Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Jailed for Pregnancy

Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 9:42:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
A Pennsylvania woman violated the terms of her work release under probation by getting pregnant, so she was thrown in jail (her original crime was shoplifting food, and prostitution - a victimless crime she committed for survival). Though the young woman spent weeks complaining to guards of trouble breathing and mucus in her lungs, they refused to send her to access medical care until it was too late, and she died in jail from medical neglect killing both her and her unborn child.

http://womensrights.change.org...

Obviously we can't expect our government to be held accountable for violating basic reproductive a.k.a. human rights. Especially because this happened to a woman. Of color. Who's poor.
President of DDO
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 9:45:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 9:42:04 AM, theLwerd wrote:
A Pennsylvania woman violated the terms of her work release under probation by getting pregnant, so she was thrown in jail (her original crime was shoplifting food, and prostitution - a victimless crime she committed for survival). Though the young woman spent weeks complaining to guards of trouble breathing and mucus in her lungs, they refused to send her to access medical care until it was too late, and she died in jail from medical neglect killing both her and her unborn child.

http://womensrights.change.org...

Obviously we can't expect our government to be held accountable for violating basic reproductive a.k.a. human rights. Especially because this happened to a woman. Of color. Who's poor.

I saw that yesterday how the hell is that legal?
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 9:46:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I did think it was just the fetus that was killed because of lack of treatment and the mother was suing. I didn't know they both died.
I don't gt why prostitution should be illegal, pimping should be illegal, what purpose to pimps even serve?
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 10:59:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 9:46:44 AM, lovelife wrote:
I don't gt why prostitution should be illegal, pimping should be illegal, what purpose to pimps even serve?

They protect the hoes from being ripped-off or attacked by the punters.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 11:04:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
And thats why you make it a government run profession. (for those that want it done by the government)
Its like taxes there are government places you can go to (the government whores)
Or there are other people that do it less commercialized (street whores)
And there is the option to do it yourself (bet you can guess)
There of course is the option to hope that your wife/gf/whatever can do it good enough...
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 11:09:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 9:46:44 AM, lovelife wrote:
I did think it was just the fetus that was killed because of lack of treatment and the mother was suing. I didn't know they both died.

Yes, both she and the fetus died. It's her mother that's suing.

I don't gt why prostitution should be illegal, pimping should be illegal, what purpose to pimps even serve?

Prostitution should absolutely not be illegal - that's obvious.

A pimp serves three functions. First, they protect their girls (the hookers) from getting ripped off by customers. If the girl doesn't get paid, the pimp will deal with the guy and make sure she does get paid. Second, they protect the girls from other pimps. Basically random guys will simply beat the sh!t out of women for no reason, or take their money. A pimp ensures that this doesn't happen to their girls. Finally they help find customers for their girls to make sure the girls work. In return, the pimp basically takes all of their money with violent force. Essentially the girls literally become enslaved to the pimps. Of course with legalized prostitution this wouldn't be an issue at all, but once again, don't hold your breath on expecting the government do to something beneficial for women... who are poor... therefore often of color. Clearly none of these demographics are important.
President of DDO
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 11:28:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 11:09:15 AM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 9:46:44 AM, lovelife wrote:
I did think it was just the fetus that was killed because of lack of treatment and the mother was suing. I didn't know they both died.

Yes, both she and the fetus died. It's her mother that's suing.

Oh, okay that makes much more sense.

I don't gt why prostitution should be illegal, pimping should be illegal, what purpose to pimps even serve?

Prostitution should absolutely not be illegal - that's obvious.

A pimp serves three functions. First, they protect their girls (the hookers) from getting ripped off by customers. If the girl doesn't get paid, the pimp will deal with the guy and make sure she does get paid. Second, they protect the girls from other pimps. Basically random guys will simply beat the sh!t out of women for no reason, or take their money. A pimp ensures that this doesn't happen to their girls. Finally they help find customers for their girls to make sure the girls work. In return, the pimp basically takes all of their money with violent force. Essentially the girls literally become enslaved to the pimps. Of course with legalized prostitution this wouldn't be an issue at all, but once again, don't hold your breath on expecting the government do to something beneficial for women... who are poor... therefore often of color. Clearly none of these demographics are important.

