R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Saying simply that someone or other is wrong about this or that is not an answer. That’s done all the time in religious debate and it answers nothing.
- Status
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
It is not, especially in our country with its 1st Amendment. We should be able to read anything we want, howsoever controversial, without having some Official Censor’s stamp of approval (who guards the guardians?) and look as well at whatever we want.
Censorship is one of the hallmarks of totalitarian goverments, and I’d not like to see it here.
D
Darryl1958
Guest
At the very most, such value judgments should be made at the community level, and not at the national level.
If the greater numbers of members in a specfic community don’t want women taking their shirts off in the street, or their panties off in bars, then it is reasonable that they have some voice in their own community.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
For rules about employment conditions, it also makes sense to tie them in with unemployment benefits. Suppose a woman has lost her job, and is looking for new work. Would it be right to deny her unemployment benefits because she refuses to accept a new job as a stripper?
No woman, or man for that matter, should be forced to take off their clothes to earn a living. This isn’t censorship, this is basic human dignity. Now if a woman has enough money to live on, but still wants to take off her clothes for free because she thinks it is fun, then there is no non-religious reason to stop her.
No woman, or man for that matter, should be forced to take off their clothes to earn a living. This isn’t censorship, this is basic human dignity. Now if a woman has enough money to live on, but still wants to take off her clothes for free because she thinks it is fun, then there is no non-religious reason to stop her.
B
Beau_Ouiville
Guest
- Under libertarianism, strip clubs could not be banned.
- If this is considered debasing, what next? First dwarf tossing, then dancing the can-can, then boxing, then ballet, then cheerleading.
- We cannot constitutionally ban forms of entertainment and expression.
S
stanmaxkolbe
Guest
I have to disagree becasue there are people in our great nation that would ban my bible study group becasue they think Christians are harmful.
I tell you how to ban strip clubs don’t go and the free market will close them; down but don’t ban someone’s freedom.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
I agree. The market will take care of it. No business, they close.
B
Beau_Ouiville
Guest
I knew I’d agree with you sooner or later!
Around here, the clubs have distance requirements: They have to be far away from schools, churches and polite society. So the few establishments tend to be in industrial districts.
D
Dionysus
Guest
Beau Ouiville said:
Anyway, we do not live in a strictly libertarian society, nor do most western nations. If consensus about the moral status of a certain kind of behavior becomes strong enough and universal enough, then it is usually outlawed. Drugs, prostitution, public nudity, etc., are all examples of this fact. This even extends to religious or political behavior (in France, burqas, or crucifixes and yamakas in public schools; Nazism is illegal in Germany; and in Austria, portions of your name can even be removed if they indicate “nobility”: such as the preposition ‘von’ ).
Do you really want to take unlimited freedom of expression to its logical conclusion?
B
Beau_Ouiville
Guest
It’s a banned sport because it debases midgets. Google for details.
But folks should remember issues like this when they express support of libertarianism.
No constitutional right is unlimited.
S
stanmaxkolbe
Guest
Come on Beau you know we agree on a few things. After all I was born and raised 100 miles north of you in Kalamazoo.
Same in Texas on the distance requirments.
E
edwest2
Guest
This is an old argument, especially linking it to the government, as if the government is the only concern. Strippers are human beings. There is such a thing as human dignity. Human dignity should be universal. That’s all that’s being discussed here. Not banning books or other reading material.
I watched the usual arguments for stripping unfold. I know how various jurisdictions in various states imposed different rules regarding how much starting clothing a stripper was required to wear in the 1950s.
And at all times, it was promoted as somewhat high-brow. I drove past a billboard for a strip club the other day. It had the words “gentleman’s club” on it, as if only gentlemen of the most refined character go there. I am ashamed to say that in the 1980s, I went to that gentleman’s club, and it was unrefined, tawdry and blatantly sexual. There was no artistic merit to anything going on there. It was a facade.
Here is some legal information I hope you will find helpful:
attorneygeneral.utah.gov/851.html
God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
If they’re doing it voluntarily and under no duress, then that’s different than if they’re doing it because they have to support a drug habit or are being controlled by a pimp.
