billvon 3,111 #26 January 31, 2005 >I am not saying I am better than any of you, just different. That's what we're saying, too. You're just different. You're not wrong, or evil, just because you believe something different than I do. I don't feel like I have to "take a stand" against you even though you believe something different than I do. Everyone's different - and accepting that is one important part of tolerance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windcatcher 0 #27 January 31, 2005 ahhhh, this is why I stay out of SC. I'd much rather watch you guys argue w. each other, than get involved. Ok, I learned my lesson, back to the bonfire. Mother to the cutest little thing in the world... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #28 January 31, 2005 I have no problem with prostitution, and think that it should be legal... If someone wants to trade sex for money, that's none of my business... but I don't think anyone should be forced into it, for any reason... But I also have to wonder how she could be out of work for a whole year without being able to find any other kind of job??? In fact, I don't really think the unemployment system should be supporting someone for more than a year anyway... There are jobs out there, but too many people either want to milk the system or don't want to take a job that is "beneath them" - in which case I think that's their own problem, not mine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #29 January 31, 2005 QuoteHave a wonderful day. You too.....I'm just pushing the buttons in SC---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoadRash 0 #30 January 31, 2005 QuotePerhaps his stand against it is simple non-participation. He can oppose smoking, prostitution, abortion, and many other things without saying that others must share his view. We don't all have to agree on everything. Question - What criteria should we use in determining that Person A's moral system is superior to Person B's and that it therefore should be imposed on Person B? Blues, Dave I agree with this post and what Bill stated above. Germany has made it legal and state that they no longer see the act of prostitution as immoral. Unfortunately, thanks to Germanys attempt to, according to the article, "cut links to organised crime,"women will be forced to work the job or do something possibly more drastic to avoid it. I guess we'll see...I think it is rather disgusting myself, but in Germany I guess it's legal...::shrug::... ~R+R...~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #31 January 31, 2005 QuoteQuotePerhaps his stand against it is simple non-participation. He can oppose smoking, prostitution, abortion, and many other things without saying that others must share his view. We don't all have to agree on everything. Question - What criteria should we use in determining that Person A's moral system is superior to Person B's and that it therefore should be imposed on Person B? Blues, Dave I agree with this post and what Bill stated above. Germany has made it legal and state that they no longer see the act of prostitution as immoral. Unfortunately, thanks to Germanys attempt to, according to the article, "cut links to organised crime,"women will be forced to work the job or do something possibly more drastic to avoid it. I guess we'll see...I think it is rather disgusting myself, but in Germany I guess it's legal...::shrug::... ______________________________________________________________ Lady RoadRush, legally, in Germany not one girl is forced to do this job. The girls decide (or their "men" - and that mainly is illegal). Slow down, we are a modern, young industrial country. No slaves to do dirty works, no young girls to please the landlord, or whatever might be in imagination, If Mr. Clinton's mistress offered him a blow job, or Mrs. Browne offered the same to Mr. Hugh Grant, they made it with their own will. If such a job (or a similar one) is legal or illegal, it will be done in your and my country. Just deal with it. In other parts of the world, it's called biz: You offer, I pay. That was before you're born, it will be the same in thousand years. Don't blame it to the poor little German country. We do our best to help even our minorities. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RoadRash 0 #32 January 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuotePerhaps his stand against it is simple non-participation. He can oppose smoking, prostitution, abortion, and many other things without saying that others must share his view. We don't all have to agree on everything. Question - What criteria should we use in determining that Person A's moral system is superior to Person B's and that it therefore should be imposed on Person B? Blues, Dave I agree with this post and what Bill stated above. Germany has made it legal and state that they no longer see the act of prostitution as immoral. Unfortunately, thanks to Germanys attempt to, according to the article, "cut links to organised crime,"women will be forced to work the job or do something possibly more drastic to avoid it. I guess we'll see...I think it is rather disgusting myself, but in Germany I guess it's legal...::shrug::... ______________________________________________________________ QuoteLady RoadRush, legally, in Germany not one girl is forced to do this job. The girls decide (or their "men" - and that mainly is illegal). Slow down, we are a modern, young industrial country. No slaves to do dirty works, no