Purchasing of sex will be criminalised (it appears) in the near future in Ireland

Dr Galen

In fairness _Beau_ the studies you provided links to are hardly cast iron. I have had a cursory look through them, and it's been a while since I critiqued a sociological piece, but I think one could call bias on quite a few of them. Would you deny that there is a feminist or religious agenda behind a lot of anti-prostitution work?

FWIW I'd share you're concerns on the turnoffthebluelight website, as I don't know who is behind that either, so of course that could be biased as well.

I would welcome anything that could protect sex workers across the board, I just don't buy the rhetoric that comes from vested interests ( on both sides). I'd like to hear more directly from the workers themselves. This is unlikely to happen in a verifiable way though, as societal stigma attached to the work, would prevent many from coming forward.

Monty Burnz

_Beau_ wrote: »

You're manipulating facts by highlighting anecdotal examples to support your opinion [which has yet to be substantiated by actual academic studies].

I could highlight anecdotal evidence too.

Here:



It proves nothing.

Lol - the anecdotal evidence you quoted has nothing to do with prostitution at all!

Monty Burnz

_Beau_ wrote: »

What percentage of the world's prostitute population are on that site? I'll be far too generous in my example, but, the message ought to be clear.

Do you understand that if 100 people had cancer and 80% of them suffered symptoms of depression following their diagnosis, while 20% chatted happily online about their experiences, that the happy chatters wouldn't belie the claims made by the majority?

I'm sorry, but your arguments are extremely weak and you've been totally taken to the cleaners in this discussion as you refuse to accept the masses of contrary evidence and counter-arguments that demonstrate that your ideologically-driven ideas about prostitution are extremely simplistic.

_Beau_

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Lol - the anecdotal evidence you quoted has nothing to do with prostitution at all!

Her being a victim of IPV and not having enough money to 'even scrape by' had nothing to do with her going into escorting?

Her experiences mirror those of a large percentage of prostitutes in the studies that I cited.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'm sorry, but your arguments are extremely weak and you've been totally taken to the cleaners in this discussion as you refuse to accept the masses of contrary evidence and counter-arguments that demonstrate that your ideologically-driven ideas about prostitution are extremely simplistic.

You do make extraordinary accusations considering the fact that I have repeatedly asked you to support your opinions and you are either unable or unwilling to do so.

I'm reporting you for attacking my character for a third time.

I'm not continuing a conversation with you. Good day.

_Beau_

Argumentum ad hominem is not an argument.

Monty Burnz

_Beau_ wrote: »

Her being a victim of IPV and not having enough money to 'even scrape by' had nothing to do with her going into escorting?

Her experiences mirror those of a large percentage of prostitutes in the studies that I cited.

So you concede that your 'anecdotal evidence' has nothing to do with her experience of actual prostitution? Why thank you.

_Beau_ wrote: »

You do make extraordinary accusations considering the fact that I have repeated asked you to support your opinions and you are either unable or unwilling to do so.

I'm reporting you for attacking my character for a third time.

I'm not continuing a conversation with you. Good day.

My loss, I'm sure. I practically never do this, but I'm declaring victory in this debate as you have refused to consider or even acknowledge any information or evidence that runs contrary to your idée fixe that prostitution is wrong in every circumstance and can successfully be banned to the benefit of all. This refusal to countenance conflicting evidence calls to mind an almost religious adherence to a set of beliefs, which leads me to suspect that ideology or religion is at its root.

_Beau_

You're doing it again.

I've reported you again.

Monty Burnz

_Beau_ wrote: »

You're doing it again.

I've reported you again.

Good luck with that. It is fascinating however that you haven't denied that your arguments are religiously or ideologically motivated. You might find you have a better chance of persuading people if you engage with their arguments and accept that the issue is rather more complex than your posts seem to acknowledge, but this would entail you shifting from your 'prostitution is always wrong' position and that seems rather unlikely.

Good day.

_Beau_

Just so that you realise how inaccurate your accusations are - I'm a humanist and a pragmatist.