Yeah I don't think I'd get a pimp if I was a hooker, I'll just take care of myself since the government has no interest in such things. Not to mention it would help save those girls from being abused but to afraid to report it, it would help keep STD's from spreading as much, it would bring in more revenue, and there would be documentation of who had what girl a what time, so if anyone goes missing or dead, the guy (or girl I suppose) will be caught that much easier, which will keep murder of hookers from being as common.
Plus the illegals that force and exploit (often children) to become prostitutes for their own profit, will be shut down, because it would no longer be beneficial for people to pay for that.
The government is too retarded.
They need to stop being so f-cking religious and see whats actually best for the people.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 12:58:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 9:42:04 AM, theLwerd wrote:
A Pennsylvania woman violated the terms of her work release under probation by getting pregnant, so she was thrown in jail (her original crime was shoplifting food, and prostitution - a victimless crime she committed for survival). Though the young woman spent weeks complaining to guards of trouble breathing and mucus in her lungs, they refused to send her to access medical care until it was too late, and she died in jail from medical neglect killing both her and her unborn child.

She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract. Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.


http://womensrights.change.org...

Obviously we can't expect our government to be held accountable for violating basic reproductive a.k.a. human rights. Especially because this happened to a woman. Of color. Who's poor.

I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:18:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't gt why prostitution should be illegal, pimping should be illegal, what purpose to pimps even serve?

Prostitution is illegal for two reasons:
1) capitalism creates the incentive to do it
2) police create the ability to control it
no comment
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:25:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 12:58:20 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract. Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.

I love that you're so oblivious to your own hypocrisy. It actually makes my job a lot easier.

The point here is that the terms and conditions of the contract are completely immoral as they violate basic human rights. Reproductive rights are human rights. That's like you b!tching about taxes, and me saying well hey taxes are simply a part of living in a civilized society... Well sure, the government might force you to pay taxes, but that doesn't mean it's right. Similarly, the government might force these conditions on her, but that doesn't mean those conditions were right. If your argument is that she simply needs to accept the way things are, then I'll be sure to throw this logic in your face every time you mention an injustice.

Oh and I think the officers' judgment extends beyond faux pas to the realm of illegal. Negligence is the legal concept that notes one's conduct makes them culpable for a crime if their choices fall short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.

Once again you miss the point. The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Stealing is stealing, and stealing is bad... do you support what they do in the Middle East (cutting off limbs for minor theft) on the basis of stealing being stealing?
President of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:32:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
How was this "jailed for pregnancy"? It sounded like she was jailed for shoplifting and prostitution.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:32:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract.

She "got" a contract? Do you capitalists not even require consent anymore for these blasted things? Or is it implied consent because she no longer wished to be held in a concrete cell with metal bars?

Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.

I'm not sure what your French lingo means but I don't need fancy language to describe a pig. Prison guards and policemen are the pigs of capitalism - mostly slimeballs with badges and weapons who ensure people submit to the rule of the rich.

Obviously we can't expect our government to be held accountable for violating basic reproductive a.k.a. human rights. Especially because this happened to a woman. Of color. Who's poor.

I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.

That's why we have discussions like this; perhaps if we show enough of the inequity in our system then someone will wake up and realize it isn't working.
no comment
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:25:35 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 12:58:20 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract. Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.

I love that you're so oblivious to your own hypocrisy. It actually makes my job a lot easier.

The point here is that the terms and conditions of the contract are completely immoral as they violate basic human rights. Reproductive rights are human rights.

Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

That's like you b!tching about taxes, and me saying well hey taxes are simply a part of living in a civilized society... Well sure, the government might force you to pay taxes, but that doesn't mean it's right.

The government shouldn't force you to accept certain rights. It should offer you them, sure, but not force them upon you.

Similarly, the government might force these conditions on her, but that doesn't mean those conditions were right. If your argument is that she simply needs to accept the way things are, then I'll be sure to throw this logic in your face every time you mention an injustice.

What's right is relevant. And she doesn't need to accept how things are, she must live with the consequences of her actions, which are:

A) Stealing, and then getting arrested

B) Choosing a probation contract over staying in prison.


Oh and I think the officers' judgment extends beyond faux pas to the realm of illegal. Negligence is the legal concept that notes one's conduct makes them culpable for a crime if their choices fall short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

Meh, faux pas was an understatement, but yeah, they're culpable.


I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.

Once again you miss the point. The punishment doesn't fit the crime. Stealing is stealing, and stealing is bad... do you support what they do in the Middle East (cutting off limbs for minor theft) on the basis of stealing being stealing?

On the basis people voluntarily accept the laws of said society.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:34:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:32:26 PM, OreEle wrote:
How was this "jailed for pregnancy"? It sounded like she was jailed for shoplifting and prostitution.

