VIDEO: Why the court got it wrong on the issue of brothels

- March 29th, 2012

Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

8 comments

  1. Chris says:

    “Why the court got it wrong on the issue of brothels”

    When reading that title I was expecting a sophisticated analysis of the Court of Appeal’s decision. The decision tried to balance the issue of criminalizing brothels with the very real issue of the risk of women’s safety put at risk by outlawing prostitutes to practice their trade in a safe environment off the street with the support of bodyguards.

    Instead, this piece contained loaded language equating prostitution to “buying flesh”, and stating that a judge “doesn’t deserve to sit on the bench” without cause. Did this correspondent even read the decision?

    Although the correspondent correctly points out that prostitution in fact is legal in Canada, he seems to hang the moral lows of it on the heads of the judiciary. In reality, if the Government wanted to prohibit it, it would be within their jurisdiction to do so and the issue of striking down brothel prohibitions would never see the light of day. Instead, the Government keeps prostitution legal, but at the same time forbids any way for prostitutes to practice it safely. This puts women practicing a legal profession at great risk of harm and in my view the court acted appropriately in striking down the prohibitions.

    If you want to make the strongest case for your side, you should have a strong advocate on your show that supports the contrarian view and show why your side is superior. Instead, Mr. Lilley had a madame who basically echoed his point of view. I can see how having something like that on could boost the outrage over the issue, but there is little to be learned there.

    Anyway, I’m only commenting because this is the first piece I’ve seen from Sun News, but I was pretty surprised at the low quality of the journalism. I hope that this kind of stuff isn’t the norm with Sun News or Lilley because I don’t think that a news organization can last long running this kind of trash.

  2. Mike Czechowicz says:

    Poor Brian. He is so upset with the oldest profession in the world and that some safety measures have been put in place to protect them. If he only new what would happen in our “society” if these outlets were not available. Don’t be such prud Brian. It’s the oldest profession for a reason. what a self righteous prig.

  3. Ihatethischannel says:

    Hey, this is bad and you should feel bad.

  4. Constantin Draghici-Vasilescu says:

    The fact remains that the legislation that we had prior to this court decision was self-contradictory and potentially harmful. Maybe this court ruling would get parliament back to the drawing board and, should this happen, Parliament would be well advised to take into account the nasty reality that your guest unveiled.

  5. Grace Isaak says:

    Your very vocabulary denotes the antiquated belief system from which your insulting article springs, ie, whorehouses, whores, hookers, “prostitution is bad”! People become prostitutes, not because they are bad but because they need money! If prostitutes had a safe environment in which to practise their trade, Robert Picton would not have murdered in excess 45 women.
    I hope you are aware that you are a judgemental chauvinist, looking down on people who do things you don’t approve of in order to earn a living. Who are you to decide “good” or “bad’? Please remember the old saw about supply and demand. I have never met a man who admits he paid for sex, so where do the clients of prostitutes hide out? If it were not for chauviniste like you, we could have legal brothels where both client and sex worker would both be safe from harm. The sex trade would be monitored, contolled and taxable.
    This is the twenty first century, sir, and you need to acknowledge that men are lusty and there are professional ladies who will cater to those lusts.
    One last note, prostitution is one of the few honest professions left. What you see is what you get!
    Let it be safe and legal.

  6. Richard Peters says:

    Brian, would you prefer that those individuals who are involved in sex-for-pay not be regulated by the powers that be? An excellent model to review is Australia’s — they’ve had both less heath issues as well as criminal events since legalizing brothels.

    However, if you’re only parroting CONservative dogma, then I can understand why you blather what you do.

  7. Denis says:

    Do I agree that women should be safe? Yes. no doubt about that. Are there people who NEED to use prostitutes Sure. Mentally handicapped people have needs, and can be helped to achieve their needs, needs that are not being met by women.

    Part of this issue is a religious problem. Your morality and mine are quite different, and as a Canadian, I find that I have religion shoved down my throat all the time, whether it is the Lord’s Prayer in Parliament or the knock on my door by the suited up Witnesses who think that I need their faith, to my being at a family member’s funeral, having had to listen to the religious verbal diarrhea spouted off so many times I wanted to scream “Get on with the flipping Funeral already!”. Not interested in following a fear based religion thanks, and that is what Christianity is to me.

    Your morals say that a woman who wants to make money by renting out her body is a bad thing. That is YOUR morals speaking here, and YOU ARE denying her the right to do what she wants. As long as she is safe, I see no reason why she should not be allowed to do so.

    If we had a 30 second screening test for diseases, which EVERY person going into a brothel would need to pass prior to having any intimacy with one of the sex trade workers, then along with bodyguards, the sex trade workers could be safe in brothels. Get them off the street where they are not safe is what I say!

    You need to get your head out of your “politics” and see that this issue is a religious issue and not a political one. Nuff said!

  8. Wolf says:

    Brian, do you really think that prostitution will ever be completely eliminated? Regardless of what laws are in place? Your own report had the title “Worlds Oldest Profession”. There always has been, and there always will be a sex trade. By criminalizing it, you only push it to the fringes where women are victimized, children are forced into it and you have criminal control, drug abuse, violence and human trafficking.

    Now, I’m a father and I certainly wouldn’t want my daughter to be a prostitute. But that said, you have to recognize the many reasons it exists in the first place. There are adult women, who decide for themselves that they WANT to do this (believe it or not). There are men who want (and even need) to pay for it. It’s not society’s place to regulate a private transaction between willing and consenting adults.

    There are also women who have to do this as a means of basic support (food, shelter, etc) Alot of these women aren’t there by choice. They simply had circumstances and/or a lack of other opportunities that led them there. That is unfortunate, but what would you have society do with every prostitute that quit hooking but was unable to find another job? Put them on welfare? Have them live and beg on the street? You think making prostitution completely illegal will make all these women disappear?

    The only answer is to recognize and allow it, but with limitations and regulations. Keep it off the street and indoors. Limit it to ‘red-light’ districts. Regulate the age and health status of the workers involved. Make it easier to track their patrons, for the protection of both the worker and the patron and to manage health risks. And… tax it. I pay my taxes, so can they.

    Your report is not journalism, it’s a personal rant and a poorly contructed and poorly supported one at that. It’s a reaction based solely on your personal morals. Do not presume to speak for every Canadian by telling us “you know it’s wrong in your heart!” You opinion is just one out of 35 million and it is naive, condescending, insulting and ignorant.

    Say what you like on your blog, but if you want to be ‘reporting’ for a major news organization, you should research this issue more (alot more) and submit a follow report that is more informative, balanced, impartial and quite simply… professional.

    This is my challenge to you sir. And judging the resonses you are getting so far, I’m not alone.

Comments are closed.