young girls to please the landlord, or whatever might be in imagination, Dear christelsabine, I believe you missed my point...nothing new in this forum...but I will elaborate...What I am pointing out is that despite the German government's attempt to crack down on crime by making prostitution legal...individuals like the woman in the article will either have to take the job offered or forced to turn to other means to make money because they will be forced off the dole. QuoteIf Mr. Clinton's mistress offered him a blow job, or Mrs. Browne offered the same to Mr. Hugh Grant, they made it with their own will. You are mixing apples with oranges...Clinton and Lewinsky was "consensual sex"...and as far as the American public as been informed...ZERO dollars changed hands...meaning...in very simple idiotic terms...no one was paid for the act of sex. Hugh Grant literally got caught with his pants down and in that case it was prostitution and the two individuals in question were charged with such, criminally. QuoteIf such a job (or a similar one) is legal or illegal, it will be done in your and my country. Just deal with it. I am dealing with it...I have no problem with legalizing it...taxing the shit out of it...and making it mandatory for women to get pelvic exams...and tested for STDs.QuoteIn other parts of the world, it's called biz: You offer, I pay. That was before you're born, it will be the same in thousand years. Thanks for the impromtu history lesson, but I am well aware of prostitution, it's history and particular it's history in Japan...since I have written several papers on the subject. QuoteDon't blame it to the poor little German country. All I did was point out how their attempt at curbing crime has effects on those that it wasn't intended for......Sounds like someone is gonna have to pay... QuoteWe do our best to help even our minorities. ROFLAO! You are a comedian after all... edited for spelling...it is R-O-A-D-R-A-S-H ~R+R...Oh, and by the way...I come from good ole Louisiana German stock......oh, and have a nice day...!~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CornishChris 5 #33 January 31, 2005 Just in case anyone's interested it is legal in Australia too. Prostituion being legal doesn't stop this story being fucked up. CJP Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ahegeman 0 #34 February 1, 2005 Yeah, I agree with you on that. I just posted that story because it seems to me like one of those irreconcilable dilemmas modern society is always dealing with. I think of myself as a logical person. I support unemployment insurance (short-term welfare, if you will) as having a place in a civilized society, despite my libertarian leanings. I also think prostitution should be legal, even if I think its immoral. People should be able to do what they want with their bodies as long as they aren't hurting anybody else. But its obvious to anyone that no once should be pressured by the state into selling their body into prostitution. How does one reconcile those three thoughts in this situation? Here you have a case where the two values of collective welfare and individual freedom clash, and the clash is SO obvious and SO overwhelming that you can't just ignore it. Just excepting the sex industry doesn't address the underlying conflict, it only minimizes a symptom enough that you can ignore it, but the conflict is still there. What about a devout Christian who doesn't want a job as a receptionist at an abortion clinic? Should they lose their unemployment benefits? An unemployed environmentalist offered a job at a logging company? I know those aren't perfect analogies, but I think its along the same lines. These sorts of conflicts of individual morality vs collective welfare are always going to erupt when the state involves itself so deeply in our lives.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites akarunway 1 #35 February 1, 2005 No. I try to talk my friends out of smoking, but I don't beat the crap out of them when they smoke. Doesn't mean I don't see it as wrong, it just means that they're adults and can make their own decisions - even if I think their decisions are wrong. =============================================== WRONG. I've many friends preach to me about smoking. I WILL QUIT WHEN I AM READY. Leave me the fuck alone. And mostly born again no smokers. And I don't bother anybody w/ my smokeI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites slug 1 #36 February 1, 2005 The basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? I think someone maybe opposed to the legalization of prostitution is trying to make a point and have the industry crimilized so that goofy stuff like this doesn't happen. Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #37 February 1, 2005 QuoteObvious jokes aside, this is disgusting and I don't really know what to say about it. Should provide quite a moral dilemma out there for some, though. Clicky Edited to fix clicky Hmm. It appears that the Germans provide better unemployment benefits to women who refuse available jobs than the state of Colorado does. There your unemployment can be reduced if you refuse a job offer after receiving benefits for a year. Our benefits at the maximum run out after 6-7 months regardless of our willingness to work in the sex industry one a year is up. People giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Other people are free to set up an alternative unemployment fund where the requirements are to have turned down a sex industry job and the benefits are the difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #38 February 1, 2005 QuoteThe basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? Same thing. Whether he accepts or doesn't he costs the tax payers (who were already generous in supporting him for a year with fewer strings attached) less. Quote Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Eliminating or at least reducing government subsidized unemployment is a better idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #39 February 1, 2005 QuotePeople giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Why not admit your disdain for unemployment exceeds your disdain for forced sexual servitude? You can try to justify the practice all you want, but you'll never succeed. Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #40 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude It's not like they are keeping her as a slave and forcing her to have sex with anyone. They are taking away a benefit that she has already been receiving for a whole _year_. If she was working in IT before (which requires at least a reasonable amount of intelligence), and she's had a whole year to think about it, I'm sure she can figure out a way to support herself other than living off unemployment or working as a prostitute. No one is forcing her to do anything... (I mean, come on... there are no grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, receptionist positions, nurseries, anyone other than a brothel that is hiring people in Germany???) Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #41 February 1, 2005 . Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Oh Lord, where are folks living? I love it. Nobody here in Germany is forced to enter into the sex industry. The owner of that brothel simply reported to labour exchange that an unemployed seems to be slacking, so should be punished with a lockout. As the owner is paying taxes for his employees, this is his right to do. He has to report it. Our laws state that someone, who is unemployed since a certain time (THAT, most important, is depending on his income before, the years he was employed before, how many children etc....) may not be allowed to refuse a proposed job. My girlfriend just lost her job after working for more than 15 yrs for same company. She has 2 kids still living with her. Her unemployment money now will be 67 percent of the average yearly income (for 14 months) plus each EURO 153 per kid for a time period of 780 days. Thats not that bad. And will not force her to sell her body in the streets.. But, it's getting rough over here, times are becoming harder and harder.... Perhaps, one day, if I should lose my job, I will do and try to live with the Talban? Or going to California? We are not living in stone ages, Mista Kelpdiver, you know? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #42 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude? She is free not to take the job offer. She has been unemployed for a year. You telling me that in that year she was not able to secure any employment as a waitress or maybe a fast food worker? She most certainly is orced to do something....like take a more serious look at that job as hamburger flipper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AndyMan 7 #43 February 1, 2005 Snopes to the rescue. They call it an example of 'broken telephone', and a mistranslation. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #44 February 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteforced sexual servitude Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. I'd have absolutely no problem with that. But we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Working in the sex trade should always be a choice, given the moral issues attached to it. And sorry, the threat of welfare lost makes it less then voluntary. It's not a very safe job. Sounds like someone found the story was not quite true, but if it were as stated, my opinion holds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #45 February 1, 2005 QuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? Did some of them have to take less than ideal (non-IT) jobs to get by for awhile? I have never drawn unemployment, but I'm pretty sure that in the US they will not allow you to draw unemployment for more than a year... so I guess that means that the US is forcing people into taking whatever job is available once their benefits run out... Wow, forcing people to take responsibility for themselves, what a concept. As I said before, I'm sure there were plenty of other jobs available to her other than prostitution. The story doesn't mention how many jobs she turned down during the year that she was receiving unemployment benefits... And from the snopes link that AndyMan posted, it doesn't sound like this "news" story is completely accurate anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ahegeman 0 #46 February 1, 2005 Glad to hear it - that wasn't up when I checked Snopes as I always do. Guess the journalistic standards in the UK aren't any better than ours. That it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #47 February 2, 2005 QuoteThat it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however. What is the technical possibility? That by having prostitution legal, the government can somehow force women into taking a job as a prostitute? Strip clubs, pornography, and prostitution are all legal in certain parts of the US... but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being forced by the government into any of those jobs. I don't know the law... perhaps it includes something to keep morally-questionable jobs from being offered to people through the unemployment program??? (But if that's the case, who decides what is morally questionable???) