street scene warning

[jim]

Rights vs Legality

No it isn't. If I choose to go cruising for sex, that's my business, not the state's, not the feminists', not society's. There are many of us who used to enjoy cruising (before the girls started leaving for other venues). What you suggested, Jim, was not to cruise. I resent the fact that the state is trying to remove all chance of a revival in a particular area of the hobby I richly enjoyed. I have a right to meet and negotiate services with an SP, whether at an MP, in my home, at her place or on the street.

Must disagree with you on this one Kev. Given the state of the law as it presently is, whether you agree with it or not, you do not have the right to go cruising the streets to negotiate for sex. Just as you do not have the right to walk out of a grocery store or restaurant without paying for your groceries or meal, stealing from your neighbours etc.

Strictly speaking, you only have the 'right' to do something that is deemed by society to be legal. If you disagree with the law than say so, but don't go playing the 'I've got rights' card. You have the right to live in a free and democratic society, you have the right to live in this society without obstruction as long as you live within the rules of the society. Luckily for us all you also have the right to disagree with the law and fight to change it, but just because you disagree with a law does not give you the right to break it.

 

[KLKev]

Most laws, as they stand, are premised on the idea that those who break them are somehow trampling on the rights or physical well-being of others. For example, robbing a bank is illegal because it takes away the rights of the lawful owners of the money. Assaulting or killing someone is illegal because it violates the right of that person to personal security and/or life in general.

Me picking up an adult hooker on the street does not violate anyone's rights. Yes, people may not like the traffic in their area, just as I don't like the traffic and debris generated by the popular convenience store a block away from my house. But just as the presence of the convenience store does not deprive me of any of my fundamental rights (e.g. my house wasn't knocked down without compensation in order to build the store) me picking up a hooker does not deprive any of the so-called affected parties of their lives, liberty, property, etc.

We have to be so careful when we allow the law to trample on fundamental freedoms of choice. Remember, it was not long ago in this country that gay sex, for example, was a criminal offence. Now you, I or any reasonable person would see such a law as a blatant infringement on a person's civil rights. And rather than just working to change such a law, I would encourage people to violate it. An illegitimate law should never be obeyed. People in Communist Vietnam and China openly break their governments' laws against distributing anti-government literature and holding public demonstrations against state policy. Should they be vilified for breaking the law? Of course not. Such laws are unjust and should be ignored.

We need to uphold the rule of law only in areas where it is truly needed--against theft, murder, assault, terrorism, etc. Legislating against consensual sex between adults is not legitimate. If I wish to get married again and have sex that way, that should be my business. If I wish to hire an escort, that should be my affair, not the state's. And if I pick up a hooker on 95th Street, the police officer driving by should keep on driving--right to Mill Woods to deal with the drive-by shootings and gang violence that seem to plague that community. Let's deal with real crime and leave sex-for-hire alone.

 

[jim]

Thank you goesks.

We the choir all enjoy sex for money or we wouldn't be here.

Big Mac wrappers and Big Gulp cups as a nuisance are hardly on the same plane as a syringe or a cum filled condom. Would anyone of us want our sisters or mothers walk the guantlet that has become 95st and 118 Ave?

 

[wolverine]

I think it's just couples fucking in the playground, because as far as I know, SWs haven't ventured further south than Old Strathcona. And because that strip turns into a police state during the evenings, these SWs are usually chased back across the river.

 

[jim]

Wolverine are you saying that SW can be found on Whyte?

There's more than Edmonton's fair share of undesirables out on Whyte at any time of day but I haven't seen anything that looks like SW action. That's all this area needs to really kill it.

 

[wolverine]

I've heard that some SWs have tried to work Whyte Ave, but like I said, the anti-fun squad chase them back across the river.