Should prostitution be made legal? Watch

This discussion is closed.
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#81
Report 16 years ago
#81
(Original post by ben2111)
Sorry, made a mistake about the slavery. I thought you had said America,not Africa. But still, the slavery that existed before was of a completely differnet type. And Europe had seen a lot of slavery before, too (Roman empire), so do not come with the evil black people bs I have heard before in ths board. Thanks
"Evil black people BS" Never said anything of the sort. DO NOT drag my posts into the gutter.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#82
Report 16 years ago
#82
(Original post by Howard)
Obviously, there were no slaves in the US before the arrival of European immigrants. That's not the point I was making. The point I was making is that there was was slavery in Africa long before colonization. How do you think the pyramids were built over 2000 years ago?

And the second point I was making was that there is still plenty of it about. For example,the United Nation's children's agency UNICEF estimates 200,000 children are traded each year in West and Central Africa alone.
Exactly, exactly, exactly!!! But you never ask WHY Africa is in the state it is in! You always assume it to be due to lack of competence, corruption etc. Of course that is not WRONG but if you look at the history there are reasons for these factors. If colonialism had not existed in Africa the continent could have developed by itself, it would probably not be on our development standards today because it evolved very slowly but it would have been peaceful! The states as they exist today are a product of colonialism, that makes it pretty weired to talk about "Zimbabwe" in connection with black people, for example. All these wars could have been avoided, all these slaves would not have been taken away from the continent, all the resources and all the PRIDE!
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#83
Report 16 years ago
#83
(Original post by Howard)
"Evil black people BS" Never said anything of the sort. DO NOT drag my posts into the gutter.
I did not say you had posted anything along that line, I said I had seen posts like this before which is a fact.
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#84
Report 16 years ago
#84
(Original post by ben2111)
Exactly, exactly, exactly!!! But you never ask WHY Africa is in the state it is in! You always assume it to be due to lack of competence, corruption etc. Of course that is not WRONG but if you look at the history there are reasons for these factors. If colonialism had not existed in Africa the continent could have developed by itself, it would probably not be on our development standards today because it evolved very slowly but it would have been peaceful! The states as they exist today are a product of colonialism, that makes it pretty weired to talk about "Zimbabwe" in connection with black people, for example. All these wars could have been avoided, all these slaves would not have been taken away from the continent, all the resources and all the PRIDE!
How the hell do you equate the slave trade (which was abolished about 200 years ago) and colonization (ended 50 years ago) as the reasons why Africa is in the state it is today?

How the hell do you know that were it not for colonialism Africa would have developed by itself and would be a continent at peace?

There's absolutely no evidence to suggest a harmonious society before colonialization, and certainly not any evidence 40 to 50 years after the colonials left which is why, as I said above 200,000 children are traded annually in Western and Central Africa.

You seem to presume rather a lot. What are you saying? Were it not for colonialism Rwanda would be a land of milk and honey?

The fact is that the Tutsi and the Hutu slaughtered a million or more people during a bloody civil war based on long standing (pre colonization I dare say) inter-tribal hatred and not because of of colonialism.

You simply cannot say "But for colonialization Africa would have arrived oh so wonderful" because you don't know.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#85
Report 16 years ago
#85
(Original post by Howard)
How the hell do you equate the slave trade (which was abolished about 200 years ago) and colonization (ended 50 years ago) as the reasons why Africa is in the state it is today?

How the hell do you know that were it not for colonialism Africa would have developed by itself and would be a continent at peace?

There's absolutely no evidence to suggest a harmonious society before colonialization, and certainly not any evidence 40 to 50 years after the colonials left which is why, as I said above 200,000 children are traded annually in Western and Central Africa.

You seem to presume rather a lot. What are you saying? Were it not for colonialism Rwanda would be a land of milk and honey?

The fact is that the Tutsi and the Hutu slaughtered a million or more people during a bloody civil war based on long standing (pre colonization I dare say) inter-tribal hatred and not because of of colonialism.

You simply cannot say "But for colonialization Africa would have arrived oh so wonderful" because you don't know.
The slave trade was an important part of colonialism, the worst one can do to a society, to rob the strong working population. Or to introduce slave labour (NOT ABOLISHED 200 YEARS AGO!!!) which nearly does the same damage.

Well you know of course I cannot prove evrything I say about Africa, I can only say I have just been there for a year and seen that African people live in much more harmony than we can imagine looking at the news from todays Africa. Rwanda is the best example, the state would not even exist and Hutu and Tutsi could go their own ways! Of course there was hatred and war before colonialism, but these wars did not have the class of the massacres and genozides today. Besides the civil wars like in Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, the "civil war" as I would call it in post apartheid South Africa, the conflicts over racial hatred in modern Zimbabwe, this time the blacks kicking white butts.
Africa has never been the continent of milk and honey but there are (were) enough resources to feed all the people. And just believe me that one, African people are happier without colonialists. They told me.
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#86
Report 16 years ago
#86
(Original post by ben2111)
The slave trade was an important part of colonialism, the worst one can do to a society, to rob the strong working population. Or to introduce slave labour (NOT ABOLISHED 200 YEARS AGO!!!) which nearly does the same damage.

