However, now when I argue with them, I'm in danger of giving too much away, like I was during that argument. As far as they know, my interest in sex for money is abstract.
/Zin
-- Modified on 8/10/2004 8:02:54 AM
"this is bad for local businesses".
-- Modified on 8/9/2004 7:23:15 AM
Omaha is now deleted from places to go
Thank you
I wonder if the local providers are now cold calling these guys.
Cm.
Except they probably don't have much job security at this point.
polar opposites could have sprung from the same womb and be raised in the same family & social environment. As a side note, a few years ago he was arrested in NY for solicitation. He claimed false arrest, but as I sat in the family circle and listened to his story, I kept my mouth shut and thought to myself "you self-righteous hypocrite, you're guilty as sin". Hell, he could even be reading this post and not know it is me! But he will go to church on Sunday, and he will join with his religious right wing buddies and condemn the behaviour I love.
As for those who would legislate morals, I am at a total loss as to how to deal with them. They seem to be gaining in strength every day. If we keep going at this rate, we will be back in old Salem!
I too keep my mouth shut at family gatherings. It is not because I am ashamed of what I do, to the contrary. I just do not want to get into a scripture quoting struggle and ruin an otherwise good gathering.
he can only resort to his dogma, which becomes really repetitive after a while. And I can quote scripture better than he can, and he knows it. He knows he can't bullshit me with some false scripture, or pseudoscience crap.
However, now when I argue with them, I'm in danger of giving too much away, like I was during that argument. As far as they know, my interest in sex for money is abstract.
/Zin
-- Modified on 8/10/2004 8:02:54 AM
Just a week ago, I had an argument with my brother, who doesn't know I hobby. It started out as a political argument about my support for John Kerry, he's a Bush supporter, for social reasons. It quickly turned to social issues, and the very first one he pulled out was prostitution. He talked about how feminists (his arch-enemies) had been pushing to unionize prostitution, and he thought that, instead, enforcement should be directed at demand rather than supply, at ratting out the johns, this was one of the methods he mentioned.
I told him I was 100 percent, 180 degrees opposed to him, not so much about "unionization," a bad idea, but about continued criminilization of prostitutes.
My brother is usually a bellwether for bad ideas and bad social practices. I don't know if it's because he reads them in print, or because he gets them faster than most other social conservatives. We could expect more of this backlash now that Berkley has a movement to decriminalize prostitution. Don't think this isn't going to be fought about in many ways.
My brother echoed the quote that this Jan Quigley gave: "Prostitution is not a victimless crime." Yes, now the people who oppose prostitution have given it victims. I also like her acknowledgement that there is no solution, but she thinks that crass meanness and persecution will lead to a solution. I already know what solution she has in mind: well behaved, monogamously married men, with wives strictly limiting the supply of sex.
So, in attacking the demand, Omaha is going to create more social problems now. Broken marriages. Resentment between spouses which will make divorces contentious and support payments more difficult. Once you reveal the names of these guys and their relationships have destabilized, they are going to be needing prostitutes/providers more, not less. Socially outlawed and financially strapped, they will be encouraged to get involved in worse illegal activity. Nevermind the troubles created by firing competent people from their jobs.
Sexual predators? If there's a predator here it's this Jan Quigley and her social disease.
/Zin
A part of me feels that anyone stupid enough to still be living in Nebraska and hobbying deserves this. I mean, what the hell do you expect living in the Bible Belt? I grew up in a small town in the Midwest, and as much as I loved it, I NEVER, EVER would move back there unless they stopped the crusade that has been going on since the 80's for that "old time religion" and "family values". This country is becoming as polarized by religion now as it was by slavery in 1860, and those who don't see the battle lines are subject to becoming victims.
A vote for conservatives inevitably is a vote for religion anymore. Remember that on 11/2/04.
and even more who hobby. This is of course their right, but it does amaze me that they don't seem to get the connection. The right wants to destroy your hobby! It's somewhat analgous to gay people wanting to go to church. Why would you want to belong to an organization that believes your lifestyle is an abomination, and some would even like to eradicate you! IMO, if you are a hobbying religious right kinda guy, you are an outrageous hypocrite. End of sermon.
This is a misperception. True conservatism means you are for less government and want to keep govt. off people's backs, such as having less of the taxation and social planning which is so dear to the left. Those who want to interfere with people's private lives are wrong. One is not a hypocrite if he is conservative and supports hobbying. Those who want to interfere have perverted what the true meaning of conservatism is.
I am a conservative, but I hobby, believe gays have common rights, and I don't believe my belief in God should be thrust upon anyone.
As a conservative, I believe in small government, low taxes, self-reliance, diversity with blending, a common working language (English), limitations on immigration, secure national borders, a strong national defense, and that the war in Iraq and on terror are justified.