Good day.

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

You do make extraordinary accusations considering the fact that I have repeatedly asked you to support your opinions and you are either unable or unwilling to do so.

I'm reporting you for attacking my character for a third time.

I'm not continuing a conversation with you. Good day.

You're acting like you suppoort your claims with evidence. Your studies are from low ranked journals with clear bias. And I suspect you are only reading the titles.

rodento

Beau if a girl sells herself to fund a drug habit, how does it help her, when you want to limit her customer base

How should she fund her habit:eek:

Is crime an alternative

In real life do these plans actually help or hinder people

K-9

_Beau_ wrote: »

House of Oireachtas

Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Trafficking of Human Beings (2005)

Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008

The Council of Europe isn't the EU, it's a common misconception:

Home page - Council of Europe

_Beau_

I didn't confuse them - my recollection of the article was not accurate.

I had thought that it had stated that the EU had urged European states to amend their laws.

shadowcomplex

whats the current law surrouding this? I thought prostitution of any kind was illegal in Ireland as it is?

Wildlife Actor

Let's look at what's bad about prostitution:

1. It gives rise to human trafficking - that's a product of its illegality (legal prostitution undertakings with the freedom to communicate with police would tolerate this from their competitors any more than other legal businesses).
2. Women get mistreated by pimps - that's a product of its illegality (our employment rights legislation is very protective)
3. Women get attacked and mistreated by clients - that's a product of its illegality (they simply can't report these things, can't get id from clients, can't have security because their business is illegal)
4. Women suffer from low self esteem and PTSD (leading to drug abuse etc) because of mistreatment from pimps and clients - that's a product of its illegality (more specifically 2 and 3 above)
5. Women pick up STDs etc - that is partly a hazard of the job, it has to be said, but heavily contributed to by illegality (clients can't be vetted).

Now the more difficult questions:
6. Women are stigmatised for working in the sex industry.
7. Women suffer from low self esteem and PTSD from the mere business of prostituton (ignoring the bad stuff at 2. and 3. above).

I'm not a psychologist but I have a love of logic. [Edit: Sorry for such a pretentious statement. I'm leaving it up just to punish myself for saying it in the first place] And when we look at these issues I wonder to what extent culture and - more importantly - criminalisation, cause these evils. I would draw a parallel (it may not be a perfect one but good analogies are thin on the ground and a hell of a lot of bad ones appear on this thread) with homosexuality. It was a criminal offence until 1993. Right thinking people but people of their time thought it was immoral, unnatural and disgusting. Again I can't give stats about the mental damage and suicides (I think Norris might have in his case) but I think it is reasonably fair to say that criminalisation and social stigma generated a lot of self loathing, internalised homophobia, self esteem issues, suicide etc. Was this "caused" by homosexual conduct and feeling, or was it society's attitude.

There is a big debate out there and politicians cannot have it because of fear. Threads like this are valuable and people shoud keep their minds wide open.

ihacs

I'm behind with work so haven't been able so far to read all the messages (I was only getting to read the ones mentioning me anyway for a while). Anyway, I'm not sure it was mentioned but the Irish Times had an interesting article on prostitution:

Prostitution law may cause harm to women Oct 19
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/1019/1224306074609.html

Currently one can still comment.

---

Thought the comment by one person was interesting: usually with addictions, one has sympathy for the person with the addiction, not the supplier; but with prostitution, that isn't the case. The person reckoned it was possibly related to the fact that person with the addiction was one of those "nasty men" (i.e. not a man who is nasty, but men in general).
And of course, the law in Sweden which is the main model being focused on it seems criminalises the user, not the supplier.

---

Another IT article http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1018/1224305994342.html :

Flaws found in proposed laws on prostitution

MEN WHO spend money on women during “one-night stands” might find themselves criminalised under proposed new laws that would criminalise men buying sex but grant immunity to the prostitutes who sell it, a new Government-backed review has found.