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #48 February 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? In this world that you and others would seem to prefer, the answer would be yes...unless they were young and female and therefore capable of being a working girl. Unless the non hotties are being sent to Iraq as reservists, it seems rather unequitable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tbrown 26 #49 February 2, 2005 I would assume that under any equitable application of these laws, that MEN might face a similar choice ? And I don't mean servicing female clients either, that's pretty rare, songs & movies aside. But I'd bet anything that the whole controversy would grind to a halt if a few Aryan males were confronted with the possibility of having to take it up their ass or down their throat. THAT would be a whole different story, I'm sure. And I'm sure there's a "healthy" market demand for handsome unemployed men in the Fatherland. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #50 February 2, 2005 Quotethe answer would be yes That's odd, I've never heard of anyone (male or female) being allowed to stay on unemployment infinitely (not in the US anyway - I assume you meant the Bay Area around S.F.?)... I guess those IT workers didn't mind being out of work then, if they were allowed to get benefits for years until the perfect job popped up??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
RoadRash 0 #32 January 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuotePerhaps his stand against it is simple non-participation. He can oppose smoking, prostitution, abortion, and many other things without saying that others must share his view. We don't all have to agree on everything. Question - What criteria should we use in determining that Person A's moral system is superior to Person B's and that it therefore should be imposed on Person B? Blues, Dave I agree with this post and what Bill stated above. Germany has made it legal and state that they no longer see the act of prostitution as immoral. Unfortunately, thanks to Germanys attempt to, according to the article, "cut links to organised crime,"women will be forced to work the job or do something possibly more drastic to avoid it. I guess we'll see...I think it is rather disgusting myself, but in Germany I guess it's legal...::shrug::... ______________________________________________________________ QuoteLady RoadRush, legally, in Germany not one girl is forced to do this job. The girls decide (or their "men" - and that mainly is illegal). Slow down, we are a modern, young industrial country. No slaves to do dirty works, no young girls to please the landlord, or whatever might be in imagination, Dear christelsabine, I believe you missed my point...nothing new in this forum...but I will elaborate...What I am pointing out is that despite the German government's attempt to crack down on crime by making prostitution legal...individuals like the woman in the article will either have to take the job offered or forced to turn to other means to make money because they will be forced off the dole. QuoteIf Mr. Clinton's mistress offered him a blow job, or Mrs. Browne offered the same to Mr. Hugh Grant, they made it with their own will. You are mixing apples with oranges...Clinton and Lewinsky was "consensual sex"...and as far as the American public as been informed...ZERO dollars changed hands...meaning...in very simple idiotic terms...no one was paid for the act of sex. Hugh Grant literally got caught with his pants down and in that case it was prostitution and the two individuals in question were charged with such, criminally. QuoteIf such a job (or a similar one) is legal or illegal, it will be done in your and my country. Just deal with it. I am dealing with it...I have no problem with legalizing it...taxing the shit out of it...and making it mandatory for women to get pelvic exams...and tested for STDs.QuoteIn other parts of the world, it's called biz: You offer, I pay. That was before you're born, it will be the same in thousand years. Thanks for the impromtu history lesson, but I am well aware of prostitution, it's history and particular it's history in Japan...since I have written several papers on the subject. QuoteDon't blame it to the poor little German country. All I did was point out how their attempt at curbing crime has effects on those that it wasn't intended for......Sounds like someone is gonna have to pay... QuoteWe do our best to help even our minorities. ROFLAO! You are a comedian after all... edited for spelling...it is R-O-A-D-R-A-S-H ~R+R...Oh, and by the way...I come from good ole Louisiana German stock......oh, and have a nice day...!