The absurdity of vice laws
 

I don't understand why it's entirely legal to pay 2 (or more) people to have sex with each other, or with yourself, in front of a camera and produce this as pornography to sell to other people..... but it's ILLEGAL to just ditch the camera and just enjoy the sex...

Why is prostitution illegal but prostitution-for-video legal?

I've never been able to figure this out and have resigned myself to accepting it as one of the absurdities/hypocrisies of modern life. But I am interested in other peoples' views on this. In my opinion, prostitution should be legal and regulated. It would capture lost tax revenue that, as of right now in the USA, are not being enjoyed by the public because this particular business only exists on the black market. In addition, it would prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS by mandating safer rules etc etc etc. The benefits are numerous, as you all know...

I am just bewildered by the conservative-religious right-wing in power, currently. If they were really so devout and disgusted with anti-civic behavior, surely having sex in front of a camera is just as bad, if not more morally depraved than having sex in the privacy of a hotel room or the backseat of a chevy.

So, is prostitution a cultural "line in the sand," or are the leaders of America just hypocrites?

Consequently--for those of you just "dying" to lose your virginity, should you choose to, oh i don't know, visit "the city" for "earthly pleasures," bring a video camera with you and expressly admit to being an amateur porno director, starring in your next film. That way if you are arrested by the vice squad, you can be acquitted in court since porno is perfectly legal! :shifty:

Anything else you would like to bash the current administration for? Are they using time travel to go back decades and set the laws? As far as degrees of importance go; I'd be pretty angry if my government was talking about prostitution instead of pulling out of Iraq or dealing with energy issues. This is really a non-issue for the current, or even future, administrations. If anything a serious discussion of this in government would strike me as the newest diversion tactic to come along. Rome had its gladiators to distract its people from thier decaying society and this would be more of the same.

Demetrius, I didn't--and don't--blame the current administration for the existence and execution of vice laws around the country.

As for your gladiators reference, are you suggesting that porno is allowed in order to "distract" the people from their "decaying society"? Now who's talking crazy??

Well, I think a lot of this comes from the inability of the government to deal with all the necessary changes to the law that the internet demands. Until recently, porn would usually be a part of a fairly large company, so the women in it would be getting paid and have some sort of a job, not just taken randomly of the street, given some cash to fuck a guy in front of a camera. The internet makes it easier for guys like this to make a quick buck, so it happens more and more, and the government can't really deal with it, so they leave a really absurd paradox in place, instead of actually fixing things.

No I'm saying that government officials taking the time to pass bills legalizing prostitution in current days affairs would be seen as attempting to distract the public from more pertinant affairs.

To me prostitution and prohibition are more or less the same. No matter what you do they will both go on. Remember what happened when we outlawed drinking, the only thing that changed was criminals were getting money instead of businesses and the goverment. Prostitution is the same way. It will happen no matter what you do, so its up to the goverment if they would rather have the moral high road or cash. Though knowing politicians I am suprised they selected pleasing their conservative masters over money. Of course pleasing their conservative masters get them money.

Oh and if you dont believe that last sentence, who do you think pays for those campaigns.

Not to mention the fact that many politicians would disagree with it, in order to look morally pure for the public. It would just be another example of how politicians are afraid to do stuff that might hurt their reputation, even though it's clearly reasonable.

I've always thought of it as a loophole. You're paying someone to take part in a film, and their role happens to involve sexual activity.

couldn't you just pay a prostitute and record it, then if the cops come just say you were making a porno

Well yes, you could. And by the way, most of the 'conservative-religious right-wing' are against both prostitution and pornography. A bigger paradox is why so many people think that paying people to have sex with eachother and selling videos of it is a-ok, but that paying someone to have sex with you (without a video) is terribly horrendous and wrong, when in reality there is very little difference. I blame the Illuminati. Damn them and their robot ninja army.