It also concluded criminalising so-called “punters” might divert Garda resources into investigating the “minor offence” of buying sex at the expense of pursuing human trafficking gangs.

etc

ihacs

shadowcomplex wrote: »

whats the current law surrouding this? I thought prostitution of any kind was illegal in Ireland as it is?

This relatively short piece explains it:

The Irish Times - Monday, October 3, 2011
Shatter looking at advice on criminalising buying of sex

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1003/1224305145147.html

rodento

21 men named and shamed and anyone know how the vulnerable women working the streets will survive if the guards continue their clampdown

hatrickpatrick

The issue is consent IMO.
Where you have trafficking or rape, those are two very specific crimes: Trafficking and rape.

The government, in my view, has no right whatsoever to tell consenting adults what they can or cannot do with their own bodies. If no one is harmed without being given a choice about whether to be involved, it cannot be considered a crime. I for one am tired of living in a country where personal morality affects public legislation. If you don't want to do something, don't do it. You don't have the right to tell me I'm not allowed to sell MY body just because you yourself have an issue with doing it.

EDIT: I am not denying that there may be psychological implications of actually doing it. I for one would never go to a prostitute, the idea of being with someone not because they actually like me but because they need cash is utterly depressing IMO. But the point is, those who choose to do it, choose to do it. The law is there to protect us from eachother, not from ourselves. I apply the same criteria to pretty much all victimless "crime".

anymore

The reality is that this is a good example of a section of 'liberal Ireland' combining with old conservativeIreland' to ram their ' political correctness'.
down our throats,
Frankly there was a lot of this liberal political correctness to be seen during the Presidential election when a massive effort was made to apply censorship to the coverage of one particular lefte/liberal candidate.
The screw is simply being tightened more - sometimes it impacts on free speech and sometimes, as is the case here, it impacts on sex behaviour between adults. But it all springs from the desire of small self appointed vested groups to control people.

zuroph

rodento wrote: »

21 men named and shamed and anyone know how the vulnerable women working the streets will survive if the guards continue their clampdown

I presume they'll move back to their apartments and advertising online.

The girls on the street is a bit much, I know the gardaí were getting a lot of complaints about the girls on catherine st in limerick. I myself felt awkward even walking in the area on my own, for fear someone would see me and presume thats why I was there.

There's loopholes in the law which currently let these girls get away with working, they should exploit these intead of soliciting on the street. The reason they're on the street is they're trying to lure drunk lads in.

Personally, I say legalise it, licence it, register the apartments, regular health checks, and leave it be. It can never be eradicated. Oldest profession in the world and all that, they should just make it safer for all concerned, and take the rent money out of crime gangs pockets.

anymore

zuroph wrote: »

I presume they'll move back to their apartments and advertising online.

The girls on the street is a bit much, I know the gardaí were getting a lot of complaints about the girls on catherine st in limerick. I myself felt awkward even walking in the area on my own, for fear someone would see me and presume thats why I was there.

There's loopholes in the law which currently let these girls get away with working, they should exploit these intead of soliciting on the street. The reason they're on the street is they're trying to lure drunk lads in.

Personally, I say legalise it, licence it, register the apartments, regular health checks, and leave it be. It can never be eradicated. Oldest profession in the world and all that, they should just make it safer for all concerned, and take the rent money out of crime gangs pockets.

The reality is that the on street trade exists because for decades the authorities allowed it to. So I feel somewhat sorry for these people becasue they were doing what apparently was ok just a short spell ago ! That is the problem when laws are only sporadically enforced.

zuroph

anymore wrote: »

The reality is that the on street trade exists because for decades the authorities allowed it to. So I feel somewhat sorry for these people becasue they were doing what apparently was ok just a short spell ago ! That is the problem when laws are only sporadically enforced.

true, it was fine when it was just the two fat irish ones down on O Curry street, in spite of the fact that we complained numerous times to the Gardaí as it was affecting property price in the area. :rolleyes:

But Catherine street was getting out of hand, It was too blatent. These girls work from online too, and they could be shooting themselves in the foot here by being so public about it. I got hit on by one of them while we were both buying taco chips in Pery square, I mean, that's too much, I'm just in getting some dinner.

limklad

If you are in France due a recent Court case, if you deny sex to your wife you can get sued. There in France the Man is now force to have sex with his wife on demand which itself is rape by the wife and is condone marital rape in French law under article 215 of France’s civil code when one partner refuses to have sex. Same applies to women who refuse sex with their husband.
The judge cited article 215 of France’s civil code, which requires married couples to share a “communal life.” which he said includes sex. To me that enslaved prostitution and rape in married life.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/8741895/Frenchman-ordered-to-pay-wife-damages-for-lack-of-sex.html

The main problem with prostitution everywhere is certain women are enslaved against their free will into it, rather than choose to do it. That is a clear difference.
Women who chooses (free will) to go into Prostitution do so consensually. Unfortunately there are non-consensual sex with women (enforced Prostitution ) which is rape and Slavery/False imprisonment. The Thugs who force women into prostitution should be punished. The Gardai should be focusing their time on that. All they doing right now is shipping the problem to another jurisdiction rather that get those involve in the crime of forcing women into Prostitution.

I do not want to get into the morality of having consensual sex with a Prostitute or the married affairs of those men and women who look for sex else where outside of their relationship (that their choice), that none of my business and I have no right to have a say, however I will stand up for victim of rape/Slavery/False Imprisonment.

I think it is wrong for the female Gardai to prostitute/solicited for sex themselves from others and for their bosses to allow them to do so. It set a bad example for women and it is entrapment for men who is looking for consensual sex, not arrest men/women who rape and enslave others for prostitution. The Gardai should be ashamed of themselves wasting resources on men who are looking for consensual sex they cannot get at home. There is far more serious crimes in the city of Limerick and they should be protecting those who are fearful and been abused rather than putting scarce resources into stupid activity like this. This campaign of an age old practice does not reduce this type of dubious crime. It just shift it elsewhere and what remains pushes it far more underground into dangerous territory. I am embarrassed for the Gardai and for the Politicians. They are now putting more women at risk and other non sex abused at risk for lack of patrols. They also keep these enslave prostitute at risks, because their masters will move them else where unpunished.

ILikeBananas

limklad wrote: »

The Gardai should be ashamed of themselves wasting resources on men who are looking for consensual sex they cannot get at home.

Yes, they go back to the good old days where they left the men off and arrested the women :rolleyes:

rodento

Wonder what would have happenned if they offered the officer a gift instead:D

SeanW

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Yes, they go back to the good old days where they left the men off and arrested the women :rolleyes:

Isn't that just the reverse of what the feminist-left wants to do today?

ILikeBananas

SeanW wrote: »

Isn't that just the reverse of what the feminist-left wants to do today?

Both parties should be prosecuted. Prosecuting either one or the other is unfair.

limklad

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Yes, they go back to the good old days where they left the men off and arrested the women :rolleyes:

That is a very dumb assumption and uncalled for, especially when so many people are under a barrage of attack and fearful of attach from Thugs and criminals who are breaking into homes every day when the latest crime reports show an increase not decrease. Especially since they (The Gardai) are diverting much needed resources away from where it is needed most, since they are not going after the thugs who force women into prostitution. Instead the Gardai are putting these women at higher risk, who do not earn enough get abused and beaten by their thug masters. Shame on you. Well done for Supporting the Gardai on this issue and for leaving the Thugs and criminals off free to abuse.

ILikeBananas

limklad wrote: »

That is a very dumb assumption and uncalled for, especially when so many people are under a barrage of attack and fearful of attach from Thugs and criminals who are breaking into homes every day when the latest crime reports show an increase not decrease. Especially since they (The Gardai) are diverting much needed resources away from where it is needed most, since they are not going after the thugs who force women into prostitution. Instead the Gardai are putting these women at higher risk, who do not earn enough get abused and beaten by their thug masters. Shame on you. Well done for Supporting the Gardai on this issue and for leaving the Thugs and criminals off free to abuse.