What a euphemism! I agree. The several “gentleman’s clubs” here in Little Rock seem to attract mostly rednecks, if the number of beat up pick-up trucks parked outside are any indication.
There’s a stripper named Dita Von Teese (stage name, obviously) who was married for a while to that odd rocker Marilyn Manson and she, it seems, earns lucratively through her stripping and other legitimate businesses. So, it’s not necessarily humilation and degradation from the woman’s point of view.
E
edwest2
Guest
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
I can’t speak for Stan, but I’d think it’s a combination of freedom to view that entertainment and freedom to work at that business.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
An easy way for the government to make sure they are doing it voluntarily is to completely prohibit any compensation for stripping. The same way I can voluntarily donate my kidney to someone who needs it, but I’m not allowed to sell it or otherwise receive any kind of compensation. Or the same way I can put my baby up for adoption to a good family, but I can’t sell my baby to the highest bidder.
Certainly you can take this logic to extreme as well. But in principle it seems to be generally accepted that the government can prohibit people from doing otherwise allowed activities for profit, because if it were allowed to do those activities for money, it inevitably results in just another way for the rich to exploit the poor.
D
Dionysus
Guest
I’m wouldn’t categorically support or oppose bans like this outright. But for those of you who speak of freedom of expression, freedom of whatever, isn’t it worth asking the question, why draw the line at strip clubs? Many, if not all, of the reasons against such a ban could be applied to prohibitions on prostitution, on what we call “public indecency,” and a variety of other things.
All constitutional rights, as Beau observed, are limited. But that leaves open to what extent they should be limited. I suppose the question could be posed to the other side as well: why stop at banning strip clubs, why not outlaw premarital sex like the Saudis, if, after all, it is degrading. Of course, holding that point of view is barely socially acceptable in our world, so it’s hardly worth mentioning.
Ultimately, I am rather skeptical of arguments opposed to all legislation of virtues because we should be free to choose what virtues we aspire to, because the states that have been most progressive in liberalizing their laws have also have often become more authoritarian toward ideologies and religions to which said liberalization is hostile (Germany with Scientology, France and the Netherlands with Islam, etc.).
Individual freedom may be important, but I don’t believe it is the sole purpose of our existence, nor should it be the sole factor we consider in the making of our laws.
All constitutional rights, as Beau observed, are limited. But that leaves open to what extent they should be limited. I suppose the question could be posed to the other side as well: why stop at banning strip clubs, why not outlaw premarital sex like the Saudis, if, after all, it is degrading. Of course, holding that point of view is barely socially acceptable in our world, so it’s hardly worth mentioning.
Ultimately, I am rather skeptical of arguments opposed to all legislation of virtues because we should be free to choose what virtues we aspire to, because the states that have been most progressive in liberalizing their laws have also have often become more authoritarian toward ideologies and religions to which said liberalization is hostile (Germany with Scientology, France and the Netherlands with Islam, etc.).
Individual freedom may be important, but I don’t believe it is the sole purpose of our existence, nor should it be the sole factor we consider in the making of our laws.
B
Beau_Ouiville
Guest
Freedom of artistic expression. Its part of free speech.
B
Beau_Ouiville
Guest
Sexual relations outside of marriage is illegal in my state. There are very few prosecutions, however.
All of our laws are based on the constitution, which contains those freedoms.
The extent of permissible limitation of constitutional rights has to do with a ‘compelling state interest’. Many hefty tomes have been written on the subject.
E
edwest2
Guest
I’d like to relate an anecdote about a stranger who came to a man’s home in the late 1800s after a general invitation to the local population.
After he introduced himself, he told the homeowner that he did not subscribe to any real sense of morality as commonly practiced. The homeowner felt obliged to publicly tell his guests about this man and his beliefs. He then turned to the man and after telling him to enjoy himself, added that he would have the man thoroughly searched before leaving his home, not wanting to see any of the family silverware go missing.
God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
After he introduced himself, he told the homeowner that he did not subscribe to any real sense of morality as commonly practiced. The homeowner felt obliged to publicly tell his guests about this man and his beliefs. He then turned to the man and after telling him to enjoy himself, added that he would have the man thoroughly searched before leaving his home, not wanting to see any of the family silverware go missing.
God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
- Status