Shouldn't a Woman's Right to Choose apply to prostitution?

[Toni]

No. I am accusing you of that ridiculous implication. You claim that if the government pays, the government "owns".

Pro lifers love love love love to argue that the fetus doesn't belong to her until it is born then she and only she is responsible for it.

I can't make any sense of "pro-life" arguments, which is likely why the above seems like nonsense to me. "pro-life" is an intentional misnomer. They are anti-abortion, not pro-anything.

Which is an argument I can't wrap my head around.

Then you should not have made it. you said that if you want the government to subsidize any part of healthcare, then they have the right to own your body.

How does it make any sense to you that women get to have this special benefit and government can't have any say in the abortion? I'm not saying giving them an override and owning, that is actually you misrepresenting my assertion.

Why are women so special?

How is it fair that women get to have this kind of financial support?

If men were able to give birth would they get this kind of financial support?

Men should be allowed to abort any fetus in their body if they choose not to continue the pregnancy.

All medical care should be readily available, accessible and obtainable, even if this includes government subsidies.

Medical decisions should be between a physician and patient. If A is diagnosed with a cancer which has 3 well established effective treatments, each with its own consequences, A, under the advice and care of a physician of A's choosing should be able to select which treatment A feels is in A's best interests. Cost should not determine treatment. IE: A should not be forced it undergo amputation because it is cheaper than antibiotics.

I am not sure what makes men do special that there is no public outcry at the expense or morality of nerve sparing radical prostatectomy for example. Or ED treatments. Or post OP care after heart surgery.

I suspec this is rooted more in the tradition of males being the primary decision makers than out of any medical or financial --or moral benefit.

 

[funinspace]

Do you realize that you are arguing points that were part of sarcasm?

I You can never tell with Sawyer.

FIFY...

 

[funinspace]

No. I am accusing you of that ridiculous implication. You claim that if the government pays, the government "owns".

Pro lifers love love love love to argue that the fetus doesn't belong to her until it is born then she and only she is responsible for it.

I can't make any sense of "pro-life" arguments, which is likely why the above seems like nonsense to me. "pro-life" is an intentional misnomer. They are anti-abortion, not pro-anything.

Which is an argument I can't wrap my head around.

Then you should not have made it. you said that if you want the government to subsidize any part of healthcare, then they have the right to own your body.

How does it make any sense to you that women get to have this special benefit and government can't have any say in the abortion? I'm not saying giving them an override and owning, that is actually you misrepresenting my assertion.

Why are women so special?

How is it fair that women get to have this kind of financial support?

If men were able to give birth would they get this kind of financial support?

ED issues for older men should give you all the answers you need to your question...

Besides, in the US it has gone far beyond simply 'the govt.' not paying for abortion, as it hasn't in like forever. The Repugs are working hard to regulate legal abortion out of existence with onerous and unnecessary rules in a bunch of states.

 

[ZiprHead]

First of all, The US government does NOT pay for abortions. It is against the law.

And second, the only people the US government provides healthcare to are VA patient and service members.

 

[Malintent]

No. I am accusing you of that ridiculous implication. You claim that if the government pays, the government "owns".

Pro lifers love love love love to argue that the fetus doesn't belong to her until it is born then she and only she is responsible for it.

I can't make any sense of "pro-life" arguments, which is likely why the above seems like nonsense to me. "pro-life" is an intentional misnomer. They are anti-abortion, not pro-anything.

Which is an argument I can't wrap my head around.

Then you should not have made it. you said that if you want the government to subsidize any part of healthcare, then they have the right to own your body.

How does it make any sense to you that women get to have this special benefit and government can't have any say in the abortion? I'm not saying giving them an override and owning, that is actually you misrepresenting my assertion.

Why are women so special?

How is it fair that women get to have this kind of financial support?

If men were able to give birth would they get this kind of financial support?

It's not "special". It's healthcare. It's a right. What makes an abortion different than any other medical procedure exists only in your mind. And you rmind only gives you the right to deny or accept such a procedure for yourself.

your concept of fairness is out of alignment of how mature, modern, societies operate. We all put in, we all get out.