Prostitution needs to be dealt with. It makes sense to begin with visible street prostitution before moving on to the more difficult task of illegal brothels.

Naming and shaming perpetrators is a welcome change in tactics. For too long kerb crawlers were let off with no punishment whilst the prostitute ended up in court. This never worked out in the long run since most prostitutes were in a position where they had no alternatives but to go back on the game. Users also have a choice and are often not in the same dire predicaments that the prostitutes find themselves in. Knowing that they stand to be named and shamed might make them think twice about their actions.

limklad

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Prostitution needs to be dealt with. It makes sense to begin with visible street prostitution before moving on to the more difficult task of illegal brothels.

Naming and shaming perpetrators is a welcome change in tactics. For too long kerb crawlers were let off with no punishment whilst the prostitute ended up in court. This never worked out in the long run since most prostitutes were in a position where they had no alternatives but to go back on the game. Users also have a choice and are often not in the same dire predicaments that the prostitutes find themselves in. Knowing that they stand to be named and shamed might make them think twice about their actions.

Sex will always happen, you cannot regulate that who men and women have sex (provide they are not related and under age or rape). It is not mine or your molarity to decide who should have consensual sex with and many people have different view of what is molarity is right and there been religious wars in the past on who is right and what god is the true god.

I be upfront with this, Prostitution is a age old issue that every country, Nation, Religious Organisations have to deal with since the start of civilisation with great difficulty.
The Main problem with Prostitution that it is illegal and Criminals are taking advantage of that because they can make money from it. Sex sell because of biological need for it and everybody have a different need for sex. Men and Women have extramartial affairs with others because of that sexual need. Some have sex with people who want no strings attach sexual affairs because they do not have partner r their partner will not fulfil their sexual need in which consensual Prostitutes provide that service, that include women in privilege positions who have a sexual need without the drama of the other half.

When Organised criminals do not have enough willing participants they will force others into it. It is them the organised Criminals should be Procuted for it. It is rare for these organised criminals to be prosecuted in Courts. Deal with that issue for Rape and false Imprisonment and remove all their wealth and power base and you make in roads with Trafficking and enslave Prostitutes. Like Criminals, Politicians like to go for the easy method in which will always hurt more law abiding citizens who needs no string attach sex.

They main problem with Politicians/Gardai is they do not deal with the core issue of Trafficking. They just moves it on. It is does not attempt to solve the issue of people been force into Prostitution. Norway and Sweden did not solve that issue of Trafficking nor enslave Prostitution, they just force it more underground and into other Justifications like here where more abuse occurs.

This Bill and actions of the Gardai is not a cross border action to catch and punish the perpetrators who are the organised criminals in which they traffic people for Prostitution. It is an embarrassment for our nation and a major backward step for enslaved Prostitutes who will suffer far more abuse with the passing of this law.

The Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 deal with this yet, I have not heard of anyone been jail for it.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch wrote:

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/seanad/2011/10/12/00008.asp
Thankfully, Ireland has strong legislation in place to combat the trafficking of human beings for sexual exploitation.

This quote shoot her argument in the foot, Like all things in life, Politicians have a knack in pasting over their failures with cover ups actions. Since 2008, Things have gotten mighty worst on our streets with Human Trafficking for Prostitution, which shows that the Politicians and gardai have failed in the height of misery with dealing with Organised crime.

This is the reason why Organised crime is flaunting the Law here.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch wrote:

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/seanad/2011/10/12/00008.asp

The Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 gives effect to Ireland’s obligations to criminalise human trafficking as set out in the various international instruments governing human trafficking. The Act provides for penalties of up to life imprisonment for anyone found guilty of trafficking persons, including for the purpose of sexual exploitation. Specifically in relation to the sexual exploitation of trafficked persons, under the Act, it is an offence punishable by a fine or a term of up to five years imprisonment, or both, to solicit a trafficked person in any place, whether public or private, for the purpose of prostitution.