...then got on probation, on terms of not getting pregnant (and broke those terms -> jail-time)
no comment
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:35:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:32:31 PM, Caramel wrote:
She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract.

She "got" a contract? Do you capitalists not even require consent anymore for these blasted things? Or is it implied consent because she no longer wished to be held in a concrete cell with metal bars?

As I said to Lwerd:

She must live with the consequences of her actions, which are:

A) Stealing, and then getting arrested

B) Choosing a probation contract over staying in prison.

It's not as if she had two flat-out options, and the government was picking on her. She stole.


Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.

I'm not sure what your French lingo means but I don't need fancy language to describe a pig. Prison guards and policemen are the pigs of capitalism - mostly slimeballs with badges and weapons who ensure people submit to the rule of the rich.

Cool story bro.


Obviously we can't expect our government to be held accountable for violating basic reproductive a.k.a. human rights. Especially because this happened to a woman. Of color. Who's poor.

I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.

That's why we have discussions like this; perhaps if we show enough of the inequity in our system then someone will wake up and realize it isn't working.

Because your system is so perfect it must work, am I right?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:38:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think the reason her Probation agreement would say "Don't get Pregnant" is b/c doing so would make her getting back on "the right track" (which is supposedly the entire purpose of letting her out early) tougher to do...

and make the girl, who steals and prostitutes herself to get by, continue to rely on state handouts/prostitution/stealing to get by.

this IS NOT the purpose of letting her out early... the purpose of letting her out is b/c they figure if she's serious about getting on a sustainable path.. they wouldn't mind Reducing her sentence to let her get a jump start on putting her life together.

now.. it's absolutely horrendous that she didn't get medical attention and died.

But I can understand why the Probation agreement would say "don't get pregnant" to a girl who was incarcerated for shoplifting food/prostituting to get by...

and can understand why the state would enforce following probation agreements.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:50:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:32:26 PM, OreEle wrote:
How was this "jailed for pregnancy"? It sounded like she was jailed for shoplifting and prostitution.

She was. Then she was released. Then she was jailed again... for getting pregnant.
President of DDO
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 1:53:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:38:54 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
I think the reason her Probation agreement would say "Don't get Pregnant" is b/c doing so would make her getting back on "the right track" (which is supposedly the entire purpose of letting her out early) tougher to do...

and make the girl, who steals and prostitutes herself to get by, continue to rely on state handouts/prostitution/stealing to get by.

now, yeah... women can for the most part work a regular job pregnant...

but, this woman couldn't work a regular job Not-Pregnant.. getting pregnant would just make such a prospect tougher.

and, yeah... I agree Prostitution ought not be illegal..

but GIVEN that it IS.. and given that she the probation people were allowing her out early to have a chance to build a foundation for her life Without relying on Prostitution/Stealing/the state....

I can see why they would want to have her to stick to Simple Job-oriented living Whilst on probation... so that she can get used to a 9-5 type life... Before she fulfilled her sentence.

you gotta remember She's STILL serving her sentence...

and (supposedly) the ONLY reason she's outside is to focus on training herself to get by w/o relying on that which she has...

Getting pregnant adds a BIG complication to that Self-Training that the state Demanded she do if she was to have probation.

that's why they told her she wasn't to do that.

now... making her go back to jail... does seem harsh.. but, I suppose it's kinda necessary to Enforce Probation requirements if you plan on having them at all...

And I CAN understand why they'd put in such a requirement, as pregnancy Would plausibly be a big Complication to that Training that they conditionally released her for.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:03:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 12:58:20 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 11/29/2010 9:42:04 AM, theLwerd wrote:
A Pennsylvania woman violated the terms of her work release under probation by getting pregnant, so she was thrown in jail (her original crime was shoplifting food, and prostitution - a victimless crime she committed for survival). Though the young woman spent weeks complaining to guards of trouble breathing and mucus in her lungs, they refused to send her to access medical care until it was too late, and she died in jail from medical neglect killing both her and her unborn child.

She stole, got a probation contract, and then breached the terms of her own contract. Though a bit of a faux pas on the guards fault for not getting her medical access.

A bit of a faux pa? A bit of a faux pa is offering a rabbi a bacon sandwich or not putting the milk in first when you make a cup of tea. Murdering someone who should not even be in prison by denying her the most basic of rights is not a fVcking faux pa.

I don't care if she's a minority or poor, stealing is stealing.

