Prostitution can be culturally discouraged, but MUST be legal

General
1

These are the reasons that LL must keep prostitution legal, and I also think it should be included in a bill-of-rights in the Constitution to protect the principles upon which LL was created against future citizens that may believe the exact opposite of these principles.

-It violates the Non-Agression Principle to make prostitution illegal as it enacts police force against people who have not initiated aggression against anyone. Prostitution is victim-less.

-There is a study of Rhode Island (prostitution legal 1980-2009) that showed a 31% decrease in reported rapes after prostitution was decriminalized. Links below to that study and 6 others that indicate a lowering of crime by legalization/decriminalization.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2606891

https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/61808/Chen%2C%20Sirong.pdf?sequence=1

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0886260504270333

-This is the first time in my research for LL that I have been strongly against the “Nordic” model. They have decriminalized the selling of sex, but CRIMINALIZED the buying of sex. Many other countries have copied their model, including France, Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Canada. Several studies have shown an increase in crime after adopting this unfair model; of course the studies twist the meaning and say that “prostitution” causes the crime But really it is the unfair criminalization of the men that purchase it that increases crime.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0791603520939794

https://hal-sciencespo.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02115877/document

-Criminalization procedures in places like Serbia operate more as a tax on prostitutes rather than actually trying to stop the acts.

-Women who are against prostitution are really just engaging in a mate-choice-suppression-strategy. If we think of sex as a free-market-place, women are incentivized to remove their competition from having access to the market-place and then they can “charge higher prices” for access to sex.

When we look at the above points, it seems obvious that prostitution should be legal just from violation of the NAP and the decrease in crime alone. Every other reason to keep it legal is just a value add-on.

I state again that prostitution should be legal and put in the “bill-of-rights” to protect it from some radicalized form of feminism that may emerge in LL in the future.

2

I wouldn’t necessarily put it explicitly in the bill of rights but I would argue that under the rights of freedom of association and right to, “the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry,” (this right is found in Article 1 Section 2 of the Missouri Constitution (no other state constitution has such a right) and I think Liberland should also have something similar built into its Bill of Rights.

Have you looked into Zurich’s Langstrasse sex boxes? I have long admired how the Swiss are always very innovative in certain areas including this one, because it protects both workers and the “john’s”, but we must form the cultural opinion that we shouldn’t encourage this activity and that it is not the governments job to prohibit either like the US has done minus Nevada, but even they and Switzerland do regulate prostitution.

1 Like
3

LL Constitution: “We hold the value of these hookers to be self evident. May the tricks they turn be an endearing symbol of the hard-working spirit of Liberland.”

Haha, I did not mean anything like the above passage. I meant more like an addition to a section on the Non-Aggression-Principle, something like “…and even prostitution should be protected because it is non aggressive and does not warrant aggressive police action by the government, even if it may contribute to cultural decline.”

The current LL Constitution is high on fluff and light on actual values that the country should be based off of. Woke feminists could just pretend to be pro NAP, and then turn around and pursue illegalization of prostitution.

As much as we like to criticize the US Constitution’s 2nd amendment, in reality, it is probably the one thing that has kept most gun rights intact in most areas. Yes it has been under attack for many decades and some states like Commie-fornia have won battles against 2A rights, but in CA tons of people still own and buy guns, and compared to UK or Australia, it is doing pretty good in this aspect.

So I have to agree to disagree with you on this point; I think everything that represents the values of LL should be in its Constitution, and everything that is omitted will probably be regretted 50 years from now. In fact I think that the LL Constitution should contain such strong and detailed language, that it should discourage anyone holding opposing values from ever considering moving or starting a business there, and the people like us that strongly believe in these values will be doubly motivated to move and do business there.

Interesting point about the Missouri Constitution. I’m embarrassed to admit I’ve never looked at any state constitution, but now I’m going to make a point to look at, at least, MO’s, CA’s, TX’s, and FL’s. I’ve heard CA’s is a jumbled mess from it being too easy to change.

The Langstrasse sex boxes are also pretty interesting and I share your admiration for the way the Swiss are open to experimenting with new ideas.

Personally, I believe we can avoid govt regulation of prostitution by using the same method with which we are avoiding regulation in other areas: by careful think-tanking and mental planning of systems that make regulation unnecessary (to clarify; I mean no labor and money intensive regulation, but yes to minimal laws). Some possible steps might be the following:

-Have very strict anti-trafficking laws with extremely harsh penalties (LL should have these anyways)
-Ban pimping
-Limit prostitution to within 200 meters of a police station

4

I agree bold language is needed in the bill of rights and yes if we didn’t have the US Bill of Rights what would make the US different from the UK or Australia? I would say nothing our 1st and 2nd amendment solidifies the bedrock of what makes America different from other countries above all else.

1 Like
5

Yeah we need to make a bill-of-rights for the LL Constitution. I know they said they had one previously and then removed it, but maybe they just didn’t have the right one. If a constitution doesn’t spell out the rights of the non-powerful, then all it exists for is to spell out the rights of the powerful.

6

There is a bill of rights but it’s called “Universal Principles of Liberty” and they way it is constructed it is even higher law than the constitution itself.

1 Like
7

Mmm I saw that in my first read-thru and I didn’t immediately think of it as a bill-of-rights at the time, but I’ll look again. I didn’t quite understand how all the different documents were connected to each other. Quite frankly, a lot of that stuff was written very brilliantly, I loved the first 4 pages and many other parts.

But unfortunately, I can’t talk anymore about the parts I loved because they have expanded the idiotic Senate idea to be even more corrupt and all encompassing than it was before. It’s an extreme oddity to me that in the same PDF can be quite a few people that have obviously spent a heck of a lot of time thinking about liberty and what it means, and then within the very same PDF are a group of people that are insanely corrupt and willing to try to trick everyone into giving them forever power over the entire govt and therefore the entire populace.

“Just give us control over the money and the ability to void any law that we don’t like and the ability to fire anyone in the govt we don’t like. But hey, we totally promise never to abuse that forever authority and trust us, our children’s children won’t abuse it either.”

I don’t understand how these 2 polar opposite groups can even co-exist without despising each other. I thought humanity had gotten better about calling out bulls#!t, not worse.

8

Unfortunately I’m afraid you are correct. The o ly way I would support the senate idea is if there was a fail safe where the people could vote to remove the senate via one person one vote if the people use the already built in petition method. Otherwise I don’t know if I can support the document, unless there are some other mechanisms in place like when the senator dies their “shares” revert back to the government and the senate elects someone to replace the deceased senator. I cannot stomach inherited power. My ancestors fought in the American Revolutionary War so that we weren’t ruled by people who inherited their power to rule over “commoners”, I love the rest of the document though, it is very carefully crafted to ensure maximum liberty.

1 Like
9

The bad news is that we are probably still in satan’s “little season” and his minions can still get in the ear of people with a bit power, and whisper to them: “If only YOU had ALL the power, then how much good could you do with all that power…”

The good news is that I’m getting some great ideas for my children’s book series about how kids can learn about morality. The LL Senate scam is a goldmine for corruption story-lines.

10

I would have included this video if I had seen it, or others from Sulikowski, in my original post because she expertly explains how large scale behaviors can only be explained through the lens of mate suppression.

And of course, this relates to prostitution because banning prostitution is women (and male feminists) limiting the mating possibilities for all men, and therefore driving up the “cost” that each man must “pay” to have any single mating possibility. This is akin to Lamborghini benefiting from increased customers if Ferrari was to go out of business.