Ruling against legislating morality

[Fishbone Jones]

 

[Gunnerlove]

Have you seen the pics on the news? I wish I hadn't

I know it is a little off topic but I never understood why I, or other people are limited to one wife?

Is it to protect me from myself or to give the less desirable men a shot at getting hitched?   Hmm a dozen women micro managing my life and finances, sure sounds sexy and deviant.

As far as the elimination of Taboos and collapse of society go have you ever been to Germany? They still seem to get by.


Now I know swinging rubs a number of people the wrong way (and a number the right way) however in reality it is a non issue for 99% of Canadians. What is an issue for Canadians is the current failure of the RCMP to control the amount of drugs comming into the country. If you want to fight social degeneration why not fight the big fight and spur the Police into doing their job. Why not waste this much band width arguing for increased security (and searches) at our ports and border crossings?  

 

[Hunter]

What will start out as a swingers club ie)couples of consenting adults swapping partners, will likely degenerate into a modern version of a ***** house.  Clubs will charge the hookers a surcharge to linger and do their thing, and guys will start coming in without partners to see "whats up". 

Really?  And how long will this take to happen?  Swinging clubs have been operating in Montreal for the better part of 30 years, and at least a decade here in Ottawa.  If it hasn't happened already, what makes you think it's going to happen now?

As for a lawsuit, we have a criminal case her in Windor involving Carl Leone:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/12/07/Leone-sexassault-1207.html

There are many women that are affected by this tool, and stand by for huge lawsuits after the trial.

Since this case involves a single guy and a bunch of bar hookups, how is this relevant?

 

[xFusilier]

I just finished reading the summary of judgement in the two cases and the court does set out a fairly stringent test for what constitutes criminal indecency.  The legislation, of morality in a modern society has not place, as morality stems from ones one rational thought, then by extension any regulation of moral conduct constitutes, regulation of rationality.

The above are all examples of activities that are going on today in Canada. Fortunately, our society still finds them unacceptable, and to varying degrees, puts a stop to them when they are found out.

What makes the swinging ruling unacceptable, is that it used to be on the above list. It was found out, and now 5 unelected judges has deemed the COMMERCIAL operation of the activity moral and acceptable.

Our list of taboos is getting shorter and shorter, to the point where we may not have any in a generation or two.

What happened is that it was found that no societal harm was being caused.  If no societal harm is being caused, then the government has absoulutely no business prohibiting it.  The crown was unable to bring a finding of fact that societal harm was being caused by this practice.  As for the unelected judges I would rather have individuals presiding over issues surrounding the constitution than a bunch of Judge Roy Bean types who managed to get elected on the concept of zero tolerance, which usually equates to zero thought, on crime.

l. Is the next step down this slope legalized, commercial prostitution. Based on the arguments on this board, it looks like that one's a slam dunk.

Hate to tell you this but prostitution by its very nature is a commercial enterprise, so its already here.  Once again if it meets the test of minimal societal harm, which I believe has been proven in Europe, then why prohibit it simply because people don't like it?

The difficulties and pitfalls of raising a child in a single parent household are well documented. You may not agree with the scientific conclusions, but they do indeed exist, and, in my case, were backed up by personal experience as a police officer

The conclusions are not scientific, the simply form a correlation and as it has been stated time and time again correlation does not imply causality.  If you show me a situation where a randomized control study was done that proves that single parent families cause youth crime, I'll eat my hat.  Personal experience on the other hand is inherently flawed as there are numerous sources of bias in drawing conclusions about cause and effect relationships through intuition.

 

[kcdist]

Now I know swinging rubs a number of people the wrong way (and a number the right way) however in reality it is a non issue for 99% of Canadians. What is an issue for Canadians is the current failure of the RCMP to control the amount of drugs comming into the country. If you want to fight social degeneration why not fight the big fight and spur the Police into doing their job. Why not waste this much band width arguing for increased security (and searches) at our ports and border crossings?  

