Riches and Hos
The case for decriminalizing America's oldest profession Justin Hartfield
The United States should decriminalize prostitution. While it's true that in an ideal world, prostitution would be seen so reprehensible and degrading by men and women as to be nonexistent, in the real world, prostitution provides an important market function.
The economist Steven Levitt said, "Morality is the way you'd like the world to work. Economics is the way the world actually does work." Instead of trying to mend American society so that prostitutes would simply become unnecessary, the government outlaws the industry altogether. Like applying a giant band-aid to a gushing bullet wound, the government's attempt to invoke moral righteousness actually weakens the citizenry's moral resolve; it performs the opposite of the intended purpose and spirit of the Constitution. Former Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan once said, "If there is a bedrock principle of the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." Living in a truly free society means that people should be allowed to frolic with their personal demons which the majority may view as deplorable.
The American citizens that do not frequent prostitutes also lose from this antiquated law. The demand for sex is unquenchable, and criminalizing it creates an indomitable black market. All Americans are the ones who have to live with the inevitable black market: hookers on street corners, and seedy run-down motels.
Besides from the obvious, prostitution services a segment of the population which would otherwise be without sexual satisfaction: disfigured servicemen, the handicapped, and the social outcasts. Even sexual predators could enjoy their perverse fantasies under decriminalized prostitution, legally and safely. Wherever prostitution has been legalized, cases of rape have declined. A study by Kirby Cundiff found that the decriminalization of prostitution could prevent 25,000 or more rapes a year.
Furthermore, the current laws smack of hypocrisy. Laws against prostitution make it illegal for a woman to sell her body directly. Yet many woman are doing essentially that over a period of several months or years until they have received enough gifts of substantial economic value to enter into a physical relationship. The term "gold digger" is used to describe this type of woman, one who seeks relationships for financial gain rather than personal satisfaction.
What is the difference between a gold digger and a prostitute? Aside from the fact that prostitution is illegal and gold digging isn't, they share many commonalities. Both extract money from a sheepish male in exchange for use of their bodies. Both view sexuality as a way of attaining currency, not that of intimate communion with a loved one. At least the prostitute is up front about admitting this truth; the gold digger masks her true intentions with a feigned appearance of sincerity. While many believe it is amoral for a woman to use a man for his money, none are calling for the imprisonment of money-hungry women. The legitimacy of gold digging cannot be reconciled with the illegality of prostitution. They are both wrong on a gut level, both glorified by certain liberal segments of society, yet both should be legal. One of the unfortunate consequences of Capitalism is that some tie their ultimate dreams and aspirations into the market and of possession of expensive goods. This misconception leads to superficiality and materialism, which is the chosen mindset of the gold diggers.
But do not mistake gold digging as an invention of the 21st century. Superficially promiscuous women have been around for a long time. Case-in-point: President Benjamin Harrison once granted comprehensive pensions to Civil War veterans (his pro-veteran stance is what got him elected). However, it turned into a monumental boondoggle; 14-year-old girls were marrying 70-year-old men, knowing they would one day receive a generous pension package from Uncle Sam.
It's ironic too, that the business of prostitution remains unregulated and illegal in the US. Not only would the industry improve by government regulation, but the government itself could benefit by the legalization of the industry. Prostitution is an excellent candidate for government regulation, because the government could actually provide a value added service (unlike, say, the FCC or FDA). In exchange for our tax dollars, the government would pre-screen prostitutes for STDs and register their vitals with the state. Registered sex workers would take regular STD tests in order to renew their license. The government could also more effectively keep hookers out of residential neighborhoods via special zoning restrictions.
The decriminalization of prostitution will happen in the United States. The only question is when. I can imagine James Madison sitting in a present-day strip club demanding booze even after he was told repeatedly by Cheyenne that strip clubs are no longer allowed to serve alcohol. In hindsight, I'm sure he would have been clearer with his diction when he laid out the Bill of Rights. Madison was well aware of the oft-times murky line which separates morality and the legal system and did his best to keep them separate.
Those who aren't persuaded by theories of natural law should embrace economics instead, and support the decriminalization and regulation of America's oldest profession. In the meantime, take a lesson from Jay-Z, and stay away from prostitutes and gold diggers alike.