~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CornishChris 5 #33 January 31, 2005 Just in case anyone's interested it is legal in Australia too. Prostituion being legal doesn't stop this story being fucked up. CJP Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ahegeman 0 #34 February 1, 2005 Yeah, I agree with you on that. I just posted that story because it seems to me like one of those irreconcilable dilemmas modern society is always dealing with. I think of myself as a logical person. I support unemployment insurance (short-term welfare, if you will) as having a place in a civilized society, despite my libertarian leanings. I also think prostitution should be legal, even if I think its immoral. People should be able to do what they want with their bodies as long as they aren't hurting anybody else. But its obvious to anyone that no once should be pressured by the state into selling their body into prostitution. How does one reconcile those three thoughts in this situation? Here you have a case where the two values of collective welfare and individual freedom clash, and the clash is SO obvious and SO overwhelming that you can't just ignore it. Just excepting the sex industry doesn't address the underlying conflict, it only minimizes a symptom enough that you can ignore it, but the conflict is still there. What about a devout Christian who doesn't want a job as a receptionist at an abortion clinic? Should they lose their unemployment benefits? An unemployed environmentalist offered a job at a logging company? I know those aren't perfect analogies, but I think its along the same lines. These sorts of conflicts of individual morality vs collective welfare are always going to erupt when the state involves itself so deeply in our lives.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites akarunway 1 #35 February 1, 2005 No. I try to talk my friends out of smoking, but I don't beat the crap out of them when they smoke. Doesn't mean I don't see it as wrong, it just means that they're adults and can make their own decisions - even if I think their decisions are wrong. =============================================== WRONG. I've many friends preach to me about smoking. I WILL QUIT WHEN I AM READY. Leave me the fuck alone. And mostly born again no smokers. And I don't bother anybody w/ my smokeI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites slug 1 #36 February 1, 2005 The basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? I think someone maybe opposed to the legalization of prostitution is trying to make a point and have the industry crimilized so that goofy stuff like this doesn't happen. Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #37 February 1, 2005 QuoteObvious jokes aside, this is disgusting and I don't really know what to say about it. Should provide quite a moral dilemma out there for some, though. Clicky Edited to fix clicky Hmm. It appears that the Germans provide better unemployment benefits to women who refuse available jobs than the state of Colorado does. There your unemployment can be reduced if you refuse a job offer after receiving benefits for a year. Our benefits at the maximum run out after 6-7 months regardless of our willingness to work in the sex industry one a year is up. People giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Other people are free to set up an alternative unemployment fund where the requirements are to have turned down a sex industry job and the benefits are the difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrewEckhardt 0 #38 February 1, 2005 QuoteThe basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? Same thing. Whether he accepts or doesn't he costs the tax payers (who were already generous in supporting him for a year with fewer strings attached) less. Quote Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Eliminating or at least reducing government subsidized unemployment is a better idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #39 February 1, 2005 QuotePeople giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Why not admit your disdain for unemployment exceeds your disdain for forced sexual servitude? You can try to justify the practice all you want, but you'll never succeed. Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #40 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude It's not like they are keeping her as a slave and forcing her to have sex with anyone. They are taking away a benefit that she has already been receiving for a whole _year_. If she was working in IT before (which requires at least a reasonable amount of intelligence), and she's had a whole year to think about it, I'm sure she can figure out a way to support herself other than living off unemployment or working as a prostitute. No one is forcing her to do anything... (I mean, come on... there are no grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, receptionist positions, nurseries, anyone other than a brothel that is hiring people in Germany???) Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #41 February 1, 2005 . Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Oh Lord, where are folks living? I love it. Nobody here in Germany is forced to enter into the sex industry. The owner of that brothel simply reported to labour exchange that an unemployed seems to be slacking, so should be punished with a lockout. As the owner is paying taxes for his employees, this is his right to do. He has to report it. Our laws state that someone, who is unemployed since a certain time (THAT, most important, is depending on his income before, the years he was employed before, how many children etc....) may not be allowed to refuse a proposed job. My girlfriend just lost her job after working for more than 15 yrs for same company. She has 2 kids still living with her. Her unemployment money now will be 67 percent of the average yearly income (for 14 months) plus each EURO 153 per kid for a time period of 780 days. Thats not that bad. And will not force her to sell her body in the streets.. But, it's getting rough over here, times are becoming harder and harder.... Perhaps, one day, if I should lose my job, I will do and try to live with the Talban? Or going to California? We are not living in stone ages, Mista Kelpdiver, you know? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #42 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude? She is free not to take the job offer. She has been unemployed for a year. You telling me that in that year she was not able to secure any employment as a waitress or maybe a fast food worker? She most certainly is orced to do something....like take a more serious look at that job as hamburger flipper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AndyMan 7 #43 February 1, 2005 Snopes to the rescue. They call it an example of 'broken telephone', and a mistranslation. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #44 February 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteforced sexual servitude Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. I'd have absolutely no problem with that. But we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Working in the sex trade should always be a choice, given the moral issues attached to it. And sorry, the threat of welfare lost makes it less then voluntary. It's not a very safe job. Sounds like someone found the story was not quite true, but if it were as stated, my opinion holds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #45 February 1, 2005 QuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? Did some of them have to take less than ideal (non-IT) jobs to get by for awhile? I have never drawn unemployment, but I'm pretty sure that in the US they will not allow you to draw unemployment for more than a year... so I guess that means that the US is forcing people into taking whatever job is available once their benefits run out... Wow, forcing people to take responsibility for themselves, what a concept. As I said before, I'm sure there were plenty of other jobs available to her other than prostitution. The story doesn't mention how many jobs she turned down during the year that she was receiving unemployment benefits... And from the snopes link that AndyMan posted, it doesn't sound like this "news" story is completely accurate anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ahegeman 0 #46 February 1, 2005 Glad to hear it - that wasn't up when I checked Snopes as I always do. Guess the journalistic standards in the UK aren't any better than ours. That it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #47 February 2, 2005 QuoteThat it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however. What is the technical possibility? That by having prostitution legal, the government can somehow force women into taking a job as a prostitute? Strip clubs, pornography, and prostitution are all legal in certain parts of the US... but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being forced by the government into any of those jobs. I don't know the law... perhaps it includes something to keep morally-questionable jobs from being offered to people through the unemployment program??? (But if that's the case, who decides what is morally questionable???) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #48 February 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? In this world that you and others would seem to prefer, the answer would be yes...unless they were young and female and therefore capable of being a working girl. Unless the non hotties are being sent to Iraq as reservists, it seems rather unequitable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tbrown 26 #49 February 2, 2005 I would assume that under any equitable application of these laws, that MEN might face a similar choice ? And I don't mean servicing female clients either, that's pretty rare, songs & movies aside. But I'd bet anything that the whole controversy would grind to a halt if a few Aryan males were confronted with the possibility of having to take it up their ass or down their throat. THAT would be a whole different story, I'm sure. And I'm sure there's a "healthy" market demand for handsome unemployed men in the Fatherland. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #50 February 2, 2005 Quotethe answer would be yes That's odd, I've never heard of anyone (male or female) being allowed to stay on unemployment infinitely (not in the US anyway - I assume you meant the Bay Area around S.F.?)... I guess those IT workers didn't mind being out of work then, if they were allowed to get benefits for years until the perfect job popped up??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