Well you know of course I cannot prove evrything I say about Africa, I can only say I have just been there for a year and seen that African people live in much more harmony than we can imagine looking at the news from todays Africa. Rwanda is the best example, the state would not even exist and Hutu and Tutsi could go their own ways! Of course there was hatred and war before colonialism, but these wars did not have the class of the massacres and genozides today. Besides the civil wars like in Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, the "civil war" as I would call it in post apartheid South Africa, the conflicts over racial hatred in modern Zimbabwe, this time the blacks kicking white butts.
Africa has never been the continent of milk and honey but there are (were) enough resources to feed all the people. And just believe me that one, African people are happier without colonialists. They told me.
Yes, but the colonialists didn't introduce slave labor. I pointed out in an earlier post that the Egyptians used slave labor to build their pyramids.

Nice assumption but I very much doubt the Hutu and Tutsi would go their own ways. I dare say they'd be fighting over the same land rights regardless of whether that land formed a State called Rwanda.

It is also unwize and infantile to laud "the blacks kicking white butts" in Zimbabwe. The whites knew how to farm. The blacks don't which is why Zimbabwe has turned from a net exporter of grains to a nation now dependent on economic aid to feed itself.

"Great. Let's kick some white ass............never mind we all face imminent starvation because we havn't got a bloody clue how to farm........at least that horrible Boer isn't around any more"
0
zizero
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#87
Report 16 years ago
#87
(Original post by vienna95)
the comparison was one of attitude not the simple one u observed.
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
Still, I don't agree with you when you allege that those who advocate legalisation of cannabis & prostitution as well as those who defend the fact that IVF treatment is legal, do so, because they think that laws forbidding those things are not enforcable.

The case for legalising cannabis and prostitution is that there nothing intrinsically wrong with smoking pot or having sex for money. At least, it's not society's business.

The reason that IVF treatment is legal is not that the government believes outlawing it would be impossible for practical reasons, but that the government believes there is nothing wrong with people having IVF treatment.

can i hear your idea of morality and how to protect it?



who is the government to impose theirs?
That's exactly my point! Who IS the government to impose it's moral view upon citizens? As long as a certain action does not do any damage to society, there's no reason to outlaw it!
When I say prostitution should be legal, I am not trying to impose my moral views upon everyone else, but I am trying to create a situation where everyone can choose for himself whether he wants to be involved in prostitution. The decision whether prostitution is morally justifiable lies with the individual, not the state.
If you ban prostitution you take away that choice from the individual, you impose upon him a certain moral view. Banning prostitution takes away freedom from the individual.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#88
Report 16 years ago
#88
(Original post by Howard)
Yes, but the colonialists didn't introduce slave labor. I pointed out in an earlier post that the Egyptians used slave labor to build their pyramids.

Nice assumption but I very much doubt the Hutu and Tutsi would go their own ways. I dare say they'd be fighting over the same land rights regardless of whether that land formed a State called Rwanda.

It is also unwize and infantile to laud "the blacks kicking white butts" in Zimbabwe. The whites knew how to farm. The blacks don't which is why Zimbabwe has turned from a net exporter of grains to a nation now dependent on economic aid to feed itself.

"Great. Let's kick some white ass............never mind we all face imminent starvation because we havn't got a bloody clue how to farm........at least that horrible Boer isn't around any more"
Did I anywhere SAY it was good what happens in Zimbabwe??????? Please read my threads exactly. Of course it is a disaster and I can´t wait the day when Mugabe has to go. But how can the whites wonder about it happening? It is very human!
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#89
Report 16 years ago
#89
(Original post by ben2111)
Did I anywhere SAY it was good what happens in Zimbabwe??????? Please read my threads exactly. Of course it is a disaster and I can´t wait the day when Mugabe has to go. But how can the whites wonder about it happening? It is very human!
Yes, but isn't it ironic that the day Mugabe goes it will probably be because of intervention by a former colonial power/slave trader like the US or UK? What does that tell you about Africa's ability to take charge of it's own destiny?
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#90
Report 16 years ago
#90
(Original post by zizero)
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
Still, I don't agree with you when you allege that those who advocate legalisation of cannabis & prostitution as well as those who defend the fact that IVF treatment is legal, do so, because they think that laws forbidding those things are not enforcable.