I don't want to pay for your kids education if I don't have kids of my own
I don't want to pay for your vaccinations if I don't want them for myself
I don't want to pay for a fire department if my house is fireproof
I don't want to pay for a police department if I wish to be an anarchist
I don't want to pay for an ethics committee in government if I don't believe in ethical treatment of citizens
I don't want to pay for your housing if you are insane and otherwise homeless
I don't want to pay for a prison system if I don't believe in punishment for crimes

I... Me... my... me, me, me,me... I really don't care about what you want for yourself. You pay your taxes and the government does (hopefully) what the people think is right. and more people think it is right to provide complete health care coverage for all people regardless of your personal beliefs.

If you are opposed to abortion, then don't get one. very easy. But claiming that healthcare for male-only or female-only anatomy somehow is different than just 'healthcare' is completely without rational foundation.

 

[Malintent]

I think a lot of people who support legalized abortion also tacitly support legalized prostitution, if you push them to answer about it, but we don't see these people pushing for it like we do with abortion, and the legal system treats in a complete opposite way. I would like to know why that is.

I personally believe the resistance to prostitution is because of the influence of Christian beliefs. It is primarily that Christianity leads the charge against prostitutes.

.. and abortion. Christianity is deeply rooted in sexual repression. Christianity is also all about being "fruitful and multiplying', so it is against their mission statement to not want to have dozens of kids to out-populate the competing religions.

And that, sir, is why your arguments are lacking... religious foundation leaves you with exactly nothing helping you support your case. you don't want your tax money going into Medicare, because Medicare helps people get abortions, and that is bad.. because... god will hate you for that?

 

[LordKiran]

It's your taxpayer money that is paying for Medicare coverage, not any specific procedure.
Do anti-vaccers have an equally valid point? Their tax money is being used to vaccinate children. CHILDREN!!!11!one!1

Do you have any children that are listed as your dependents? The government is paying for those children. They belong to the government. Perhaps someone will go collect on their investment sometime in the future... that about your line of thinking there? "Your" kids are more my kids because I pay more taxes than you.

All very stupid arguments that equate to the slippery slope you are pretending to stand on.

I view that it is not the Government's job to provide health care at all.

And no, they are not stupid arguments. Democracy ends when people find out they can vote away other people's money.

Why can I not have a say on how I spend my money? Why do you get to say and control how I spend my money? If you can say how I spend my money, what makes you so special that you can say how I spend mine and I can't have a say in how you spend yours?

If women have freedom of choice when it comes to abortion, why can we American citizens not have the same thing for our money?

You don't seem to understand. One way or another this woman is going to get her pound of flesh. It isn't up to you and is entirely out of your immediate control. So you now have two options:

Option A: Subsidize her abortion

Option B: Subsidize her child care from ages 1 to 18

Which is best for your bottom line?

 

[Keith&Co.]

The woman's right to control her body seems to me should be a stronger argument for legalized prostitution than for legalized abortion, since killing isn't part of the former, and you're not weighing her right to control her body against any right of any other being/person/clump of cells.

Except that prostitution is not just a matter of controlling who gets to put things in her pussy, it includes commerce. That moves it to a separate social issue.
And the big problem is where do we put the tax stamp for prostitution?

 

[dismal]

The woman's right to control her body seems to me should be a stronger argument for legalized prostitution than for legalized abortion, since killing isn't part of the former, and you're not weighing her right to control her body against any right of any other being/person/clump of cells.

Except that prostitution is not just a matter of controlling who gets to put things in her pussy, it includes commerce. That moves it to a separate social issue.
And the big problem is where do we put the tax stamp for prostitution?

So, the principle is actually "the government can't tell a woman what to do with her body unless it involves commerce"?

And, given the government's rather expansive definition of "commerce" these days, don't abortions involve commerce?

 

[Keith&Co.]

And, given the government's rather expansive definition of "commerce" these days, don't abortions involve commerce?

Commerce?

Do you see any clinics offering a 2 for 1 sale on abortions? Bring a friend to the Womb Broom Room and get a coupon for free drinks at a singles bar across the street?

 

[coloradoatheist]

Except that prostitution is not just a matter of controlling who gets to put things in her pussy, it includes commerce. That moves it to a separate social issue.
And the big problem is where do we put the tax stamp for prostitution?

So, the principle is actually "the government can't tell a woman what to do with her body unless it involves commerce"?

And, given the government's rather expansive definition of "commerce" these days, don't abortions involve commerce?

