Article Image

IPFS News Link • Philosophy: Liberalism

Should Christians Support Laws Against Prostitution?

• https://www.lewrockwell.com

Poor Jimmy Carter. It must be tough for a life-long liberal Democrat to almost sound like a conservative Republican.

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, the former president argues that to curb prostitution, the government should punish those who buy sex rather than those who sell it. Carter's one-sided approach is why I say that he almost sounds like a conservative since the typical conservative is perfectly happy with both parties being locked in a cage for engaging in peaceful, private, voluntary, consensual activity.

Carter is disturbed that "some human rights and public health organizations are advocating the full legalization of the sex trade." He agrees with "Amnesty International, UNAIDS and other groups that say that those who sell sex acts should not be arrested or prosecuted," but "cannot support proposals to decriminalize buyers and pimps." He equates prostitution with "violence against women," "domination," "oppression," and "exploitation." Legalizing the act of paying money for sex "debases men by assuming that they are entitled to access women's bodies for sexual gratification" and teaches every young boy that "women and girls are commodities to be bought and sold." To be clear, Carter is arguing against prostitution itself, not just "the harm that accompanies it."

Carter feels that the "Nordic model" pioneered in Sweden is a "much better policy option" that advances "human rights and healthy societies." This strategy "involves decriminalizing prostituted women and offering them housing, job training and other services" but "treats purchasing and profiting from sex acts as serious crimes." Another key component is "public education about the inherent harms of prostitution for those whose bodies are sold."

Carter says that taking the approach that "mature adults should be free to exchange money for sex" ignores "the power imbalance that defines the vast majority of sex-for-cash transactions" and demeans "the beauty of sexual relations when both parties are respected."

Carter concludes that "it is better to help women and girls avoid a life of prostitution and to deter men from buying sex acts."

Carter has always claimed to be a religious man, a church goer, and a Sunday School teacher. Yet, not once in his op-ed does he appeal to Scripture to justify his call for arresting and prosecuting those who purchase sex for money but not those who provide sex for money.

How could he?

There is no biblical warrant for either.

Before proceeding I should say that, as a Bible-believing, theologically conservative Christian, I believe prostitution to be wrong, immoral, debauched, sinful, bad, evil, impure, shameful, dishonorable, wicked, depraved, lewd, unholy, lascivious, degenerate, unclean, licentious, filthy, indecent, and every other bad thing you could possibly say about it. Prostitution is not something anyone should want in their city or neighborhood. Prostitution is not something anyone should want their wife, daughter, aunt, mother, grandmother, mother-in-law, niece, or sister to be involved in.

I should also say that not supporting laws against prostitution does not mean that I don't support laws against forced prostitution, violence against women, exploitation of women, oppression of women, human trafficking, forced prostitution, child prostitution, trespassing, loitering, sexual abuse, assault, rape, public nudity, public sex, slavery, or kidnapping. Does the non-crime of prostitution sometimes involve one or more of the real crimes that I mentioned? Certainly. But that doesn't mean that prostitution itself should be a crime.