Ummm.....not to get entirely off topic, but to answer your question, the failure lies in the Liberal legal system that we endure in this country. If we could arrest a drug dealer just once, and he would stop forever due to the harshness of the penalty, that would be all it would take. Unfortunately, a typical drug dealer and importer is arrested literally dozens of times throughout their 'career', with the odd multi-month pit stop in jail. In Canada, we follow the sports fisherman's guidebook for drug arrests (catch and release - repeat). Don't blame the RCMP....if we followed Singapore's lead, we would not have a drug problem in Canada.

Is it just a coincidence that all those fellows gunned down in Toronto this year were 'known to police'......That is simply a catchphrase meaning: 'arrested multiple-times, no serious jail time, due to bleeding heart judges giving them just one more last chance'.

 

[kcdist]

What happened is that it was found that no societal harm was being caused. 

Therein lies the crux of the argument. The above statement is a subjective opinion of five of seven judges on the supreme court. Were we to revisit this issue in fifty years, we could very well find they were bang on, or conversely, that this ruling opened the floodgates to an Amsterdam-like society existing throughout Canada.

I, for one, believe that, by further degrading the moral standards of our society, this ruling will indeed cause societal harm over the long term, especially when combined with many other similar rulings and laws (such as the 14 year old age of consent, the Sharpe ruling on child porn, ect)

REMEMBER THIS: When this ruling leads to another that fully legalizes prostitution, and your 18 year old daughter announces her new 'career path' to you over Christmas Dinner with the explanation of "Well why shouldn't I.....It's legal after all", don't come running to me looking for support.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

So by all accounts your resistance to accepting that other people might be involved in different lifestyle choices stems from what ifs and possibilities and nothing based on fact or experience or actual knowledge on swinging???

 

[Britney Spears]

don't come running to me looking for support.

I won't, but just out of curiosity, what forms of support would you be offering to those who DO agree with you? I'd like to know what I was missing out on......

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Great rant Zipperhead. Written like a true cop.

Unlike you, infanteer, I am able to engage in a healthy debate without the use of profanity or personal attacks. I wish you would learn to do the same.

Exactly.  Like a cop.  Which you seem to claim to have experience with.  Where?  For how long?  Why did you quit?  You don't come off as someone who has seen much and developed the thick skin that is synonymous with my profession.
It suprises me the hight of moral high ground that you have put yourself on.  All of my misconceptions about society and its collective morality went south once I started working within it.  People will do whatever they want to, regardless of what some pantie waist thinks is right.  Compounded by the fact that the Internet Genie is out of the bottle, peoples unrestricted access to each others inclinations will continue to go on without "polite" societies endorsement.  
All we can hope to do is attempt to regulate the clubs.  As with any public venue, such as restaraunts and bars, an eye towards health concerns is all we need to worry about and I am meaning specific to the building facilities themselves.  
There are plenty of genetic reasons why siblings/first cousins should not be together for kids.  Animals and little kids cannot consent (already mentioned by another poster, sorry for the cred failure).  If somebody wants to create the "Garden and Kitchen Implement Penetrators Club" and others want to join, who are we to say no?
Remember this too:  If your 18 year old daughter decided to become a hooker, you probably dropped the parenting ball for the preceding 18 years and should not be surprised.  
A real cop would know that a girl very rarely doesn't just pick hooking as a way to come up with spending money.  It is an act of desperation of someone with few options and/or a drug addiction.

 

[48Highlander]

REMEMBER THIS: When this ruling leads to another that fully legalizes prostitution, and your 18 year old daughter announces her new 'career path' to you over Christmas Dinner with the explanation of "Well why shouldn't I.....It's legal after all", don't come running to me looking for support.

And this same hypothetical 18 year old daughter can't do that now that it's illegal?

