Prepared Society Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The government is trying to change the laws, and, in many ways, the way that they are attempting to word things makes me wonder what they are trying to prove.

One letter to the editor of the local newspaper shows me that I am not alone in my confusion about these changing laws.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/14/letters-to-the-editor-for-july-14-2014

WE ALL PAY FOR SEX?

With the Conservative's law making spending money for sex illegal, where do we draw the line? If cash for a call girl is a crime what about a Mercedes for a mistress, a Lexus for a lover, gold (jewelry) for a girlfriend, or dinner for a date?

Only a hypocrite would deny the vast majority of men spend money to get sex.

This new bill seems to say the purchase of sex (marriage) is OK. Leasing sex, with a mistress or long term relationship, is also acceptable. Even a daily rental like a one night stand on a blind date is permitted. But short-term rentals are a crime and those who choose this business model are despicable. I am curious how Peter MacKay arrived at this line between acceptable behaviour and criminal behaviour.

S. I. Petersen
To the Canadians who are watching this story unfold, what are your thoughts?
 

·
Time Traveler
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
The obvious answer is to let her pay for dinner. When you explain that it is to avoid complications with the prostitution laws I'm sure she will und……wait one, umm, never mind forget I said that.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
687 Posts
I don't consider marriage to be payment for sex. Marriage is a profoundly spiritual and emotional act that draws a couple together. Sex is a happy benefit of marriage. Sex is more than a physical act, it too has emotional and spiritual components.

I don't consider the 37 years of my marriage to be a payment for services rendered, rather I consider it to be a time of mutual submission, growth and blessing.

If someone is getting married just to have sex and considers it payment rendered they need to have their motivations reexamined and I would suggest that they have little chance of a successful marriage.

Prostitution is going to happen, whether legalized or not. The issue isn't whether it is legal but what is the foundational truth about sex for money? It takes a beautiful thing and turns it into an object demeaning one or both (or more participants) by objectifying them. It's the same with porn, it just cheapens something beautiful. Legalizing it just makes it more readily available further increasing the cycle of the demeaning and dehumanizing of the participants.

Just my five cents worth (since we no longer have pennies).
 

·
I sold my soul to the internet
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
I heard a talk show once about girls who lived with older men.
One mother said her 15 year old teen moved out to live a 37 year old man.
The crowd was telling her she was an unfit mother.
She replied "You do not understand, I am Canadians."
Seem that the law give 15 year old children the right to live with whom ever they wish.
More than one money hungry teen turned to Prostitution after leaving home.
Teen Prostitution has alway been illegal in Canada, but the teen law helped the girl get away from the mother watchful eye.
 

·
Woodchuck
Joined
·
3,347 Posts
Canada has prostitutes? I thought that was illegal?

It is a fine line, true, and one which our glorious politicians spend way too much time discussing With all the real issues and troubles plaguing countries, how is this even coming up? Ahhh... contributions and pressure?

I can think of two easy solutions. One: NO sex on a first date, no exceptions. The second date, which could contain sex, would have to be a minimum of 24 hours after the first date. This way it can be classified as a relationship, not casual sex. No, wait... we need to qualify what a 'date' actually is. It needs to be more than shaking hands agreeing to meet again, right? So, lets set a time limit on a 'first date', an hour. Well... Maybe it should be longer to be considered a date... Two hours? Sounds good. Now, money. NO money, goods or services can exchange hands on the 'first date'. If you go out to dinner, go dutch. No, wait, if the other person tastes your meal or you share a desert, it could be considered the exchange of funds. Ok, you both have to bring your own meal, and NO sharing!!! As far as where the 'first date' can take place... It cannot be anywhere you have to pay to go, or need to tip. It cannot be somewhere you both take the same car too either, as one person would own the car and be 'trading services' to the other. To be safe, lets limit it to taking public transportation to, each paying their own way. The setting cannot be romantic in any way either, this could lead to unforeseen sex. Tell you what, let's setup a committee to discuss this and come up with a 900 page rule book for first dates..........

