mcjohnjohn

原帖由 快樂牛郎 於 2008-11-25 11:58 發表
娼妓自古以來都合法架啦
我地個個都係古人既后代
所以你又係ruined
我又係ruined
大家都係ruined
唔使再爭辯

不如而家將大清律例拎番出黎啦, 人人都守大清律例好唔好?

mcjohnjohn

原帖由 kabuki 於 2008-11-25 13:32 發表
many ppl are under the impression that drugs are bad for your health.
doing drugs is illegal.
do you see the people who use drugs stop/not using it just because it's illegal?

Make illegal is a method to increase the cost of ownership. (e.g. need to bear the risk of being arrested)
In economy, if the price of a product increases, the demand would decrease.

快樂牛郎

原帖由 mcjohnjohn 於 2008/11/24 21:41 發表


不如而家將大清律例拎番出黎啦, 人人都守大清律例好唔好?

咁你係咪大清後代先
而家講緊後代問題
唔係法律問題

chunsh

原帖由 kabuki 於 2008-11-24 22:32 發表


Let me use an example to demonstrate my point in response to part of your argument.

Well many ppl are under the impression that smoking is bad for your health.
smoking is legal.
do you see everybo ...

好野﹐有point
講真﹐佢地又唔係做的殺人放火既野﹐但又俾人當落水狗o甘打壓
如果唔係要偷偷摸摸甘去做﹐就唔使要出賣自己dignity之餘到頭來又死得不明不白啦
我覺得﹐香港人應該向個班道德塔利班說不

shutterbug

not only 殺人放火 has a negative effect on our society you know....think deeper!

soli

之前SB提出 “When your daughters/girlfriends/wives/moms/etc all dump their jobs..."﹐其實是多慮了。以娼妓的服務性質﹐絕不是令人嚮往的行業﹐幾千年來也是如此。而且﹐因為供求問題﹐性服務業也不會無限地擴張。
“not only 殺人放火 has a negative effect on our society you know....think deeper!”
在香港﹐一樓一鳳是合法的﹐其實性服務業界也只希望政府能允許一樓二鳳﹐讓她們能互相照應﹐增加打劫/殺人者被抓到的風險。這小小要求﹐會對社會有怎樣的重大負面影響﹐真的只有SB才想像得出。

shutterbug

don't have much time to reply now...just do a quick one

I think you should open your eyes and see what's going on around the world.  The world is changing.  Prostitution is not only for uneducated and lower class women anymore.  Due to the substantial amount of income, it draws women from everywhere, from high school, university, low teens, house wives, professionals, etc to the job.  I'm not 多慮, this is what's happening RIGHT NOW, and people should think about this more carefully and from many sides.  The affects is large and deep.  People now are changing to think that prostitution has a bad image as before.  There's a Chinese saying "Laugh at the poor, but not at prostitutes".

Legalizing in this context does not mean "一樓二".  I'm not gonna talk about 一樓二.

shutterbug

"People now are changing to think that prostitution has a bad image as before. "

I meant  "People now are changing to think that prostitution is acceptable just like any other job."

BiscottiGelato

原帖由 shutterbug 於 2008-11-25 09:55 發表
don't have much time to reply now...just do a quick one

I think you should open your eyes and see what's going on around the world.  The world is changing.  Prostitution is not only for uneducated an ...

I think the problem with this discussion is that you guys have not defined what is the extent of 'legalization' that is being debated. Does this mean people can start multi-billion international conglomarate on the prostitution business? or just legalizing the sales of sexual service in a 1 v 1 basis, or increasing the limit in the maximum number of prostitute allowed to operate in the same place, etc.

I am sure that each person in this discussion will use the most extreme definition for the word 'legalize' during the past 4 pages of 'debate'. Aka, the pro-legal side will say illegalizing means no prostitution ever allowed, 1 v 1 or not. This faciliates their argument of driving all prostitution activities to underground businesses, and putting the safety of prostitues in doubt, etc. while the pro-illegal side will say that legalizing mean a huge industry is allowed living off prostitutes. This faciliates their argument on the over-expansion of the prostitution industry, etc.

I think the discussion will be a lot more meaningful if its about what level of prostitution you think shall be (or shall not be) legalized for the stability of the society, and for the livelihood of people who have little choice but to practice prostitution for a living.

mcjohnjohn

原帖由 快樂牛郎 於 2008-11-25 14:49 發表


咁你係咪大清後代先
而家講緊後代問題
唔係法律問題

我係蚩尤既後代tim! 咁又點呀? 係唔係可以食人唔lur骨?