If women are going to do it anyway, would you rather have them do it in a safe and regulated manner, or without any sort of rules or regulations?  What's better, having government licenced business which are held to strict standards on things such as safe-sex and workers rights, or having a free-for-all, where prostitutes help spread STD's and are beaten, abused, and taken advantage of by their pimps?  Having a safe environment where men can go when their sex-lives have hit a slump, or making otherwise decent citizens into criminals for no reason other than that they wanted to get laid?

It SHOULD be a no-brainer.  There's absolutely no reason to maintain the current laws on prostitution, and a dozen good reasons to improve them.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Whatever happens between a man, a woman, another woman, another woman, two more men, various gendered midgets, a sheet of 14 gauge plastic, and 6 quarts of Mazola oil is none of my business.  Unless of course they're in my front yard.  Then I insist on the film rights.

 

[kcdist]

So by all accounts your resistance to accepting that other people might be involved in different lifestyle choices stems from what ifs and possibilities and nothing based on fact or experience or actual knowledge on swinging???

I do not now, nor have I ever engaged in the act of 'swinging'. Good sex is missionary only, where your spouse lies on her back and thinks only of the Queen of England. It is an act to be endured only for the purposes of procreation. Remember, ever sperm is sacred, every sperm is great....if a sperm gets wasted, God gets quite irate.

In all seriousness though, I don't have to be shot in the head to know that bullets can hurt. I know that if someone has loose enough moral standards to want to share his wife with other men, then quite frankly, I would not trust that same person in the company of my daughter or wife. If you would want a 'swinger' associated to you in your professional or private life, I say Power to You..........Weirdo

I have seen and experienced the results of the loosening of societal standards in my lifetime. Use of drugs is very much accepted in some quarters. Look who was just elected as leader of the PQ. How would you like that fellow making decisions on your health care delivery while high on cocaine? As mention previously, divorce is now much more commonplace that it was a generation ago. Some responders may see nothing wrong with the explosion of single parent families. To those, I say talk to a teacher and see what they have to say. It'll open your eyes.

My question to you, Ex-Dragoon, is where to you draw the line? Polygamy? Bestiality? Consensual Incest? Is membership in MANBLA OK?

 

[Gunnerlove]

Ah spring break 96' but with midgets and an extra dude.  

Now X what is your position on birth control and sex education? Remember that there is still a large group who believe that both are indecent and are eroding the morals of our society.


This sure beats Christmas day television

Oh and its NAMBLA just like the armoured car "North American Man Boy Love Association" ;D

 

[Hunter]

Remember this too:  If your 18 year old daughter decided to become a hooker, you probably dropped the parenting ball for the preceding 18 years and should not be surprised.  
A real cop would know that a girl very rarely doesn't just pick hooking as a way to come up with spending money.  It is an act of desperation of someone with few options and/or a drug addiction.

just curious cop, do you have a daughter?  I'm just wondering what your qualifications in this area are.  Because I can't imagine a parent would make a statement like 'If your 18 year old daughter decided to become a hooker'.  For what it's worth I am a parent;  she's 10, and I am her sole custodial parent.  But somehow I doubt she will be steered towards the life of crime you described earlier. 

This is the second time you have drawn a connection between prostitution and swinger's clubs.  Can you please explain what the connection actually is?

 

[Scott]

Choo, choo, this one is heading off the tracks.....

 

[kcdist]

Exactly.  Like a cop.  Which you seem to claim to have experience with.  Where?  For how long?  Why did you quit?  You don't come off as someone who has seen much and developed the thick skin that is synonymous with my profession.

More experienced than you might imagine Zipperhead. Don't think you've got the market cornered on policing issues mister. I've PM'd you with answers.

That said, I don't disagree with your premise that for some, life is just one big free-for-all. My concern is for those that may take the viewpoint of "well I wouldn't normally, but I guess cause it's legal I'll give it a try".