Second. No sex ever. If no one is allowed to have sex, there can be no prostitution! See! This is easy!!! Set the rules, everyone follows them, no prostitution! Why did I waste my life working for a living, I should have been a politician!
 

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
The future might just be on its way ...


:eyebulge: :eyebulge: :eyebulge: :eyebulge:
 

·
RockyMountainCanadian
Joined
·
4,288 Posts
right wrong or indifferent it happens, so make it legal for a person to sell their own services, but make pimping a public flogging punishable offence. and while they are changing laws and using public flogging , the same punishment should apply to politicians who lie their way into office.
 

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-everything-you-need-to-know/article19610318/

Canada's new prostitution laws: Everything you need to know

Sex work and the rules around it have dominated Parliament Hill chatter this summer. The House of Commons justice committee's rare summer sitting is meant to fast-track the government's Bill C-36, which was tabled in June, six months after the Supreme Court struck down some of Canada's prostitution laws. Dozens of witnesses have spoken about the bill, with some supporting it and others calling for it to be amended or scrapped altogether.

Here's a glance at what the government is proposing, and what critics say about the changes.

1. Going after the buyers

The bill criminalizes the buying of sex - or "obtain[ing] for consideration… the sexual services of a person." The penalties include jail time - up to five years in some cases - and minimum cash fines that go up after a first offence.

2. What's a "sexual service"?

The bill doesn't say, meaning it would likely be up to a court to decide where the line was drawn. A government legal brief, submitted to the committee as it considered the bill, says the courts have found lap-dancing and masturbation in a massage parlour‎ count as a "sexual service" or prostitution, but not stripping or the production of pornography.

3. What about sex workers?

They also face penalties under the bill, though the government says it is largely trying to go after the buyers of sex. Under the bill, it would be illegal for a sex worker to discuss the sale of sex in certain areas - a government amendment Tuesday appears set to reduce what areas would be protected - and it would also be illegal for a person to get a "material benefit" from the sale of sexual services by anyone other than themselves. Some critics have warned that latter clause could, for instance, prevent sex workers from working together, which some do to improve safety.

4. What about those who work with sex workers?

Anyone who "receives a financial or other material benefit, knowing that it is obtained by or derived directly or indirectly" from the sale of a "sexual service," faces up to 10 years in prison. This excludes those who have "a legitimate living arrangement" with a sex worker, those who receives the benefit "as a result of a legal or moral obligation" of the sex worker, those who sell the sex worker a "service or good" on the same terms to the general public, and those who offer a private service to sex workers but do so for a fee "proportionate" to the service and so long as they do not "counsel or encourage" sex work.

5. Can sex workers advertise their services?

This is a key plank of the bill, which makes it a crime to "knowingly advertise an offer to provide sexual services for consideration," or money. This could potentially include newspapers, such as weekly publications that include personal ads from sex workers, or websites that publish similar ads. Justice Minister Peter MacKay appears to believe the ban could go after such publications. "It affects all forms of advertising, including online. And anything that enables or furthers what we think is an inherently dangerous practice of prostitution will be subject to prosecution, but the courts will determine what fits that definition," he told reporters after speaking to the committee July 7. This has been welcomed by some, including Janine Benedet, an associate professor at the University of British Columbia who supports the bill overall, though she called for some changes. "I didn't actually expect to see this advertising provision in this bill but I would say it's actually a really important step, to say that kind of profiteering needs to stop," she said.

6. Can anyone still advertise the sale of sex?

Yes - sex workers themselves. The bill includes an exemption that says no one will be prosecuted for "an advertisement of their own sexual services," though platforms that actually knowingly run the ads may face prosecution.

