Current Events > If it wasn't for Republicans we would have door dash But for prostitutes

(+) Yeah! (+)

It's the future radcial left liberals want

Lol what

Nirvanas_Nox posted...

Lol what

I'm high rn

A lot of Republicans have that already themselves too. Think about that.

I don't necessarily want it. Just saying.

Lord_Shadow posted...

I'm high rn

Lmfao so am I. Very happy a dispensary opened up down the street from me

Recently got legal here

Nice! It's only legal medically in my state but I've had my card for a while.

Republican politicians have had door dash for prostitutes for a long time.

It's call an outcall, they usually charge you an extra fee for gas or uber. Never was comfortable letting them know where I live, so never had one done, but it would be nice not having to wait for a text with a room number and trying to be all casual walking by the front desk of the lobby while trying to figure out where the elevator is.

Lord_Shadow posted...

If it wasn't for Republicans we would have door dash But for prostitutes

So, are you aruging for or against Republicans?

bknight posted...

It's call an outcall

Heh. I'm guessing he means a 3rd party gets paid to deliver the prostitute to your door.

The_Korey posted...

So, are you aruging for or against Republicans?

Republicans are traitors who ruined my Birthday with their insurrection

Being against prostitution is something many far righties and far lefties have in common, actually.

With modern day tech we should be in a golden age of prostitution but we're not because Religious zealot Republican traitors want to enforce thier cult on the nation

Lord_Shadow posted...

With modern day tech we should be in a golden age of prostitution

Doubtful. We'd probably have a bunch of fat 50 year olds dying of viagra induced heart attacks and maiming their prostitute when they fall on them.

Like a bunch of 50 year olds will be able to understand how to use a phone app

I'm pretty sure you could get a prostitute to come to your place online.

I'm sure you could but it's not convenient as an app would be

Honestly everyone in this country needs to take the sticks out their asses and legalize prostitution, or at least come up with a new name for it that doesn't carry a stigma.

Sex sells, literally and figuratively. There's literally no reason why anyone should have to get laid "the old fashioned way" if pulling out your wallet gets you the same results quicker and (ideally) easier.

Lord_Shadow posted...

I'm sure you could but it's not convenient as an app would be

It'll never be "convenient". Any legalized prostitution (regulations) would require consumers to constantly get tested for stds.

if it wasn't for richard nixon the world might still have project cybersyn

it was really, really ahead of its time even if the underlying technology was decades away the maturity we're now witnessing

Lord_Shadow posted...

I'm high rn

Then you should consider quitting since this topic just ain't it.

If i want to sell my body for sex den it should be my choice not da shitty government tbh

Vegy posted...

If i want to sell my body for sex den it should be my choice not da shitty government tbh

except we want to hand health care over the government. They would cut sex workers out of single payer option because of the risky lifestyle. And with all that sweet, sweet centralized power that we are just dying to hand to them, we'd be powerless to stop them.

Anyway, religious zealots on the right says something something jesus as an arguments against prostitution.

crazy liberals say that any bit of legalized, regulated prostitution has the consequence of more proliferated human traficking/slavery, therefore all prostitution should be illegal.

And, some percentage of women (both left and right) know they will lose a lot of power over men if access to sex is very easy, and they will fight prostitution and sex robots tooth and nail

It's quite a powerful fantasy team that has been assembled to fight against sex. It is interesting to see how all these people that claim to be so different just wind up at the same position, which is anti freedom.

Dakimakura posted...

Republican politicians have had door dash for prostitutes for a long time.

They just dont want the commoners to have it

Lol I had a friend who used BP before it got shut down

I do not want to see the fees on that service

Would you call it Whore Dash?

whetstone314 posted...

except we want to hand health care over the government. They would cut sex workers out of single payer option because of the risky lifestyle. And with all that sweet, sweet centralized power that we are just dying to hand to them, we'd be powerless to stop them.

Anyway, religious zealots on the right says something something jesus as an arguments against prostitution.

crazy liberals say that any bit of legalized, regulated prostitution has the consequence of more proliferated human traficking/slavery, therefore all prostitution should be illegal.

And, some percentage of women (both left and right) know they will lose a lot of power over men if access to sex is very easy, and they will fight prostitution and sex robots tooth and nail

It's quite a powerful fantasy team that has been assembled to fight against sex. It is interesting to see how all these people that claim to be so different just wind up at the same position, which is anti freedom.

Ohh, youre a libertarian. Why didnt you just say so?

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

I do not want to see the fees on that service

The cleanup fee would be far worse than for Uber, I think.

Kakapo posted...

Ohh, youre a libertarian. Why didnt you just say so?

that is false. I typically fall into the camp of agreeing with libertarians on a lot of things, but I ultimately think that entities very similar or identical to governments would be created as a means to facilitate and take all the tasks libertarians take for granted off the shoulders of the citizenry

whetstone314 posted...

that is false. I typically fall into the camp of agreeing with libertarians on a lot of things, but I ultimately think that entities very similar or identical to governments would be created as a means to facilitate and take all the tasks libertarians take for granted off the shoulders of the citizenry

My apologies, enlightened centrist, then.

