In our modern society, too often we see big Government impose regulations on goods and services. If a good is seen as mutually beneficial by two parties, who is the Government to interfere with their transaction? However, it i key this mutual cooperation does not infringe on any person's individual rights.
A classic example is prostitution. If a prostitute is willing to sell her body for a price, why not? There is a market for sex, and if two individuals are willing to meet at an equlibrium price and service, so be it. An individual owns a car, and can do anything to it, so why not a person's body? Why does the Government interfere and stop a mutually-beneficial transaction. A person who buys a prostitute's services is willing to accept the risks involved. That individual has shown preference through action. Many of you reading this will wonder about STD's and if they will increase if prostitution were legal. It is fair to wonder about the social implications and benefits of legalizing something so taboo. However, that is an issue of personal responsibility (condoms and HIV testing.) The Government should not be the "big brother" and order a series of checks and balances and further regulations on a private business.
If prostitution were legal, it would be the end of pimps and, getting these young woman hooked on narcotics and cocaine. Making it legal would allow this unusual enterpise to be profitable and ethical. Long live free markets.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Icerocket
So true. It is also
So true.
It is also hypocritical to allow some activities in certain parts of the country (Nevada) and declare it illegal and imoral in others.
There should a law in all states and at the federal level that mandates that for any new regulation or law passed, two should be taken off the books. There simply cannot be the need for the amount of regulations and laws that currently on the books.