The case for legalising cannabis and prostitution is that there nothing intrinsically wrong with smoking pot or having sex for money. At least, it's not society's business.

The reason that IVF treatment is legal is not that the government believes outlawing it would be impossible for practical reasons, but that the government believes there is nothing wrong with people having IVF treatment.


That's exactly my point! Who IS the government to impose it's moral view upon citizens? As long as a certain action does not do any damage to society, there's no reason to outlaw it!
When I say prostitution should be legal, I am not trying to impose my moral views upon everyone else, but I am trying to create a situation where everyone can choose for himself whether he wants to be involved in prostitution. The decision whether prostitution is morally justifiable lies with the individual, not the state.
If you ban prostitution you take away that choice from the individual, you impose upon him a certain moral view. Banning prostitution takes away freedom from the individual.
yes thats why classical liberalism is the best way to go
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#91
Report 16 years ago
#91
(Original post by Howard)
Yes, but isn't it ironic that the day Mugabe goes it will probably be because of intervention by a former colonial power/slave trader like the US or UK? What does that tell you about Africa's ability to take charge of it's own destiny?
OH PLEASE as if the US or the UK had ever performed a proper mission in Africa, ever put serious weight on any political issue in Africa (except the oil issue in Angola) or though of any serious concept to develop the continent. It is all done by NGOs and some parts of the UN.
So where is the serious pressure on Mugabe? He seems to feel pretty comfortable. The only time there was considerable action was in the early 90s against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the biggest economical power (coincidence). The rest of the continent does not bother anybody.

I think I am tired of this thread, I do not know where your opinions about "Africa not being able to take charge of it´s destiny" come from, I wish you could jsut cast a look on some AIDS orphans, mudhuts and child soldiers. And then explain to me how these people, without any information and knowledge should politically take care of themselves and ot become the victims of corruption, wars and dictators.
Maybe you would change your opinion, maybe not. I am not going to change it it seems.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#92
Report 16 years ago
#92
(Original post by ben2111)
OH PLEASE as if the US or the UK had ever performed a proper mission in Africa, ever put serious weight on any political issue in Africa (except the oil issue in Angola) or though of any serious concept to develop the continent. It is all done by NGOs and some parts of the UN.
So where is the serious pressure on Mugabe? He seems to feel pretty comfortable. The only time there was considerable action was in the early 90s against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the biggest economical power (coincidence). The rest of the continent does not bother anybody.

I think I am tired of this thread, I do not know where your opinions about "Africa not being able to take charge of it´s destiny" come from, I wish you could jsut cast a look on some AIDS orphans, mudhuts and child soldiers. And then explain to me how these people, without any information and knowledge should politically take care of themselves and ot become the victims of corruption, wars and dictators.
Maybe you would change your opinion, maybe not. I am not going to change it it seems.
what are yoiu actually arguing, you say that the US and Uk never do anything, well France stopped a civil war in Cote De Ivoire, and why would it make sense for them to take an action against an economical power unless they felt that they were doing something morally wrong ( i dont have morals- but public pressure does).

You contradicted yourself, where are the opinions of africa not being able to take care of itself coming from adn then showing exactly what that statement means.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#93
Report 16 years ago
#93
(Original post by JSM)
what are yoiu actually arguing, you say that the US and Uk never do anything, well France stopped a civil war in Cote De Ivoire, and why would it make sense for them to take an action against an economical power unless they felt that they were doing something morally wrong ( i dont have morals- but public pressure does).

You contradicted yourself, where are the opinions of africa not being able to take care of itself coming from adn then showing exactly what that statement means.
Yeah right I mean compared to missions in other continents! Compare the Iraq wars and the tiny missions in Africa, explain the difference without using the word "oil" and I will shut up.

I said it was good what happened in South Africa.

Please read the whole thread even though it is quite long, you have to read what Howard and vienna wrote before and your last question will be explained.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#94
Report 16 years ago
#94
(Original post by ben2111)
Yeah right I mean compared to missions in other continents! Compare the Iraq wars and the tiny missions in Africa, explain the difference without using the word "oil" and I will shut up.

I said it was good what happened in South Africa.

Please read the whole thread even though it is quite long, you have to read what Howard and vienna wrote before and your last question will be explained.
i have read the whole thread and sorry but i would agree with howard and vienna, you dont seem to have a point, the war in Iraq was fought becasue the US and the UK mistakenly (or otherwise) believed IRaq to be continuing its WMD program. They were right in the case of IRan, Libya and Korea which have all cracked under pressure.

end.

anyway under the word i cannot say for food program, the US got what you calim they want
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#95
Report 16 years ago
#95
(Original post by ben2111)
OH PLEASE as if the US or the UK had ever performed a proper mission in Africa, ever put serious weight on any political issue in Africa (except the oil issue in Angola) or though of any serious concept to develop the continent. It is all done by NGOs and some parts of the UN.
So where is the serious pressure on Mugabe? He seems to feel pretty comfortable. The only time there was considerable action was in the early 90s against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the biggest economical power (coincidence). The rest of the continent does not bother anybody.