Kakapo posted...

My apologies, enlightened centrist, then.

lol, why don't you just call me what you want?

whetstone314 posted...

lol, why don't you just call me what you want?

Does that mean I call you Quizinarpops the Embrasurnator?

Kakapo posted...

Quizinarpops the Embrasurnator

well typically around these parts "centrist" is used to mean something along the lines of "alt righty who is too cowardly to come out"

So, I find it interesting that you are the one being sheepish and tip toeing around with your words. How the turned tables.

DoctorPiranha3 posted...

Would you call it Whore Dash?

It should be.

whetstone314 posted...

crazy liberals say that any bit of legalized, regulated prostitution has the consequence of more proliferated human traficking/slavery, therefore all prostitution should be illegal.

there's nothing crazy about this claim. it's a recurring phenomenon in jurisdictions where it's legal and even regulated.

with that said, you neglected to mention opposition to legalization by many fssws themselves as it would result in a saturated labor market that would severely undercut their earnings and compromise whatever standard/quality of life they currently have. even though it's not legal, they seem to currently benefit from legal loopholes and some degree of regulatory arbitrage.

It is interesting to see how all these people that claim to be so different just wind up at the same position, which is anti freedom.

freedom does not exist in a vacuum. in the absence of state-mandated constraints, more organic social constraints emerge, but the end goal is ostensibly the same: managing a series of real-world tradeoffs.

TheMikh posted...

there's nothing crazy about this claim. it's a recurring phenomenon in jurisdictions where it's legal and even regulated.

with that said, you neglected to mention opposition to legalization by many fssws themselves as it would result in a saturated labor market that would severely undercut their earnings and compromise whatever standard/quality of life they currently have. even though it's not legal, they seem to currently benefit from legal loopholes and some degree of regulatory arbitrage.

freedom does not exist in a vacuum. in the absence of state-mandated constraints, more organic social constraints emerge, but the end goal is ostensibly the same: managing a series of real-world tradeoffs.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I mean, what are you guys even saying?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


well, this isn't about centrists, even. That poster was trying to stealth call me bad names. The "enlightened centrist" and the "libertarian" comments they made were just used as stealth bombers to call me something worse.

I don't see the problem with legalizing it. It's legal throughout Europe and they do just fine. It would probably help stop sexual assaults

Nirvanas_Nox posted...

I don't see the problem with legalizing it. It's legal throughout Europe and they do just fine. It would probably help stop sexual assaults

amsterdam has a major human trafficking problem. legally sanctioning a market means many will inevitably be involuntarily exploited by said market, regardless of how well regulated it is - and this doesn't just apply to prostitution.

that aside, you're right that legalization could potentially reduce sexual assaults to some degree if there's any validity to claims of an inverse correlation between sexual violence and availability of pronography, but it's a somewhat controversial thesis with lots of nuances and counterpoints.

I don't think either political party wants you happy and laid.

They're not equal, they're not the same, but they both want you agitated and subservient rather than tending to your own desires. That's just the natural of the political beast.

<_<

(message deleted)

I prefaced that by saying that the two sides were not equal. If you're not allowed to bring up faults the two parties share, you're flat out not allowed to criticize the left.

TheMikh posted...

amsterdam has a major human trafficking problem. legally sanctioning a market means many will inevitably be involuntarily exploited by said market, regardless of how well regulated it is - and this doesn't just apply to prostitution.

that aside, you're right that legalization could potentially reduce sexual assaults to some degree if there's any validity to claims of an inverse correlation between sexual violence and availability of pronography, but it's a somewhat controversial thesis with lots of nuances and counterpoints.

i wonder what utilitarianism would say? I wonder what the liberals who just want to "reduce human suffering" would say? Like, if legalizing prostitution doubled slavery in the civilized world, but cut down sexual assault to a quarter of what it is, how would those folks need to argue to remain logically consistent?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

"Well Gus Fring was able to move his meth because of a regulated chicken market!"

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

my point is that there are tradeoffs and externalities. i'm not saying it should be illegal or legal, personally leaning in favor of legalization; just pushing back against any insinuation that the outcome of legalization is candy and rainbows.

the trend towards cannabis legalization in various states has significantly undermined the involvement of organized crime in its production and distribution and reduced incarceration rates related to its possession or use in the states in question, but there's also been a dramatic increase in cases of psychosis and other disorders linked to use of increasingly potent strains cultivated stateside. i still favor its legalization, but this is something that still needs to be considered and addressed.

TheMikh posted...

but this is something that still needs to be considered and addressed.

A lot of people fundamentally disagree. A lot of people would say social engineering isn't the role of government.