Max Blast
02-23-2011, 07:23 PM
I recently heard this during a conversation regarding govt funding for abortion or abortion services.
If one of the leading arguements for government funding of abortion is that it will take abortions out of the back alleys and the criminal element is valid would not that exact same arguement be valid in support of government funding of prostitution services.
As an add-on it was brought up that if a leading arguement for abortion is that women have the right to choose what happens to their own body why is that exact same arguement not valid with regards to a women's right to choose vis-a-vis prostitution services.
I should mention that before this was brought up the speaker asked that the "one is legal and one is not" arguement be set aside for the purposes of the discussion. Perhaps the speaker had presented this in other discussions.
I have read some of the threads in this section and have noticed some great thinkers participate here. Looking for responses from members here.
regards,
Max Blast
If one of the leading arguements for government funding of abortion is that it will take abortions out of the back alleys and the criminal element is valid would not that exact same arguement be valid in support of government funding of prostitution services.
As an add-on it was brought up that if a leading arguement for abortion is that women have the right to choose what happens to their own body why is that exact same arguement not valid with regards to a women's right to choose vis-a-vis prostitution services.
I should mention that before this was brought up the speaker asked that the "one is legal and one is not" arguement be set aside for the purposes of the discussion. Perhaps the speaker had presented this in other discussions.
I have read some of the threads in this section and have noticed some great thinkers participate here. Looking for responses from members here.
regards,
Max Blast