Wednesday, March 12, 2008

ACLU: NO Regulation of Prostitution

Governor Spitzer has resigned. As far as Gov. Spitzer goes, for me this is simple. Spitzer violated state law and he should have resigned and should be prosecuted. I would also question if he may have abused his office and cut any back room deals. He was prosecuting prostitution rings at the same time he was seeing prostitutes. That leads me to wonder if there was something "fishy" going on.

But, since Gov. Spitzer brought up the issue, it is appropriate to discuss the issue of prostitution and the published views of the ACLU.


However, I do not believe that prostitution should in any way, shape or form be federally regulated. This would fly in the face of the 10th Amendment.

State regulation is another matter. If the people of a given state decide that they want to regulate prostitution, then, the will of the people should prevail. Historically, prostitution has been regulated dating back to ancient times. Rome had various laws and taxes surrounding prostitutes and prostitution. This regulation has historically played an important role in the protection of public health.

The people at the ACLU have a different opinion. They seem to believe that prostitution should be legalized and unregulated. From Stop the ACLU:
The ACLU's Policy 211 is straightforward. "The ACLU supports the decriminalization of prostitution and opposes state regulation of prostitution". They base their argument on several points, including that existing laws are discrimination against women, and the right of individual privacy. They argue that what two consenting adults in private do is their own business. However, when you also oppose zoning laws, and regulation you can hardly argue that prostitution is a private business.
This yet another issue that the ACLU is on the wrong side of.


Post a Comment

All comments are welcome- However, Anonymous Comments might be subject to deletion.