They do not consider it, Rape or False Imprisonment or slavery. They tarnish all Prostitutes with the same brush, they must all be victims. They all must be force into it. Some Prostitutes see it as an opportunity to earn money. They also failed to understand that Trafficked person can be sold to others for enslavement so the new owners can used them for sex when they the new owners did not traffic the person into the country.

Politicians always seem to fall down in their understand of Organised crime. They used their bias glasses and bias gasses of others and lack of understanding and will fail because of it.

sarkozy

limklad wrote: »

Sex will always happen, you cannot regulate that who men and women have sex (provide they are not related and under age or rape). It is not mine or your molarity to decide who should have consensual sex with and many people have different view of what is molarity is right and there been religious wars in the past on who is right and what god is the true god.

I be upfront with this, Prostitution is a age old issue that every country, Nation, Religious Organisations have to deal with since the start of civilisation with great difficulty.
The Main problem with Prostitution that it is illegal and Criminals are taking advantage of that because they can make money from it. Sex sell because of biological need for it and everybody have a different need for sex. Men and Women have extramartial affairs with others because of that sexual need. Some have sex with people who want no strings attach sexual affairs because they do not have partner r their partner will not fulfil their sexual need in which consensual Prostitutes provide that service, that include women in privilege positions who have a sexual need without the drama of the other half.

When Organised criminals do not have enough willing participants they will force others into it. It is them the organised Criminals should be Procuted for it. It is rare for these organised criminals to be prosecuted in Courts. Deal with that issue for Rape and false Imprisonment and remove all their wealth and power base and you make in roads with Trafficking and enslave Prostitutes. Like Criminals, Politicians like to go for the easy method in which will always hurt more law abiding citizens who needs no string attach sex.

They main problem with Politicians/Gardai is they do not deal with the core issue of Trafficking. They just moves it on. It is does not attempt to solve the issue of people been force into Prostitution. Norway and Sweden did not solve that issue of Trafficking nor enslave Prostitution, they just force it more underground and into other Justifications like here where more abuse occurs.

This Bill and actions of the Gardai is not a cross border action to catch and punish the perpetrators who are the organised criminals in which they traffic people for Prostitution. It is an embarrassment for our nation and a major backward step for enslaved Prostitutes who will suffer far more abuse with the passing of this law.

The Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 deal with this yet, I have not heard of anyone been jail for it.


This quote shoot her argument in the foot, Like all things in life, Politicians have a knack in pasting over their failures with cover ups actions. Since 2008, Things have gotten mighty worst on our streets with Human Trafficking for Prostitution, which shows that the Politicians and gardai have failed in the height of misery with dealing with Organised crime.

This is the reason why Organised crime is flaunting the Law here.


They do not consider it, Rape or False Imprisonment or slavery. They tarnish all Prostitutes with the same brush, they must all be victims. They all must be force into it. Some Prostitutes see it as an opportunity to earn money. They also failed to understand that Trafficked person can be sold to others for enslavement so the new owners can used them for sex when they the new owners did not traffic the person into the country.

Politicians always seem to fall down in their understand of Organised crime. They used their bias glasses and bias gasses of others and lack of understanding and will fail because of it.

I see your point. Strictly, this is an Act to combat human trafficking. It formally recognises the strong link between prostitution and human trafficking. As you suggest, this Act does not protect sex workers who have not been trafficked. Therefore, we need some.

My view on this is the current legal situation does not adequately handle the situation. Therefore we need robust legislation to protect the right people. There need to be legal protections for all sex workers that provide the basis for alternative routes out of prostitution. It should also take cognizance of the different kinds of sex labour and adequately define them in law to ensure those guilty of crimes related to the industry cannot get off and those accused falsely will not be prosecuted.

hatrickpatrick

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Both parties should be prosecuted. Prosecuting either one or the other is unfair.

