[–] Skyote 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Not to mention condoms can rip and you risk getting AIDS or anything else from having sex with a hooker.
I don't think casual sex is "immoral" per se, but it does weaken families when cheating is involved. For single men, hookers provide them an excuse to stay undesirable to women because they can pay for sex instead of improving themselves.
[–] Bilbo_Swaggins 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
The only good argument I've seen for prostitution is that it makes sex easy for men to acquire, and therefore weakens the effect of Briffault's Law by giving women a stronger incentive to be decent to men.
Other than that, I think that the traditional family unit is superior in all relevant regards and that even premarital sex is somewhat unethical under normal contexts. My girlfriend and I do it, but that's because we're living in a sewer (modern society) and neither of us were virgins when we met anyway. But in most societies, men and women got married young, as virgins, and they had lower divorce rates and higher fertility rates.
[–] ExplosiveDonkey ago
I agree with everything except the "no sex before marriage" aspect. People can be entirely compatible emotionally, intellectually and in all other facets but they can be totally non compatible sexually. In which case now they've just found out after promising to god that they will spend their life together.
[–] WhiteSoIMustBeRacist 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago (edited ago)
Half-truth. Condoms do block herpes where the condom is properly applied. But I agree improperly applied or open sores that contact or come in close proximity may be able to spread.
And that is why condoms aren't the only preventative measure taken with legalized controlled prostitution. Legal brothels in Nevada take a number of precautionary measures to prevent the transmission of STDs: Regular medical exams, disinfecting before sex, the prostitute examining for open sores or signs of an STD, etc.
Even if it isn't 100% foolproof, this is a risk that the buyer assumes when they partake of the activity. Other dangerous activities that aren't illegal: sky-diving, bungee jumping, skiing, boxing, motorcycle racing, hang gliding. Isn't the conservative mantra all about "keep the government out of my business"?
For fuck's sake you can't even be assured of not getting sick from going to a restaurant. CDC claims 1 in 6 will get food poisoning every year, and how much of that occurs because people at at a restaurant. Do we need to outlaw the food service industry? OMG IT SPREADS DISEASE! Of course not, that's ridiculous. We take adequate precautions and have multiple levels of safety to minimize people getting sick.
And for that matter, if the transmission of disease is your concern then why not also ban any extra-marital sexual contact. Shit high schools have been found where a substantial number of students all had the same STD. Maybe we need to put all those kids in prison?
So what? Again, I thought the conservative/libertarian hated the government getting all up in their business. You're banning an activity for everyone because some people are being irresponsible? If some married men hire a prostitute, that is on their own conscience. As a single guy, I would like to be able to go to the local brothel, put on a condom, and fuck to my hearts delight in exchange for monetary compensation .
Some fat people eat fast food, so let's ban fast food? Some people have sworn off drinking, so let's ban alcohol? Some people gamble too much, maybe we need to ban gambling? And these are the obvious vices.
Don't ban an activity because some people are irresponsible.
Again, isn't the typical conservative rallying cry all about not treading on you? Small government YAY!
I would also define morality as not buying a gun and then shooting your wife. So I assume you are for a ban on gun ownership? If not explain how you reconcile allowing gun sales while banning prostitution when both can be used unethically by irresponsible people. Shit, maybe we need to also ban cars because some people who buy cars end up going out and drive recklessly or while under the influence.
The fact that you continue to make half-witted responses makes me cringe.
[–] Bilbo_Swaggins 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
You argue long after you've been proven wrong.
There may be ways to reduce transmission of STDs, but herpes isn't the only one that can be passed that way and no, condoms do not stop HIV either.
Conservative =/= libertarian you braindead. Besides, do I look like a fucking neocon to you? Someone who wants a government that actively pursues White interests isn't against them pursing such social policies.
Food poisoning isn't an infectious disease. Again, your logic is beyond faulty. STDs are TRANSMITTED. You can't give food poisoning to other people- and food poisoning doesn't stick with you for the rest of your damn life. On top of that your 1 in 6 stat is in spite of Americans visiting restaurants astronomically more often than brothels. You have equated a mountain to a molehill without even having an iota of a clue of how absurd that is.
Extramarital sexual contact isn't guaranteed to be with someone whose job it is to fuck virtually everyone else in town. Again, your analogies are beyond illogical.
And then you say that we should make it legal because you want to do it. Contrary to what you may imagine, I for one do not make social policy based on the desires of irrational degenerates on the internet, least of all when they're so self obsessed that they think something should be illegal or legal based on whether they want to do it.
Okay, you're comparing being addicted to alcohol to hiring hookers. If one were to compare sex to drinking and posit that addiction is an instance of drinking that should not occur and prostitution is an instance of sex that should not occur I would agree, and posit that we might pursue social policies that limit the amount of addiction and prostitution which occur in the country.
And for the umpteenth time, we're not neocons. You're on an alt right forum. You will not find cheeseburger Republicans here.
Cars and guns are ethical by most relevant standards but prostitution is still up for debate. In my opinion it devalues sex and the people having it. So yet again your analogies are shit.
[–] WhiteSoIMustBeRacist 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago (edited ago)
[citation needed]
Provide a reliable source of what the failure rate is of HIV transmission when condoms are used properly.
Agreed. But both believe in small government and limited regulations (except for the conservatives who want regulations where their ancient myth's ethics are concerned).
Irrelevant, the practice of food handling is inherently unsafe and should be made illegal. (sarcasm if you didn't notice it)
Again, irrelevant. Unless you can show that the risk of getting sick from legal controlled prostitution such as in a Nevada brothel is substantially higher than the risk of eating at a restaurant on any given day.
LOL, you must have had a shitty high school and college experience.
Pointless blabbering. You want to deny individuals to engage in an activity because you don't like it. Fuck off. How about this? How about you not telling me what I should be doing and I don't do the same for you?
Irrelevant. You are still preventing >all< people from accessing an activity that they would like to engage in, safely, because (by your argument) some individuals are irresponsible. Your argument of "some men are married" is a big load of fucking crap right from the start, and you know it.
LOL Sure. "guns are ethical by most relevant standards". PIck up a fucking newspaper, and you'll find a lot of people will disagree with you.
Here is a simple rule to live by, don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you what to do? Naa, you assholes need to get all up in other people's shit and force your "morality" on the rest of us. Fuck off.