[plagiarist]

We should decriminalize the sex worker so they can report abuse and seek medical attention without fear of imprisonment. It's hard to say it should be completely legal because that does seem to incentivize some trafficking that might not otherwise happen. Maybe I should see some statistics instead of blindly guessing what the situation is.

I think we somewhat agree. But what I am going for is: we still want to be prosecuting the sale of drugs while decriminalizing drug use. Society doesn't benefit if heroin is readily available, but it does benefit if heroin users are able to get help. I don't know the analogous situation with sex work. Even taking part may be harming a third party.

[phpisthebest]

>> But what I am going for is: we still want to be prosecuting the sale of drugs while decriminalizing drug use.

We do not agree then, I should be able to walk in a CVS and buy Cocaine or any other drug (provided CVS wants to sell it)

It is no business of the government (or you) what I consume, be it a High Fat diet or cocaine or something else

No different than who I sleep with and the reasons why be it for a "relationship", for a dinner or for $XXX money exchange

The government should prevent person X from Abusing Person Y, so in the context of Drugs that would preventing someone selling Weed that was laced with something, or that was some other substance. in the context of Sex, just like any other work, that would be to ensure the seller is selling their labor voluntarily

I dont care if they are selling their labor for sex or to work in a meat packing plant, sex work is no different than factory work, I would want people prosecuted for operating Sweat Shops and I would want people prosecuted forcings someone into sex work

[plagiarist]

Why should the government do anything about minimum wages and long working hours in a sweatshop? That's a voluntary exchange just like you buying cocaine at CVS is.

[phpisthebest]

Well sweatshops normally invoke forced labor of some kind, often in relation to Human Trafficking, since this conversation is about Human Trafficking I was using that context. I will recognize the technical definition is any "employer that violates more than one federal or state labor law governing minimum wage and overtime, child labor, industrial homework, occupational safety and health, workers' compensation, or industry registration", however in the context of this conversation I think it is pretty disingenuous to circumscribe that to be violations of "minimum wages"

In the context here Sweatshops often obtain workers that have been tricked into starting work without informed consent, or when workers are kept at work through debt bondage or mental duress, or child labor. None of which have anything to do with Minimum wage, they could be paying them $20/hr and still be a sweatshop

I am not a big fan of current Minimum wages laws, and believe there is far better ways to accomplish the stated goals of those laws with out a blanket floor on the price of labor, ironically minimum wages also end up hurting the very people they purport to be "helping" very much like drug and sex laws.