Neither should be prosecuted. It's a consensual choice and is none of anyone else's business.

hatrickpatrick

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Prostitution needs to be dealt with.

Why? Why should we live in a nanny state where we are not free to make our own decisions regarding our own lives?

Knowing that they stand to be named and shamed might make them think twice about their actions.

If their actions only involve them and another consenting adult, then why should they "think twice" about them at all?

ILikeBananas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If their actions only involve them and another consenting adult, then why should they "think twice" about them at all?

If a poor person decided to sell one of their kidneys to a wealthy person who had renal failure purely because they thought that they had no other options for making income then would this be right and just? After all, they are both consenting adults.

SeanW

ILikeBananas wrote: »

If a poor person decided to sell one of their kidneys to a wealthy person who had renal failure purely because they thought that they had no other options for making income then would this be right and just? After all, they are both consenting adults.

Two completely different situations, granted I'm not sure of my own position on kidney-selling, but you're comparing apples and oranges.

What gives YOU the right to tell two consenting adults what they can and can't do ... eh ... behind closed doors?

Bottle_of_Smoke

ILikeBananas wrote: »

If a poor person decided to sell one of their kidneys to a wealthy person who had renal failure purely because they thought that they had no other options for making income then would this be right and just? After all, they are both consenting adults.

See no major issue there. People donate kidneys all the time.

hatrickpatrick

ILikeBananas wrote: »

If a poor person decided to sell one of their kidneys to a wealthy person who had renal failure purely because they thought that they had no other options for making income then would this be right and just? After all, they are both consenting adults.

It's my kidney, what gives you or anyone else the right to tell me what I can or cannot do with it? I I want to sell it that's my own choice. A stupid choice, granted, but still my choice.

Now if my kidney was being taken from me against my will, THAT should be a crime.

ILikeBananas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's my kidney, what gives you or anyone else the right to tell me what I can or cannot do with it? I I want to sell it that's my own choice. A stupid choice, granted, but still my choice.

Now if my kidney was being taken from me against my will, THAT should be a crime.

Where do you draw the line?

What if the person is selling the kidney under duress from a third party and the buyer is not aware (nor cares) about this fact? Is it still ok then?

Bottle_of_Smoke

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Where do you draw the line?

What if the person is selling the kidney under duress from a third party and the buyer is not aware (nor cares) about this fact? Is it still ok then?

that would be wrong in a similar way to people being forced into prostitution is wrong

SeanW

Granted it may not be an easy line to draw (i.e. your point re: attributing fault to a careless 3rd party) but then again one thing to me is clear: if two people are freely agreeing to an eh ... "favours" for money deal, it's noones businesses but the participants.

However as you rightly point out, when one party is under duress, it gets a whole lot messier, and nastier. All the more reason to take the trade out of the hands of criminal scumbags.

Al Capone was only ever jailed for tax evasion and his gang was not finally taken down by government force or more restrictive laws, but the abolition of the Prohibition of alcohol that gave rise to his gang in the first place.

hatrickpatrick

ILikeBananas wrote: »

Where do you draw the line?

What if the person is selling the kidney under duress from a third party and the buyer is not aware (nor cares) about this fact? Is it still ok then?

Obviously not.
I never said forced prostitution is ok, I was referring to consenting adults very clearly.

Pointless analogy.

limklad

SeanW wrote: »

Al Capone was only ever jailed for tax evasion and his gang was not finally taken down by government force or more restrictive laws, but the abolition of the Prohibition of alcohol that gave rise to his gang in the first place.

I fully agree. Yet Politicians/Police forces still never learn from history and keep remaking old mistakes.

ILikeBananas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Obviously not.
I never said forced prostitution is ok, I was referring to consenting adults very clearly.

Pointless analogy.

Well, what I'm getting at is that often the man will never know if the prostitute is under duress or not.