My opinions on abortion, sex, gays, etc are mine alone and not to be subjected on the masses. I believe abortion should be safe, legal and extremely rare. I also believe it should be limited to the first trimester with the exception of lifesaving issues for the mother. Of course, because I don't believe in abortion-on-demand and available in all cases thru the entire pregnancy, I am considered a pro-lifer. I prefer to be call reasonable.
I don't see a conflict between hobbying and being a believer in God, a higher power or Barney. Religion is a private matter between my Maker and myself. If I am going to hell for my actions, that's the job of my God, not a matter for others to determine.
So, you see, conservatism exists that doesn't necessarily conflict with the rights of others. As for being an outrageous hypocrite, please remember that is your opinion and a judgement of me, but not necessarily the truth. BTW, labeling me a hypocrite is applying the same judgemental attitude conservatives are continually accused of doing to others.
Just my opinion and I could be wrong.
Loarthan
In 2 of the 3 states where we are working towards decrim legislation Republicans are the strongest supporters and will likely be the ones to go public about the issues and introduce bills.
Also, there are far more important things than the hobby to consider when choosing a candidate (although the hobby and civil liberties issues do tend to go together and civil liberties is one of my personal top 5.)
Finally, can you tell me where in the Bible it says that you shouldn't hobby? There are numerous instances of hobby activities mentioned without any condemnation. The only mention of not visiting a provider is with regard to the temple prostitutes.
with you two guys, whos opinions I deeply respect. A spirited debate, yes, but not a contentious one. As for loarthan's comment that my labeling him a hypocrite is applying the same judgemental attitude conservatives are continually accused of others, I agree, and I will eat a little humble pie here and apologize. When I re-read my comment, I realized it is contentious. I will point out, however, that 1) I did not call him a hypocrite, I was referring to the religious right; he clearly does not fit the pattern, but the rebuke is just as relevant. 2) Nowhere did I even imply that anyone is going to hell for their actions 3)I agree with virtually all of your "platform", so since we hold such similar beliefs, does that make me conservative? On many issues, yes. But unlike the religious right, I don't believe in legislating morals, nor do I condone their self-proclaimed taking of the moral high ground
As for JustTryingHarder's comment that "Republicans are the strongest supporters" (of decriminilization), I say, hurray, they should be. Conservatives should work for less, not more legislation and intrusion of the government into the private lives of citizens. I also agree, that hobbying is not the most important thing to consider when choosing a candidate, but since it is part of the larger civil liberties issue, that puts it near the top for me.
I never implied that the Bible says you shouldn't hobby, and you are correct; the Bible is full of references: Solomon had over 600 wives and concubines, which is a full-time courtesan, and he was a favorite of God. Jesus himself defended the prostitute "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Again, when I re-read my post, I recognized the underlying tone, and in my defense, can only say that I have obviously built up some resentment against those who would condemn me for my beliefs. Or even others, for that matter. I am not gay, but have a lot of sympathy for their cause. It irks me that there is so much homophobia and that the religious right feels so threatened by the so-called gay agenda.
To hrnyguy31: Hey, no problem. I didn't think you meant it personally. Also, I don't know if that makes you conservative, that is just a label I use because I am comfortable with it. The remainder of this post is general discussion, not specifically aimed at anyone in particular.
I just want to follow up by saying that being conservative means agreeing with the religious right. I happen to believe in many things that the religious right believes in, but legislating morals is not one of those items.
To paraphrase the message to the religious right from a couple of really great rappers:
"So the moral of the story is: Who are you to judge?
There's only one true judge, and that's God
So chill, and let my Father do His job"
Later,
Loarthan
I'm going to stay right in the Bible Belt doing what I'm doing. All moving will do is make it easier to draw the boundaries for a future war.
/Zin
Alcohol destroys far more lives than prostitution ever will. Of course they would *never* post the names of DUI offenders, because some of those offenders would most surely be the most prominent and successful in the community.
prostitution....some of the "offenders" are the most prominent and successful in the community. I know for a fact. They are frequently the most hypocritical. I also believe that printing DUI offenders' names in the paper has been implemented in some communities, although I can't remember any specifics. (Old-timers Disease)
The newspaper article that JustTryingHarder has added a link for quotes a lady named Jan Quinley and mentions that money came from the Omaha Community Association. A whitepages.com search results in telephone listing both for the Association and Jan (and Dave) Quinley.
Mrs. Quinley has exercised her free speech rights to express her opinion. Since she has made her telephone number a matter of public record, some people might want to telephone her and ask her for more information or tell her their opinions. The Association might be asked if it receives public tax dollars and whether that was the source of the money used for the billboards.
Although it is not specified, a reading of the article would seem to suggest that these were "street" crimes resulting from undercover females portraying street walkers. I imagine most of us would agree that consentual adult activity should not be negotiated on the public byways.
I could agree that sex shouldn't be negotiated (or practiced) on public by-ways. But that's a matter of regulation, different subject, as far as criminal activity goes.
/Zin