Look at gambling. Once illegal and now pushed on us heavily by the government. Result? Record levels of suicides and families destroyed via pathological gambling. In Alberta, Video Lottery Terminals are found in nearly every bar -- the 'crack cocaine' of gambling. Sure, there would always be illicit gambling dens, but would the numbers of problem gamblers be as high if it wasn't legal and available on nearly every streetcorner? Not likely.

Same goes with the push to decriminalize marijuana. How many kids who otherwise might not try the drug may now be tempted to give it a toke? Once that barrier is broken, where will that kid end up? Crack? Crystal Meth?
As a teenager, I was tempted on numerous occasions to smoke pot, but I resisted every time because I knew it was illegal and I had a career goal.

All we can hope to do is attempt to regulate the clubs.  As with any public venue, such as restaraunts and bars, an eye towards health concerns is all we need to worry about and I am meaning specific to the building facilities themselves.  

Surely, Mr Zipperhead, you don't condone the government sponsored crack houses that now exist in Vancouver. See what the Vancouver Police Union has to say about them.

A real cop would know that a girl very rarely doesn't just pick hooking as a way to come up with spending money.  It is an act of desperation of someone with few options and/or a drug addiction.

Not sure if you're naive, inexperienced in this area, or have only dealt with street level hookers. You'd be surprised who ends up being paid for sex....I was.

Edit for spelling

 

[xFusilier]

Therein lies the crux of the argument.

I would disagree, I would say the crux of the argument is morality versus reason.  The moral argument against this lifestyle is don't do it, it's wrong. The rational arguement attempts to explore why it is wrong, or as was the case if it is even wrong to begin with.  There is no rational justification for, telling groups of consenting adults they cannot commune to have conjugal relations with each other(and none of the opponents to this ruling have yet, IMHO, to give one.  As for your slippery slope concept, there are rational reasons, for which societal harm can be clearly illustrated, for the prohibition of incest, pedophillia, bestiality, etc, and under the test put forward in the rulings they would remain prohibited. 

REMEMBER THIS: When this ruling leads to another that fully legalizes prostitution, and your 18 year old daughter announces her new 'career path' to you over Christmas Dinner with the explanation of "Well why shouldn't I.....It's legal after all", don't come running to me looking for support.

And the fact that solicitation is illegal stops so many people from engaging in it today, right? 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

In all seriousness though, I don't have to be shot in the head to know that bullets can hurt. I know that if someone has loose enough moral standards to want to share his wife with other men, then quite frankly, I would not trust that same person in the company of my daughter or wife. If you would want a 'swinger' associated to you in your professional or private life, I say Power to You..........Weirdo

For someone that got upset with Infanteer you like to drop names as well, considering I have been courteous to you I would have hoped for the same. Guess the old double standard applies here. Either way I don't care but your mode of thinking lumps gays into the child molestor category. Do you believe all homosexual men molest boys? Also from the same sources I illustrated earlier, its rather hard for you to know who is a swinger and who is not because they get the same reaction as you just did.
Also why is it you insist on derailing this topic with other points. This is about the SCC ruling on swinging, it has nothing to do with drug use, nor prostitution, keep it on topic.

I am not the morality police kc and unlike you I would never force my views on another but if its safe consenting no one is getting exploited or hurt then its none of my business. It should be none of yours as well.

Gunner to answer your question I believe sex education should be taught the earlier the better as well as proper birth control techniques. Far too many in society still live in the dark Ages and would prefer the kids of today remain ignorant.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

just curious cop, do you have a daughter?  I'm just wondering what your qualifications in this area are.  Because I can't imagine a parent would make a statement like 'If your 18 year old daughter decided to become a hooker'.   For what it's worth I am a parent;  she's 10, and I am her sole custodial parent.  But somehow I doubt she will be steered towards the life of crime you described earlier. 

This is the second time you have drawn a connection between prostitution and swinger's clubs.  Can you please explain what the connection actually is?

