This thread looks like a troll, but just for fun...
Before I get started I'd just ask the following: I'm pro enforcing a zoning law that would outlaw streetwalking, but I'm ALSO pro prostitution. Meaning I'm ok with zoning these businesses like I do other business activities like street vendors, lunch trucks, etc. but if you want to take it to an appropriate place I really could care less whether someone has sex for free or for money. If that's the total of your argument and you just want a zoning law then I agree and you shouldn't bother to read the rest. If on the other hand your problem is prostitution then...
1) There is no law against consensual sex, the law is against that same act where money or goods are exchanged. I'd like at least 1 (one) example where free is both morally and legally ok, and then contrast with the *exact* same situation where she is handed a dollar. How is anyone outside the two individuals affected? Be specific as to how some third parties life is now different because she received that dollar, but if she refused the dollar you'd think it was perfectly ok.
2) I've never done drugs, never even been interested, but possession fills our jails and causes us to release serious offenders early, if my choice is putting a marijuana smoker in jail in exchange for releasing a violent offender, I'll pass on the smoker. I'll also say what you do to yourself is none of my business, if you steal, drive intoxicated then you affect others and at THAT point I care. So the repeat people whose only conviction is drugs aren't persuasive to me in either direction.
3) If she could make real money at prostitution some of the crimes listed might be lessened in frequency - you don't need to commit larceny or burglary if you can make substantially better money doing something legal. But if both activities are illegal you have to evaluate both crimes in terms of risk, payoff, and long term consequences.
4) If the message is supposed to be that because some people in this profession also have problems with the law, then we should conduct studies to see what other professions also have troubles with the law. After all, we've elected politicians with much equivalent or worse histories than described above, some to the highest office in the land.
5) Convicting a woman of such a crime does not help enable her to find other more "respectable" work, in fact it does the opposite as any reasonable person would agree.
6) You argue that it is not victimless. I honestly don't see anything that makes it any more full of victims than any sex act done for free (ignoring the fact that there are almost zero examples of sex actually done free of funds/gifts/favors/obligations). I'd actually also be interested in an example of sex where there wasn't some exchange of something prior during or after the act, be that dinner, drinks, a ride home, jewelry, a place to live, etc. but actually just two people who meet, fuck, and never exchange any goods or services.
I'll repeat. Seriously. Any example where free is ok, and then contrast with the exact same situation where only because she receives funds directly society detonates