just wondering ... your opinion please

It is, but it is really funny to see the look on the mans face when the wife finds out he was arrested for prostitution and not something else.

Say shatzy, want to exchange euro's for services?

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/...oticons/25.gif

[img]tongue.gif[/img]

At the moment, 1 EUR = 1.04843 USD.

Hmm yeah, good thinking, i'd better wait for the dollar to be worth less.

LOL!!!

well i wouldn't want just any euro...
i want purty, shiny ones [img]smile.gif[/img]

I like the way Shatzy credits Soulfilms and Zela while IGNORING the fact that I brought up the consumer versus supplier argument.

Now I'll wait while you guys address the idea that until people don't favor those they have sex with over those they know as "mere" friends or associates, prosititution cannot be legal.

Blah blah blah... What, did someone say something?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Tempus Sans ITC, Tahoma">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#25004f"><font size=2 face="Tempus Sans ITC, Tahoma">Originally posted by Super8 Filmmaking in the DigitalAge:
Now I'll wait while you guys address the idea that until people don't favor those they have sex with over those they know as "mere" friends or associates, prosititution cannot be legal.</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

surely you do not mean that alex??!!

there is no way to govern people's feelings on such occasions, just as there is no way of knowing how an individual acts in such situations. what about in marriage? do you expect a husband (say) to only equally favour a friend, associate to wife?

by classification of friend to acquaintance, you have already added hierarchy.

to be honest, the reason why i 'ignored' your
post, alex, is because i simply do not see how
it applies.

since you have butchered the english language
with this:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Tempus Sans ITC, Tahoma">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#25004f"><font size=2 face="Tempus Sans ITC, Tahoma">Now I'll wait while you guys address the idea that until people don't favor those they have sex with over those they know as "mere" friends or associates, prosititution cannot be legal.</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

i had to redefine it as:

prostitution cannot be legal until people favor
friends/associates over those they have sex with.

which doesn't make any sense at all.
as SF stated, it has nothing to do with creating
a 'new' heirarchy....
but rather, redefining our emotional/spiritual
attachments to sexual behavior.
now i will admit that i am not the one to say
this (as i completely disagree), but i assume
that the main reason why prostitution is illegal
(as defined by america) is because the established
norm for how a person should feel towards sex
is IMPOSED upon us at a very early age... this,
i feel, is also relational to pornography
(which i will spare in this conversation).

apparently there is a big ta-do-da about sticking
a penis in a vagina... something catastrophic
and etheral...

but i doubt anyone will argue that the bulk of
americans (or anyone) engaging in sex is really
doing it for child bearing. the major reason why
most people have sex (and you can argue this,
if you will) is for self-serving pleasure.

you can argue til the cows come home that most
people have sex to 'share with their partner'...
but then we open a bigger philosophical can o' worms.

assuming that most people have sex because of
pleasure only leads to comparisons of other
ways to derive self-serving pleasure...
eating a pizza over tofu, for example.

so technically...
as soon as we can redefine that whole spiritual
bs, the better off we... and prostitution will be.