Comments on: Protecting Prostitutes https://windypundit.com/2005/04/the_illinois_ho/ Classical liberalism, criminal laws, the war on drugs, economics, free speech, technology, photography, sex work, cats, and whatever else comes to mind. Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:58:22 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0 By: XXX https://windypundit.com/2005/04/the_illinois_ho/#comment-110 Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:58:22 +0000 http://www.windypundit.com/?p=99#comment-110 Are all women prostitutes by nature?
Engagement Ring=Down payment for the sex

Dating=Spending MONEY on her for sex(depending on how much)

Good Job= Proof that he can pay for the sex

Having sex with a broke man=Investment to get money later

No money involved=Paying for a Body guard by having sex

House wife=A prostitute/housewife with only one client

THINK ABOUT IT. IT’S TRUE

]]> By: Howard https://windypundit.com/2005/04/the_illinois_ho/#comment-109 Mon, 17 Apr 2006 03:49:19 +0000 http://www.windypundit.com/?p=99#comment-109 This law may sound great for the “feminist” prohibition crowd, but that’s basically all it is, another form of prohibition laws dressed up to look like prostitute protection. And we all know how well prohibition turned out with alcohol and drugs.

There is another precedent that indicates this law will be more public relations than serious policy. The federal anti-trafficking act has been around with great fanfare for five years. Hundreds of millions in funding has led to what? About one hundred prosecutions, low-level crap at five millions dollars per case?

There are a lot of people who will profit from the new wave of prohibition laws, but it won’t be the women working in sex trade.

See my site at http://www.streetwomen.org.
for photos and audio of Chicago women in prostitution.

]]>