26

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, ivan2016, you wrote: I> For a long time already it is time to fasten this hypocritical ostentatious struggle against prostitution. Whores should be legalized, deduced from a shade, to deliver on the registration, to cut from them taxes and to force to transit regularly medical board. It will be favourable everything, except souteneurs. To what it is everything when it is already invented ?

27

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> 1. Legalization does not entail majority legalization for people do not want to pay taxes, generally to quit a shade. I.e. most likely besides a criminal spectrum, will be legalized which allows including  criminal at the expense of lowering of norms of morals. At cops the pressure lever disappears. And working women will have a choice between payment of taxes and payment of bribes. And, most likely, the first will be strong less that automatically means lowering of bribes to insignificant which anybody to interest and will not be. IT> unique advantage are taxes. But such  it will be favourable to state to become  and the killer. , what incomes trample. Drugs too are time for legalizing for a long time.

28

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> Hello, ivan2016, you wrote: IT> 1. Legalization does not entail majority legalization for people do not want to pay taxes, generally to quit a shade. I.e. most likely besides a criminal spectrum, will be legalized which allows including  criminal at the expense of lowering of norms of morals. Not . So it is possible to tell about any spectrum of products - they do not want to quit a shade, taxes do not want to pay. But for some reason the shadow share in the legal goods and services  is less. I think that the majority of prostitutes  legal office. And at all I do not understand, why sex it is immoral. If at you the mistress, you contain it and have with it sex - that it, type normally and if sometimes only to it you pay immediately for sex it is already immoral. Why it generally is immoral? IT> but such  it will be favourable to state to become  and the killer. Correctly, let's deliver sex in one row with murders and drugs. However, already it is not rare so do. Really it is not obvious that plotting of direct harm to health and human life it is immoral, but sex by it is not. Though shadow prostitution increases risk to health and life. Morally, from this point of view, would be to take care of people and to make their legal, to reduce their risks.

29

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> Hello, ylp, you wrote: ylp>> certainly it is possible. If there is something, the prohibition something does not work, it should to cease be forbidden something ( that money is spent for nothing) and to legalize. IT> is not present, murders and rapes - a fine example of prohibitions. Always there will be those who breaks something. Always there is that immediately does to the person harm. Violence in particular, as an example resulted by you. Poisons, still, for example. Sex does not get to this category in any way. It is not necessary to put in one row  needs and murders.

30

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Gattaka, you wrote: G> Hello, ivan2016, you wrote: I>> For a long time already it is time to fasten this hypocritical ostentatious struggle against prostitution. Whores should be legalized, deduced from a shade, to deliver on the registration, to cut from them taxes and to force to transit regularly medical board. It will be favourable everything, except souteneurs. G> it as the snow clod is a lot of that with itself drags. Specific examples are possible some that it behind itself drags. I here think, alcohol should be forbidden - here the real factor of degradation. Something against it not especially are at war.

31

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Hello, ylp, you wrote: ylp>> about, my favourite argument "well same quite another matter!" ylp>> you can explain, why (for example, the believer) the person who is ashamed of prostitution as the phenomenon, ceases to be ashamed of it if the phenomenon legalize? S> it is necessary that all were ashamed. It will not be irrespective of, legalize prostitution or not.> Such society works better, in it it is less than sufferings. An example of such society result please. S> you think for what to the person sense of shame is given? ylp>> the relation of believers to prostitution somehow changes after it will be legalized at state level? S> all of us believers. You did not answer my question.

32

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb> At cops the pressure lever disappears. And working women will have a choice between payment of taxes and payment of bribes. And, most likely, the first will be strong less that automatically means lowering of bribes to insignificant which anybody to interest and will not be. It and now in the Russian Federation is not present. , the penalty in 500 on which prostitutes to spit and which cops  for a tick shines only. Working women do not select, as the souteneur will solve. And they too in most cases hang is better, rather than pay though any taxes. vsb> drugs too are time for legalizing for a long time. No. On the contrary, it is necessary to deduce alcohol and tobacco gradually.