Yep. By all definition they are using commerce to conduct the transaction and ased on the commerce clause abortions can be stopped. Commerce clause is good when it's the issue when you like to change the behavior, and unimportant when it's an issue you agree with.

 

[Malintent]

Good point. Women are always saying, "You can't tell me what to do with my body!" when it comes to outlawing abortion, so why wouldn't that statement apply to prostitution as well?

I think a lot of people who support legalized abortion also tacitly support legalized prostitution, if you push them to answer about it, but we don't see these people pushing for it like we do with abortion, and the legal system treats in a complete opposite way. I would like to know why that is.

The woman's right to control her body seems to me should be a stronger argument for legalized prostitution than for legalized abortion, since killing isn't part of the former, and you're not weighing her right to control her body against any right of any other being/person/clump of cells.

I agree with you. The reason these are different conversations is that one is about availability of healthcare and the other is about availability of job opportunities. no law says a woman cannot have sex with any adult they want... it is about making a living out of it.

 

[dismal]

And, given the government's rather expansive definition of "commerce" these days, don't abortions involve commerce?

Commerce?

Do you see any clinics offering a 2 for 1 sale on abortions? Bring a friend to the Womb Broom Room and get a coupon for free drinks at a singles bar across the street?

Sorry, the Living Constitution (tm) says commerce involves more than the buying and selling things. You must have missed the USSC deciding a guy growing wheat for his own personal use was involved in "commerce" because growing the wheat caused him not to buy other feed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

Obviously we can apply similar logic to conclude an aborted fetus affects commerce differently than one carried to term.

 

[Derec]

The woman's right to control her body seems to me should be a stronger argument for legalized prostitution than for legalized abortion, since killing isn't part of the former, and you're not weighing her right to control her body against any right of any other being/person/clump of cells.

Except that prostitution is not just a matter of controlling who gets to put things in her pussy, it includes commerce. That moves it to a separate social issue.

1. Abortion is also commerce.
2. Why should something being commerce make it illegal? Sure, commercial activity might require additional regulation, but that's very different from banning something.

And the big problem is where do we put the tax stamp for prostitution?

Well Bonn Germany has a machine that dispenses tax stamps/daily permits for streetwalkers.

 

[Derec]

Commerce? Do you see any clinics offering a 2 for 1 sale on abortions? Bring a friend to the Womb Broom Room and get a coupon for free drinks at a singles bar across the street?

So you think such promotions are what is required to label something commerce? So if my hooker does not give me a two for one deal or free drinks coupons that is not considered commerce and thus can't be banned?
This is the definition of  commerce from its Wikipedia article:
Commerce is the activity of buying and selling of goods and services, especially on a large scale.
Abortion certainly qualifies. In fact, Planned Parenthood would also fulfill the "large scale" clause, while your friendly independent neighborhood hooker does not.

 

[Derec]

I agree with you. The reason these are different conversations is that one is about availability of healthcare and the other is about availability of job opportunities. no law says a woman cannot have sex with any adult they want... it is about making a living out of it.

I do not see why that should matter, given the decisions like Griswold, Roe (right to privacy) and Lawrence (sexual freedom).
But just to be sure, maybe we should refefine sex work as therapy. I certainly feel rejuvenated every time.

 

[Toni]

What is needed in this thread here is a bit more intellectual honesty. Many prostitutes are not women and a fair number are actually male. This convo is much less about advocating for a woman's tight to choose than it is about indulging in male fantasy.

 

[dismal]

a woman's tight to choose

Please keep your sexist comments about a woman's tightness out of this discussion.

That's only part of her value.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Should abortion be illegal because there are men who force women into it, threaten them into it, or unduly influence them to do it? Should abortion be illegal if we hear activists and social scientists say that having an abortion is harmful to the psyche of the mother-to-be?

Shouldn't a Woman's Right to Choose apply to prostitution? If not, why not?

Banning prostitution would not necessarily make it unpopular. (My Chinese colleagues used to like this one).

 

[whichphilosophy]

What is needed in this thread here is a bit more intellectual honesty. Many prostitutes are not women and a fair number are actually male. This convo is much less about advocating for a woman's tight to choose than it is about indulging in male fantasy.

In countries like the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand the best looking naughty ladies are often men. So there are probably more men involved than we realise.