Doesn't normally carry the death sentence.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime), so suggesting her human rights should be void on that basis is preposterous. Therefore I'm assuming you're suggesting that her shoplifting (food) means she should lose her basic human rights. Well, ignoring the fact that you're a huge hypocrite in the sense that you steal all the time (see: most likely all the music you own) so by that logic you should also have your rights greatly inhibited, one could easily make the argument that stealing for survival (which she did... it was food that she took) is not immoral if she was oppressed by capitalist notions forced upon her.

Did she have the opportunity to stumble upon a piece of land where she could plant a garden and sustain herself? No you say? Because of capitalist property laws (deeds) bestowed upon others by an imaginary entity known as the government that says "this land is yours, and we have the right to give it to you because um, erm, uh... well we say so" prevented her from doing so? In that case, it's not as cut and dry as you're making it seem.

The government shouldn't force you to accept certain rights. It should offer you them, sure, but not force them upon you.

What does this have to do with anything? I was saying that the punishment was wrong. You might be able to make an excuse for why it wasn't, just as some people can make an excuse for increasing taxes... that obviously doesn't necessarily make it right.

What's right is relevant. And she doesn't need to accept how things are, she must live with the consequences of her actions, which are:

A) Stealing, and then getting arrested

B) Choosing a probation contract over staying in prison.

Right. And you must live with the consequence of your actions, which will probably be:

A) Getting a job

B) Expecting to pay income taxes or go to jail

Once again, the point was that someone committed a heinous crime due to negligence, but that person will not be punished because they are an officer of the law. That's disgusting. Yet instead of acknowledging the f*cked up realities of our justice system, you feel compelled to justify what happened. To me this is very disturbing. Stop being a robot and think about what you're saying. A true capitalist would be appalled at the level of authority our "government" has, or at least acknowledge the BS reasons she was even punished in this way and why.

On the basis people voluntarily accept the laws of said society.

I don't think the woman voluntarily accepted the laws bestowed upon her. Does anyone? There are many laws that I would like to shrug but can't.
President of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:18:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Holy crap. This website seriously baffles me sometimes.

Matt, my immediate reaction to this was being appalled. First of all, obviously this woman is poor if she relied on prostitution to get by. Now because her line of work isn't exactly legal (which you acknowledge is stupid to begin with) then she relied on stealing a bit of food to survive. Now, obviously stealing is illegal, but so is smoking pot -- that doesn't necessarily make it immoral. Perhaps this woman was a syndicalist and did not believe in private property, thereby even justifying her stealing morally! Regardless, it's a sad fact that she was in this position to begin with, and even sadder (at least to me) that our reaction as a society is not to help her for her misfortune but to JAIL her.

Then, to make it seem as if we're being "reasonable" we'll release her from her metal cage, and despite her not harming anyone, we'll take away her basic human rights as a compromise; after all she's no longer entitled to them since she resorted shoplifting a few bucks worth of groceries. God forbid. I mean this is absurd logic to begin with... what if she was raped? What if her pregnancy was accidental? Should she be jailed then simply for having sex?! How about instead of justifying the State's RIDICULOUS behavior, you acknowledge that it's A GIANT WASTE OF TAX PAYER DOLLARS, not to mention a blatant example of how huge and irresponsible our government is. I mean aren't you supposed to be a huge libertarian? It's hilarious to me that people are so eager to be contrary and argue with one another that they lose site of their own ideals. My main gripe with this whole thing is simply the fact that the officers are not being heavily criminally charged, because if they weren't cops, they would be. The rest of it is just sad and f*cked up in general but just a sad reflection of the messed up world we live in, I guess.
President of DDO
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:21:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

What utter crap.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:23:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

... Lol, are you serious? I think everybody knows prostitution is a crime, just like smoking pot is a crime, just like a 19 year old having sex with a 16 year old is a crime, just like driving 35 mph in a 30 mph zone is a crime, etc. So yes, by definition, those things are crimes. Congratulations on defining what a crime is. Obviously I was expressing an opinion about what should and should not constitute as crimes. For example, I don't think any of the things I just mentioned should be crimes, even though they are. I thought that was really, really obvious.
President of DDO
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 2:27:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

Getting your feelings hurt doesn't make you a victim, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word. The prostitute doesn't have control over what other people do or don't feel or think--only those people do. With real crimes, there are real victims, people who have been actually hurt against their will by someone else's aggression.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 3:33:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:27:44 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

Getting your feelings hurt doesn't make you a victim, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word. The prostitute doesn't have control over what other people do or don't feel or think--only those people do. With real crimes, there are real victims, people who have been actually hurt against their will by someone else's aggression.