7. What else is in the bill?

It expands the Criminal Code's definition of a weapon to including anything "used, designed to be used or intended for use in binding or tying up a person against their will," a change the head of the Canadian Police Association welcomed. The bill also sets mandatory minimum sentences of at least four years in prison for kidnapping cases that involve exploitation, or any similar case where a person's movements are limited - steep new penalties. The bill also gives a judge new powers to order a sex ad seized or deleted - by amending a clause that previously extended those powers in cases of child pornography or voyeurism.

The government has pledged $20-million over five years in new funding to help sex workers get out of the trade. However, Ottawa hasn't said specifically how the money will be spent and various critics, including police chiefs, have warned it's too little.

8. What brought us here?

The Supreme Court struck down Canada's existing laws last December - namely, a ban on keeping or being in a "bawdy house," or brothel; a ban on "living on the avails of prostitution," since largely reworded as the "material benefit" ban; and a ban on communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution. The court generally said the provisions violated the Charter by threatening sex workers' rights to life, liberty and security of the person. That's essential, because critics are warning the new bill does the same thing, and is therefore vulnerable to a Charter challenge. "The new bill does not respect our constitutional right to life, security and liberty," sex worker Émilie Laliberté told the committee.

The group whose challenge led to the December Supreme Court decision has already promised another legal fight.

9. Why is the government doing this?

They're doing it now because the court forced their hand - without a new law, Canada would simply not have any laws on the books against prostitution by December. Some witnesses have called for that, but that's not what government is doing. Conservative MP Stella Ambler, who is on the Justice Committee considering the bill, has flatly called the bill an "anti-prostitution law," and the Justice Minister has said it's the government's aim to limit the sex trade as much as possible.

The opposition parties have opposed the bill. But both the NDP and Liberals have avoided getting into specifics about how they would have responded to the court's ruling.

10. What's the status of the bill?

Once done at the committee, it will return to the House of Commons, which is scheduled to return from its summer break Sept. 15. It has not yet worked its way through the Senate. Canada's current laws, struck down by the Court, officially expire in December, and the government has pledged to pass Bill C-36 by then.
 

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Why does anyone need to buy sex? It is readally available to anyone anytime any sex.
Sometimes people are too busy with working long days with few breaks (oil-fields) that they do not have time to develop relationships and their hand is no longer sufficient.

Others may feel like it is cheating to go out and build a second or third relationship, so, to get around that feeling of cheating, making it a business transaction takes away that sense of guilt.

For me ... I personally have known quite a few prostitutes (and call-girls, and sugar babies) as friends. They don't look at it as being a bad-thing to do for some extra cash ... in fact, they would have done the same kind of work as a volunteer because they enjoy that kind of attention. It is not the same situation for all working in that field, but, the ones who choose to be there (not forced to be there) should receive the same kind of respect as the one who works in a fancy restaurant serving the food ... It is just another job in the service industry ...
 

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Lego to the rescue!


:scratch
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Personally, I think that the government should worry about the state of our roads, the availability of public transportation, the state of our military, and the atrocious treatment our veterans receive before they start poking their noses into the bedrooms of the citizenry, what they do there, who they do it with, and for what reasons. So long as the parties involved are consenting adults, I couldn't care less what people do to get their jollies, and I hate the fact that our ever-increasing tax dollars are being spent on such ridiculousness.

What we need is fewer laws, some clear guidelines for minimal government, and for people to stop trying to legislate morality.

Just my $1.12 -- YMMV.
 

·
Jack of all trades?
Joined
·
8,397 Posts
Lucky you, that certainly isn't how my younger years worked out.
You just didn't have low enough standards! :p

Some of my greatest regrets in life would have been using girls (that really liked me) for sex only. Even before I was a Christian I knew it would be wrong to do that.

It's actually pretty easy to get sex if you know which strings to pull... but I was always conscientious of not damaging a girl's heart doing that because I knew how tender they usually are inside (and some of those girls I could have laid because they really did "like me" for me - but I didn't - and that would be totally taking advantage of them).

My rule of thumb was typically only after about a month of dating would it come up for consideration.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top