I think I am tired of this thread, I do not know where your opinions about "Africa not being able to take charge of it´s destiny" come from, I wish you could jsut cast a look on some AIDS orphans, mudhuts and child soldiers. And then explain to me how these people, without any information and knowledge should politically take care of themselves and ot become the victims of corruption, wars and dictators.
Maybe you would change your opinion, maybe not. I am not going to change it it seems.
All of these things; orphans with aids in South Africa, people living in mud huts in the Gambia, child soldiers in Sierra Leone, starvation in Ethiopia, 6 year old girls being circumstized in the Sudan (I could go on), child slavery on the Ivory Coast, have absolutely nothing to do with Africa once being under English/German/Durch/French control.

And, if the US/UK ever did "perform a proper mission" in Africa people like you would be crying into your beer "******* colonialists........why can't they leave Africa alone.......*sniffle sniffle boo hoo hoo*"

Let's face it. Whatever the US does is wrong isn't it? It intervenes and it's an evil imperial empire. It sit's on it's hands and it's pursuing a policy of selfish isolationism.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#96
Report 16 years ago
#96
(Original post by ben2111)
Not MY morals, any morals. It is just a term, in whatever way you understand it is your problem. I think "fair" means a moral that aims at making people equal, but that is MY moral, OK?
yes, and "making people equal" is viewed by some as unfair. hence my reference to socialism.

Of course all societies are equal, as long as they do not harm anybody outside or inside their circles. Even though every society harms people inside in very diverse ways. I guess that will always bve subject to opinion and not to facts. And PLEASE do not tell me now muslim societies
harm us by terrorism
i was thinking more along the lines of Muslim civilisation being inferior to Western ones. of course there were times when Muslim states were ahead of their Western counterparts but this has changed. before you ask i base this on the principles of human development, exploration and invention, both materially,morally, economically and politically.

cause then I will sit here the rest of the day and list occasions when Europeans, the USA, Israel & Company have damaged the rest of the world and taken billions of lives away.
im interested to see how the centuries of struggle by European Christendom can be lumped together with a relatively infantile American and Israel existance that has by comparison inflicted no harm on this world.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#97
Report 16 years ago
#97
(Original post by ben2111)
Exactly, exactly, exactly!!! But you never ask WHY Africa is in the state it is in! You always assume it to be due to lack of competence, corruption etc. Of course that is not WRONG but if you look at the history there are reasons for these factors. If colonialism had not existed in Africa the continent could have developed by itself,
tell me which developed, democratic nation has developed without the adoption of Western principles and values..


it would probably not be on our development standards today because it evolved very slowly but it would have been peaceful!
peaceful, are you nuts? i would go further than Howard and bet my life on the fact that Africa would still be as riddled with primitive tribal warfare and civil war as it is today.

The states as they exist today are a product of colonialism, that makes it pretty weired to talk about "Zimbabwe" in connection with black people, for example. All these wars could have been avoided, all these slaves would not have been taken away from the continent, all the resources and all the PRIDE!
jezus. have some respect for mankind and the course it has taken.
id like to know how these 'wars' could have been avoided.
it was the western civilisations who were the first to recognise the immorality of slavery. all the resources?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#98
Report 16 years ago
#98
(Original post by ben2111)
Did I anywhere SAY it was good what happens in Zimbabwe??????? Please read my threads exactly. Of course it is a disaster and I can´t wait the day when Mugabe has to go. But how can the whites wonder about it happening? It is very human!
how can 'whites' (racist but ill let it go) wonder? because we as a civilisation have moved on and are morally disturbed to see such primitive and uncivilised society.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#99
Report 16 years ago
#99
(Original post by JSM)
i have read the whole thread and sorry but i would agree with howard and vienna, you dont seem to have a point, the war in Iraq was fought becasue the US and the UK mistakenly (or otherwise) believed IRaq to be continuing its WMD program. They were right in the case of IRan, Libya and Korea which have all cracked under pressure.

end.

anyway under the word i cannot say for food program, the US got what you calim they want
No, by now the official reason has been more or less reduced to overcoming saddams regime and that has always been part of the excuse.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#100
Report 16 years ago
#100
(Original post by ben2111)
No, by now the official reason has been more or less reduced to overcoming saddams regime and that has always been part of the excuse.
still mine was the official reason, this is just to cover up their flaw
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (214)
67.94%
No (101)
32.06%

Watched Threads

View All