So you don't believe that emotional pain or emotional hurt counts. I suppose you don't believe that bullying someone (non-physically) to the point of suicide doesn't count, since one didn't do physical harm.

I suppose pulling a gun on some random person in public and putting it against their head, just to mess with them is okay, since it as long as you don't pull the trigger you aren't doing any physical harm to them.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 3:35:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 2:23:32 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

... Lol, are you serious? I think everybody knows prostitution is a crime, just like smoking pot is a crime, just like a 19 year old having sex with a 16 year old is a crime, just like driving 35 mph in a 30 mph zone is a crime, etc. So yes, by definition, those things are crimes. Congratulations on defining what a crime is. Obviously I was expressing an opinion about what should and should not constitute as crimes. For example, I don't think any of the things I just mentioned should be crimes, even though they are. I thought that was really, really obvious.

I was defining "victim" and just continued to define the entire thing for the sake of accuracy. The entire notion that it is a "victimless crime" is bull. It is just a lie used to guilt people to your side.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 3:39:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 3:33:15 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:27:44 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

Getting your feelings hurt doesn't make you a victim, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word. The prostitute doesn't have control over what other people do or don't feel or think--only those people do. With real crimes, there are real victims, people who have been actually hurt against their will by someone else's aggression.

So you don't believe that emotional pain or emotional hurt counts. I suppose you don't believe that bullying someone (non-physically) to the point of suicide doesn't count, since one didn't do physical harm.
Counts as a crime? No. Just because something is morally wrong doesn't mean jailing someone for that thing is acceptable.

I suppose pulling a gun on some random person in public and putting it against their head, just to mess with them is okay, since it as long as you don't pull the trigger you aren't doing any physical harm to them.
Threats are violent acts of aggression, and I would be perfectly justified shooting and killing you if you pulled a gun on me first.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 3:44:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 3:39:34 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 3:33:15 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:27:44 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

Getting your feelings hurt doesn't make you a victim, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word. The prostitute doesn't have control over what other people do or don't feel or think--only those people do. With real crimes, there are real victims, people who have been actually hurt against their will by someone else's aggression.

So you don't believe that emotional pain or emotional hurt counts. I suppose you don't believe that bullying someone (non-physically) to the point of suicide doesn't count, since one didn't do physical harm.
Counts as a crime? No. Just because something is morally wrong doesn't mean jailing someone for that thing is acceptable.

I suppose pulling a gun on some random person in public and putting it against their head, just to mess with them is okay, since it as long as you don't pull the trigger you aren't doing any physical harm to them.
Threats are violent acts of aggression, and I would be perfectly justified shooting and killing you if you pulled a gun on me first.

But no physical harm was done, therefore, physical harm cannot be your measuring stick.

Thank you.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2010 3:49:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/29/2010 3:44:49 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 3:39:34 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 3:33:15 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:27:44 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:12:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/29/2010 2:05:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/29/2010 1:33:12 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Basic human rights? She made those rights void.

Prostitution is a victimless crime (i.e. not really a crime)

False.

Victim - "•an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance."

Crime - "an act punishable by law"

Family and friends that care about the person are victims of her actions, and it is a crime, therefore, it is not a victimless crime.

You may disagree with it, as to whether it should be a crime or not, but that is your opinion.

Getting your feelings hurt doesn't make you a victim, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word. The prostitute doesn't have control over what other people do or don't feel or think--only those people do. With real crimes, there are real victims, people who have been actually hurt against their will by someone else's aggression.

So you don't believe that emotional pain or emotional hurt counts. I suppose you don't believe that bullying someone (non-physically) to the point of suicide doesn't count, since one didn't do physical harm.
Counts as a crime? No. Just because something is morally wrong doesn't mean jailing someone for that thing is acceptable.

I suppose pulling a gun on some random person in public and putting it against their head, just to mess with them is okay, since it as long as you don't pull the trigger you aren't doing any physical harm to them.
Threats are violent acts of aggression, and I would be perfectly justified shooting and killing you if you pulled a gun on me first.

But no physical harm was done, therefore, physical harm cannot be your measuring stick.

Thank you.

If you simply pointed a gun in my direction, but then did nothing, that would not be a crime, and you shouldn't go to jail (depending on who's property we were on--if it were my house, you'd have to obey my rules, but if it were on the property of someone who didn't care, or unowned property, then no). But while you had the gun pointed at me, you were threatening me with physical harm, and so I would have the right to defend myself--it wouldn't be punishment for a crime, it would be self-defense against a threat.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.