33

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Fantasist, you wrote: F> And at all I do not understand, why sex it is immoral. Not sex immorally, and selling sex immorally. But god with it, with morals. Exponentation of selling sex in public norm dulls interest to sex as to this from bases of human relations in a society and it is simply poor and degenerate.

34

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> Hello, ylp, you wrote: ylp>> certainly it is possible. If there is something, the prohibition something does not work, it should to cease be forbidden something ( that money is spent for nothing) and to legalize. IT> is not present, murders and rapes - a fine example of prohibitions. Always there will be those who breaks something. Murders and rapes are crimes where there is a victim. And my announcement was about things,  on which does not work. Punishment presence for  and rapes reduces number of murders and rapes. The prohibition of prostitution does not reduce number of prostitutes. Look to statistican. Crimes,  about prostitution - the forced involving in prostitution, kidnapping and   are things which are present because prostitution is illegal. In in itself sex for money (legal) victims are not present. ylp>> "Corruption" - the phenomenon of other order. Also she dares very simply - magnification of salaries of officials that they did not need to take bribes. IT> at the time of Tsjurupy of bribes took in times less (real copecks in comparison with the present) at very low salaries. Not so I understand, about what you and as it is relevant to that we consider. IT> people frequently steal not because from them the salary small. And why still people steal, tell?

35

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Fantasist, you wrote: F> But for some reason a shadow share in the legal goods and services  less. It is impossible to tell about what was shadow. The Netherlands had an experience with drugs, not so successful. F> and at all I do not understand, why sex it is immoral. If at you the mistress, you contain it and have with it sex - that it, type normally and if sometimes only to it you pay immediately for sex it is already immoral. Why it generally is immoral? Immorally, because among people long monogamous relations are accepted. It is the evolutionary biology substantiated including mathematics. And including besides remaining aspects - there is an aspect of venereal diseases why whores always drove. It too the veiled prostitution and, for example, normal healthy feminism (and he happens - yes-yes) - condemns such relations. And, suddenly, now too it is condemned ", the whore, " is all epithets with which award such lady naturally. F> but sex by it is not. Though shadow prostitution increases risk to health and life. Morally, from this point of view, would be to take care of people and to make their legal, to reduce their risks. Legal does not reduce risks, whence this nonsense? To reduce risks it is necessary, that the prostitute after each contact made tests and waited. To reduce risks it is necessary to forbid prostitutes rendering of services without condoms and other perversions - Russian on it do not go at all for to whom they become necessary? You instead suggest to legalize even more to kindle epidemic and to promote morals lowering. Perhaps suffices?

36

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> It is one of control threads for which the person it is possible to pull and manipulate it. It is one of mechanisms allowing people to coexist with similar to in a society. And living in wood, in loneliness sense of shame is not necessary, absolutely.... <<RSDN@Home 1.2.0 alpha 5 rev. 1495>>

37

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> 1. Your daughter can legally be arranged with the prostitute (on reaching 18 years). And your neighbors, laughing, will be to you and to your wife regularly to tell as they it had. You can make nothing - all legally. Whether reduces this amount of your sufferings? If brought up the daughter the silly woman who works in a brothel in the adjacent house suffer. S> 2. The spoilage institute can break up generally. Children in it is put. The house or houses where it is possible to come and with them to be played, satisfy a parent instinct. And wives will be considered as the phenomenon become outdated - after all the woman can receive money for sex, and legally. You consider that the spoilage institute keeps only what the man contains the woman? So women work for a long time, and earn quite often more

38

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, antropolog, you wrote: ylp>> a question - if presence /   does not influence in any way phenomenon presence,  not to remove from it a crime and not to start to earn on it money? A> already the second in this subject with cheap demagogy. Really not clearly that so it is possible to tell about any illegal activity, making profit? Any trade in the illegal goods or banal corruption falls under a template. Well, at a drug trafficking or the weapon slightly other consequences both for users, and in the social plan. And here - I personally do not see problems with . I see one pluses.