Please feel free to read the WHOLE post before you react.  The point is that if she decided, then you didn't really do a good job of "steering".  Is it really necessary to state that I would not want my kids to be prostitutes?

So far as the link between the clubs and prostitution it is only speculation.  A well regulated club could likely keep it out if they chose to.  But just because you go to the car swap doesn't mean you brought a car, right.  Maybe you just have a pocket full of cash.  In either case, I don't really care what consenting adults do.  

And yes, KC I was only talking about street level hookers.  I'm sure that there are lots of high end ones who will never have any diseases and make a bundle.  As for crack houses, we don't provide them in Ontario.  What we do provide is Ontario housing, and they have lots of crack houses.  Any difference, not really.  That is not a Policing issue, though.  If our liberal govt's want to keep providing shelter for crack heads then what am I supposed to do, but complain.  At least I have a solid address to look at when I am looking for a crap rat.
Did I mention I am in Windsor?  We have a big ole casino here and it has been great for the City.  Addictive personalities gravitate to all kinds of things, so if they want to throw their money at the City, we'll take it.  And if some tool wants to wax himself because he is too weak and selfish to smash on and overcome his addiction, boo hoo.  At least he is acting decisively.
And I think everyone agrees that adding midgets is always a good idea.

 

[Infanteer]

Well great....let's not stop there with your examples though:

Did you not understand red herring when I explained it to you the first time?  When you talk about children, incest, and animals you are making comparisons that don't exist.  Ask Santa for a dictionary for Christmas (if it isn't too late) and look up "consensual".

What makes the swinging ruling unacceptable, is that it used to be on the above list. It was found out, and now 5 unelected judges has deemed the COMMERCIAL operation of the activity moral and acceptable.

Our list of taboos is getting shorter and shorter, to the point where we may not have any in a generation or two.

As I've told you before (and Hunter indicated) this is nothing new - methinks you aren't to aware of what's been happening in society since the late 50's.

Maybe this and this will be some good holiday reading material for you.... ^-^

It is the rules we set as a society that make our society worth living in. We can debate on where the line should be drawn, but I think we all agree there should be a line.

Rules need to be principled - yours are arbitrary and you've yet to gives us a clue on how you reasoned them out.

The commercial swinging operation leads to the next obvious barrier - prostitution. We all know prostitution is legal in Canada, but laws regarding communication and living off the avails of the enterprise make it virtually illegal. Is the next step down this slope legalized, commercial prostitution. Based on the arguments on this board, it looks like that one's a slam dunk.

And why not?  Should we keep it illegal for the pimps, the drugs, and the abusive johns to run the industry or should we regulate it and protect the women in what is inevitable anyways?

Unlike you, infanteer, I am able to engage in a healthy debate without the use of profanity or personal attacks. I wish you would learn to do the same.

Well, I call a spade and spade - tough luck for you if you feel hurt when challenged but you are still full of it.  Show me the proof.  Do you understand statistics 101?  Principles like double blind, sample size, etc, etc.  You have no clue on what percentage of single-parent youths commit crimes as opposed to kids with married-parents or what percentage of single-parent children of the total get into trouble, so unless you have something concrete, quit blowing smoke up our asses with unfounded assumptions.

I, for one, believe that, by further degrading the moral standards of our society, this ruling will indeed cause societal harm over the long term, especially when combined with many other similar rulings and laws (such as the 14 year old age of consent, the Sharpe ruling on child porn, ect)

I'm still waiting for you to define this "moral wall" that you've put on a pedestal to protect the rest of us.  What is it?  Where is the line?  Why do you draw it there?  What is your rationale for imposing it on society at large?  What ethical lines have you drawn it upon?

Unless you can explain this to me, I'm going to just go on believing that you have no real justification for your thoughts other than the fact that it makes you squeamish.

I guess we can settle with the fact that you fit Brad Sallows' description of a moral egoist.  I'll be waiting for you to prove me wrong....