Prostitution Proposal

[ReeferMadness]

The rationale that this law is needed to protect victimized women doesn't hold water. If you want to help women, then help them. Open up more substance abuse facilities. Offer income supports. Help them develop marketable skills. Offer them counseling. Help them, don't focus on criminalizing guys who want to buy sexual favours.

I wonder if any of the people who claim this will help women have stopped to consider the differences between Canada and the Nordic countries from which some of the underpinnings of this law were taken. Canada's social safety nets are weak and full of holes. I don't see Harper's cronies rushing out to set up new programs to support the women.

Say, for a minute, that this law is wildly "successful" and there is no more prostitution in Canada. What do the people who imagine they are helping women think the prostitutes are going to do? Go on welfare and live under the poverty line? Take on a minimum wage job (and live under the poverty line)? I'm guessing that the women who feel like they are being victimized (as opposed to those who feel they are making a choice) are people with substance abuse issues, mental health issues, limited marketable skills, illegal immigrants (or some combination thereof). Where will they turn if there is no more prostitution?

There will still be prostitution but it will be driven into the shadows and the most desperate of the prostitutes will follow it.

[gman29]

Maybe they will be forced to migrate to the porn industry where they will be filmed too so others can watch their sex acts.

Cause it is perfectly legal to pay to get people to have sex if it is for the camera

the abuse is removed by putting it on film for generations and generations to watch the whole world with the Internet

actors are unionized its industry as soon as its rolling instead of rolling

what's safer than film.

just think some lucky john/jane could win the lotto as the next big producer in Los Angeles

it's a lotto ticket and sex all rolled into one and you get a door prize

better yet it can be tax deductible if you wear a logo and distributed as a promo. and the (man)whore come on and dine tax deductably too

the government helping average John's like you. *wink*

what's that a business write off for both of them that's getting down to business

I think I need to make a video explaining this to other people so they can learn from my wisdom. then post it on an online buy now webpage and start a agency signing people up both as producers and actorices an actors

Edited July 17, 2014 by gman29

[webc5]

Alan Young the lawyer who stuck down the old laws said it will likely takes 5-10 years to run another successful challenge. This is a new approach and nothing like this has ever happened where half the transaction is illegal. Part of the reason it will take 5-10 years is because they will need some time to see what comes from the courts so they can run some studies, that's how the first laws were stuck down.

He said he predicts that the Johns won't go to these indoor establishments because you don't want to be a sitting target and that the Johns will prefer to do business on the street and be a moving target, therefore the sex worker will go where the money is and will take risk(working the street) because the Johns won't go to these indoor establishments where you can be raided at any moment. He said that most of the trade happens indoors right now and as a result of this new law street sex work will increase.

[webc5]

Personally I think this Bill shouldn't become law. It's the same old law with new language I don't see how this will protect sex workers. The problem isn't with the indoor sex trade, it's the street trade that's the problem and the police have already said 80% of the trade happened indoors. Though this new Bill might decrease the OVERALL size of the of the sex trade overall being the indoor/street trade it will increase the street trade because this is about money and the sex workers will follow the men(Johns). I predict that they will be a huge decrease in the sex trade by a lot ie. massage parlors, escorts agencies, the high end call girl. Though there will be a small increase in the street trade.

Ask your self this can you tolerate a men paying 200-300 dollars per hour for sexual services as long as it is consensual sex? Sure you might think it's degrading that's how the Conservatives view, but can you tolerate it? IT HAPPENS can you tolerate it? The problem isn't with the indoor sex trade it's the street and this will increase the street trade. The one's in the street will face the worse violence.

Edited October 25, 2014 by webc5

[CITIZEN_2015]

Well webc5 in fact the bill became law of the country on December 21, 2014.

Edited October 5, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[Argus]

Well webc5 in fact the bill became law of the country on December 21, 2014 and this conservative government did everything in their power abusing their 25% given majority to manipulate and pass it through the parliament.

This is a pretty weird thing to write, especially eight months after the fact. Or did you just copy this from something previously written elsewhere? As to the tories abusing their majority in order to pass it through parliament... uh... isn't using your majority to pass bills how every bill has been passed in the history of this country?

The new laws undermine recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling on prostitution laws that struck down old laws saying that because some aspects of it are illegal then they would endanger citizens (the sex workers) this conservative government headed by Peter MacKay responded harshly out of contempt for Supreme Court and purposely by brings new laws that would make every aspect of the profession illegal and hence endangering the sex workers even more than before.

Again, this sounds like you copied it from somewhere given this law has already been challenged and upheld by the courts.

[CITIZEN_2015]

No I just became a member and posted this. I wasn't a member 8 months ago. Not sure where you got the idea that I copied from somewhere else!!!. I posted it now as it was my first chance opportunity as a new member and appropriately at the time or day which elections called to remind voters of the wrong deeds by this government.

And please state the facts instead of spreading misinformation which is a common behavior by conservatives and their supporters. The new laws passed just 8 months ago has NOT been challenged and upheld by any court. The old laws were struck down by SCC in 2013. The Cons responded to that by bringing similar but harsher laws. The new laws only 8 month sold has not had the chance to be challenged yet.

Edited October 5, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[Argus]

No I just became a member and posted this. I wasn't a member 8 months ago. Not sure where you got the idea that I copied from somewhere else!!!. I posted it now as it was my first chance opportunity as a new member and appropriately at the time or day which elections called to remind voters of the wrong deeds by this government

I'm sure they won't mind you pointing out their stance on prostitution since it is very, very popular among Canadians, very few of whom want no laws to exist.

And please state the facts instead of spreading misinformation which is a common behavior by conservatives and their supporters. The new laws passed just 8 months ago has NOT been challenged and upheld by any court. The old laws were struck down by SCC in 2013. The Cons responded to that by bringing similar but harsher laws. The new laws only 8 month sold has not had the chance to be challenged yet.

The new law was modeled on that of Sweden, which last time I checked wasn't exactly a cruel and evil place when it comes to social and criminal policy. You're correct. It has not been found constitutional by a court. I was mistaken. I probably got that from the Ontario government, whose Liberal premier expressed dislike of the law and thought it might be unconstitutional, however, after a review by the Ontario Attorney General's office, the law was found to be constitutional.

[CITIZEN_2015]

Again you are misrepresenting the facts Argus. For some reasons I cannot copy the link (maybe this forum would not allow copying a link, Not sure) but a poll just prior to the bill C36 debate in June 2014 indicated a majority of Canadians oppose the bill (please google search bill C36 poll) and believe that sex between consenting adults paid or not should be legal as long as force, exploitation and underage is not involved. Even their own government survey indicated an almost even split (don't remember exact numbers but maybe 40% - 60%) in which religious groups and churches galvanized to take part and vote. You are correct about the imported laws from Sweden but recently those laws in Sweden have been put under questions in the same country who invented them as their effectiveness and safety.............

That said the debate here is not whether or not it is a good or bad bill or whether it is popular or not but rather the manner in which it was manipulated through the parliament when sex workers were not consulted as what new laws should be and the government side headed by Peter MacKay called their own witnesses rather than the experts and interest groups and those who opposed the bill and pushed it through in a rush and also the manner in which they purposely undermine the Supreme Court which is the vanguard of constitution and citizens' right n this country and that is what distinguishes this lovely country from dictatorships in other parts of the world.

Edited August 2, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015