39

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb>... To finance the state - I will select the second. "Noble" thoughts about taxes and state financing look suspiciously double-faced, hypocritical and sanctimonious that in a subject context funny doubly.... <<RSDN@Home 1.2.0 alpha 5 rev. 1495>>

40

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: ylp>> a question - if presence /   does not influence in any way phenomenon presence,  not to remove from it a crime and not to start to earn on it money? S> one business when the phenomenon is, but you it should be ashamed and look down. Understanding that you are guilty before God, permanently live in sense of guilt. S> and quite another matter when you lose sense of shame and b-dej put in one row with workers of sphere of services. I do not see problems. You, for example, like to solve challenging tasks, you work as the programmer and is happy. And someone likes more to strike. Why from this it is impossible to derive some income? On  every second - the individual (everyone the first - or  with the trailer, or with cockroaches-mutants, or with any problems)

41

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, ylp, you wrote: ylp> a question - if presence /   does not influence in any way presence of the phenomenon it explicitly influences an amount of displays

42

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> Unique advantage are taxes. But such  it will be favourable to state to become  and the killer. , what incomes trample. In these branches at the state monopoly

43

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb> Drugs too are time for legalizing for a long time. How to save the children from heroin?

44

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, antropolog, you wrote: A> except favourable/is unprofitable to eat and other criteria of true at people. For example morals. The morals already had time to be fixed three times near Adrianople since juris italici so that we will not remember the old woman in vain

45

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> Hello, Fantasist, you wrote: F>> But for some reason the shadow share in the legal goods and services  is less. IT> It is impossible to tell about what was shadow. The Netherlands had an experience with drugs, not so successful. F>> and at all I do not understand, why sex it is immoral. If at you the mistress, you contain it and have with it sex - that it, type normally and if sometimes only to it you pay immediately for sex it is already immoral. Why it generally is immoral? IT> it is immoral, because among people long monogamous relations are accepted. It is the evolutionary biology substantiated including mathematics. And including besides remaining aspects - there is an aspect of venereal diseases why whores always drove. IT> it too the veiled prostitution and, for example, normal healthy feminism (and he happens - yes-yes) - condemns such relations. And, suddenly, now too it is condemned ", the whore, " is all epithets with which award such lady naturally. In that that you tell a reason is, I should recognize. I can not agree completely for there are also other reasons, but truth that you speak is is it is necessary to consider.

46

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb> Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S>> 1. Your daughter can legally be arranged with the prostitute... S>> 2. The spoilage institute can break up generally... vsb> And what hinders these phenomena to happen now? How legalization affects it? Generally evidently legalization affects it. Also it is necessary to be very big hypocrite and the liar to represent here misunderstanding.

47

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> you instead suggest to legalize even more to kindle epidemic and to promote morals lowering. Perhaps suffices? What else epidemic? You so speak as though at us half of country of prostitutes and their clients.

48

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, pagid, you wrote: P> From that that souteneurs  "dear businessmen" in branch of intimate services they cease to be souteneurs? In all countries where prostitution is legal, souteneurs are forbidden by the law. They simply are not present. As there are also other accompanying phenomena like roofs,  at local no cops, etc.

49

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, ivan2016, you wrote: I> For a long time already it is time to fasten this hypocritical ostentatious struggle against prostitution. Whores should be legalized, deduced from a shade, to deliver on the registration, to cut from them taxes and to force to transit regularly medical board. It will be favourable everything, except souteneurs. Yes  these prostitutes generally are necessary? The normal little girl to remove and more pleasantly and more cheaply quits. And to bang crocodiles, moreover for money it is a tin

50

Re: Down with souteneurs

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: ylp>> about, my favourite argument "well same quite another matter!" ylp>> you can explain, why (for example, the believer) the person who is ashamed of prostitution as the phenomenon, ceases to be ashamed of it if the phenomenon legalize? S> it is necessary that all were ashamed. Such society works better, in it it is less than sufferings. Well here I am not ashamed. And sometimes I use this phenomenon. And? S> you think for what to the person sense of shame is given? ylp>> the relation of believers to prostitution somehow changes after it will be legalized at state level? S> all of us believers. Simply some do not like a word God and instead of it they use a word  societies or nature principles. And still all of us rave. Simply someone is more, someone is less