CornishChris 5 #33 January 31, 2005 Just in case anyone's interested it is legal in Australia too. Prostituion being legal doesn't stop this story being fucked up. CJP Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ahegeman 0 #34 February 1, 2005 Yeah, I agree with you on that. I just posted that story because it seems to me like one of those irreconcilable dilemmas modern society is always dealing with. I think of myself as a logical person. I support unemployment insurance (short-term welfare, if you will) as having a place in a civilized society, despite my libertarian leanings. I also think prostitution should be legal, even if I think its immoral. People should be able to do what they want with their bodies as long as they aren't hurting anybody else. But its obvious to anyone that no once should be pressured by the state into selling their body into prostitution. How does one reconcile those three thoughts in this situation? Here you have a case where the two values of collective welfare and individual freedom clash, and the clash is SO obvious and SO overwhelming that you can't just ignore it. Just excepting the sex industry doesn't address the underlying conflict, it only minimizes a symptom enough that you can ignore it, but the conflict is still there. What about a devout Christian who doesn't want a job as a receptionist at an abortion clinic? Should they lose their unemployment benefits? An unemployed environmentalist offered a job at a logging company? I know those aren't perfect analogies, but I think its along the same lines. These sorts of conflicts of individual morality vs collective welfare are always going to erupt when the state involves itself so deeply in our lives.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #35 February 1, 2005 No. I try to talk my friends out of smoking, but I don't beat the crap out of them when they smoke. Doesn't mean I don't see it as wrong, it just means that they're adults and can make their own decisions - even if I think their decisions are wrong. =============================================== WRONG. I've many friends preach to me about smoking. I WILL QUIT WHEN I AM READY. Leave me the fuck alone. And mostly born again no smokers. And I don't bother anybody w/ my smokeI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #36 February 1, 2005 The basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? I think someone maybe opposed to the legalization of prostitution is trying to make a point and have the industry crimilized so that goofy stuff like this doesn't happen. Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #37 February 1, 2005 QuoteObvious jokes aside, this is disgusting and I don't really know what to say about it. Should provide quite a moral dilemma out there for some, though. Clicky Edited to fix clicky Hmm. It appears that the Germans provide better unemployment benefits to women who refuse available jobs than the state of Colorado does. There your unemployment can be reduced if you refuse a job offer after receiving benefits for a year. Our benefits at the maximum run out after 6-7 months regardless of our willingness to work in the sex industry one a year is up. People giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Other people are free to set up an alternative unemployment fund where the requirements are to have turned down a sex industry job and the benefits are the difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #38 February 1, 2005 QuoteThe basic concept is flawed and doesn't pass the smell test. In this example a women is required to interview for a job in the sex industry. What would happen If a guy was required to do the same for gay sex industry? Same thing. Whether he accepts or doesn't he costs the tax payers (who were already generous in supporting him for a year with fewer strings attached) less. Quote Requireing virgins to work as prostitutes because their unemployed or they will be cut off from unemployment payments R.I.P. Eliminating or at least reducing government subsidized unemployment is a better idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #39 February 1, 2005 QuotePeople giving out handouts are free to attach whatever conditions they want to those handouts. The Germans have decided that after a year of looking for work people who want to receive full unemployment benefits need to take any job available for which they are qualified. Why not admit your disdain for unemployment exceeds your disdain for forced sexual servitude? You can try to justify the practice all you want, but you'll never succeed. Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #40 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude It's not like they are keeping her as a slave and forcing her to have sex with anyone. They are taking away a benefit that she has already been receiving for a whole _year_. If she was working in IT before (which requires at least a reasonable amount of intelligence), and she's had a whole year to think about it, I'm sure she can figure out a way to support herself other than living off unemployment or working as a prostitute. No one is forcing her to do anything... (I mean, come on... there are no grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, receptionist positions, nurseries, anyone other than a brothel that is hiring people in Germany???) Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #41 February 1, 2005 . Frankly, I think the Taliban treated their women better than the Germans appear to be. Oh Lord, where are folks living? I love it. Nobody here in Germany is forced to enter into the sex industry. The owner of that brothel simply reported to labour exchange that an unemployed seems to be slacking, so should be punished with a lockout. As the owner is paying taxes for his employees, this is his right to do. He has to report it. Our laws state that someone, who is unemployed since a certain time (THAT, most important, is depending on his income before, the years he was employed before, how many children etc....) may not be allowed to refuse a proposed job. My girlfriend just lost her job after working for more than 15 yrs for same company. She has 2 kids still living with her. Her unemployment money now will be 67 percent of the average yearly income (for 14 months) plus each EURO 153 per kid for a time period of 780 days. Thats not that bad. And will not force her to sell her body in the streets.. But, it's getting rough over here, times are becoming harder and harder.... Perhaps, one day, if I should lose my job, I will do and try to live with the Talban? Or going to California? We are not living in stone ages, Mista Kelpdiver, you know? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #42 February 1, 2005 Quoteforced sexual servitude? She is free not to take the job offer. She has been unemployed for a year. You telling me that in that year she was not able to secure any employment as a waitress or maybe a fast food worker? She most certainly is orced to do something....like take a more serious look at that job as hamburger flipper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #43 February 1, 2005 Snopes to the rescue. They call it an example of 'broken telephone', and a mistranslation. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #44 February 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteforced sexual servitude Personally, I think the government should simply not extend unemployment benefits past one year. I bet if that was the case, she would have somehow managed to find a job by now. I'd have absolutely no problem with that. But we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Working in the sex trade should always be a choice, given the moral issues attached to it. And sorry, the threat of welfare lost makes it less then voluntary. It's not a very safe job. Sounds like someone found the story was not quite true, but if it were as stated, my opinion holds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #45 February 1, 2005 QuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? Did some of them have to take less than ideal (non-IT) jobs to get by for awhile? I have never drawn unemployment, but I'm pretty sure that in the US they will not allow you to draw unemployment for more than a year... so I guess that means that the US is forcing people into taking whatever job is available once their benefits run out... Wow, forcing people to take responsibility for themselves, what a concept. As I said before, I'm sure there were plenty of other jobs available to her other than prostitution. The story doesn't mention how many jobs she turned down during the year that she was receiving unemployment benefits... And from the snopes link that AndyMan posted, it doesn't sound like this "news" story is completely accurate anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ahegeman 0 #46 February 1, 2005 Glad to hear it - that wasn't up when I checked Snopes as I always do. Guess the journalistic standards in the UK aren't any better than ours. That it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however.--------------------------------------------------------------- There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness'. --Dave Barry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #47 February 2, 2005 QuoteThat it is still a "technical possibility under current law" still makes for an interesting discussion, however. What is the technical possibility? That by having prostitution legal, the government can somehow force women into taking a job as a prostitute? Strip clubs, pornography, and prostitution are all legal in certain parts of the US... but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being forced by the government into any of those jobs. I don't know the law... perhaps it includes something to keep morally-questionable jobs from being offered to people through the unemployment program??? (But if that's the case, who decides what is morally questionable???) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #48 February 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteBut we had a lot of good IT workers in the Bay Area out of work for a year - we didn't give them the choice of fucking for their rent, or getting nothing. Were they given the opportunity to stay on unemployment infinitely, until the perfect IT job came up? In this world that you and others would seem to prefer, the answer would be yes...unless they were young and female and therefore capable of being a working girl. Unless the non hotties are being sent to Iraq as reservists, it seems rather unequitable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #49 February 2, 2005 I would assume that under any equitable application of these laws, that MEN might face a similar choice ? And I don't mean servicing female clients either, that's pretty rare, songs & movies aside. But I'd bet anything that the whole controversy would grind to a halt if a few Aryan males were confronted with the possibility of having to take it up their ass or down their throat. THAT would be a whole different story, I'm sure. And I'm sure there's a "healthy" market demand for handsome unemployed men in the Fatherland. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #50 February 2, 2005 Quotethe answer would be yes That's odd, I've never heard of anyone (male or female) being allowed to stay on unemployment infinitely (not in the US anyway - I assume you meant the Bay Area around S.F.?)... I guess those IT workers didn't mind being out of work then, if they were allowed to get benefits for years until the perfect job popped up??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