Just for the record, I mostly agree with the libertarian argument that what's done between consenting adults should be legal. So, I'm pro gay marriage and in theory I'm pro euthanasia, pro legalisation of narcotics and pro legalisation of prostitution. However I would be in favour of putting in place laws that protect vunerable people from being taken advantage of as I realise that not all adults are fully logical and rational and of sound mind.

In the case of prostitution therefore I'd be pro legalised brothels that are safe, hygienic and regulated (as they have in Austraila, New Zealand and Germany) whilst criminalising street prostitution and illegal brothels.

As it stands, in Ireland we don't have the former so I'd still be in favour of criminalising the latter.

Linoge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's my kidney, what gives you or anyone else the right to tell me what I can or cannot do with it? I I want to sell it that's my own choice. A stupid choice, granted, but still my choice.

Now if my kidney was being taken from me against my will, THAT should be a crime.

When you remove your kidney, you are removing your use of it (and decreasing your lifespan in the process). When you have sex with someone you are not removing the use of your sexual organs. Kinda obvious when you think of it actually....

hatrickpatrick

Linoge wrote: »

When you remove your kidney, you are removing your use of it (and decreasing your lifespan in the process). When you have sex with someone you are not removing the use of your sexual organs. Kinda obvious when you think of it actually....

Agreed, hence why I said it was a pointless analogy. But either way, my kidney is my own kidney and I see absolutely no excuse for it being illegal for me to sell it. If it shortens my lifespan, that's my own conscious decision, so be it. Nobody else's business.

Linoge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Agreed, hence why I said it was a pointless analogy. But either way, my kidney is my own kidney and I see absolutely no excuse for it being illegal for me to sell it. If it shortens my lifespan, that's my own conscious decision, so be it. Nobody else's business.

I think that's a matter of psychology really. I would think that anyone who would sell an organ is not of sound mind - think of that guy in China who sold his kidney and went out and bought an iPad.

There would be of course cases of fathers selling an organ to buy medicine for their child I'm sure. However, allowing people to sell their organs would open market where one does not currently exist, and then you have just brought on some of the problems that prostitution actually already faces - people being forced to sell. The poorer members of society would suffer at the expense of the rich. It is not just a matter of it being degrading or possible psychological problems - we're talking serious unavoidable health implications in every single case.

I know its a whole other debate that could fill a thread of its own - I just don't think it's good to draw similiarities between the two with regards to doing whatever you want with your body. Prostitution and organ selling aren't remotely in the same league. Prostitution would be much closer to modelling if you want to draw similarities.

AhSureTisGrand

ILikeBananas wrote: »

 I realise that not all adults are fully logical and rational and of sound mind.

Nobody is fully logical and rational

AhSureTisGrand

Linoge wrote: »

When you remove your kidney, you are removing your use of it (and decreasing your lifespan in the process)

The scientific evidence seems to suggest otherwise: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182026.php

Obviously there are sound reasons for keeping both your kidneys. I also suspect kidney donors are given advice on staying healthy which gives them an advantage over the other people in that study.

Now unhealthy eating, that can shorten your lifespan by decades, and is arguably something nobody of sound mind would do

SupaNova

Linoge wrote: »

When you remove your kidney, you are removing your use of it (and decreasing your lifespan in the process). When you have sex with someone you are not removing the use of your sexual organs. Kinda obvious when you think of it actually....

If you are using the possible decreased lifespan as a reason why selling a kidney be illegal, why stop there, why not make it illegal to smoke or drink, or why not even make it illegal for anyone to not exercise daily?

If someone who smokes and drinks and has a party lifestyle and decreases their lifespan from what it could have possibly been doesn't make automatically them mentally ill, they have weighed the length of life versus the type of lifestyle they want and come to their own decision.

I think that's a matter of psychology really. I would think that anyone who would sell an organ is not of sound mind - think of that guy in China who sold his kidney and went out and bought an iPad.

This example is of a kid. A kid can make a stupid decision, while not having mental problems. If selling an organ has little affect on ones health would you still feel the same? Is it just people who would sell an organ that you consider not of sound mind or donors as well?