DEAR PROCON.ORG READERS: We’re being outspent by biased organizations that use millions of dollars to misinform you. This week we’re asking our readers to help us. We survive on donations, which keep us independent and ad-free. If every one of our readers gave $3 now, the price of a cup of coffee, our fundraiser would be over. We’re a small nonprofit, but it costs a lot to keep our servers, research staff, and programs going. ProCon.org is your oasis on the Internet for unbiased information on important issues. If ProCon.org is useful to you, please take a minute to keep us online and ad-free. Thank you.
The Baltimore Examiner wrote the Oct. 26, 2006 editorial "Legalize Prostitution For Sake of Women" that said:
"If history can serve as a guide, shame will not stop the profession. Because of that, the better solution would be to legalize prostitution as in parts of Nevada and the Netherlands - and tax the proceeds like any other business. That way the government could use the money to pay for programs to help women find a path out of it."
Vaclav Maly, Auxiliary Bishop of Prague, on May 4, 2002 was quoted on Radio Prague as having said:
"I am not making a moral judgment here. I see prostitution as a reality of the modern world. The chances of eliminating it are practically nil. Under those circumstances it is better to keep it in check and under control by giving it a legal framework. This is not to say that I approve of brothels - but it seems to me that it would be better to have prostitution take place there - with medical check-ups and prostitutes paying taxes. It would be the lesser of two evils."
Janice Raymond, PhD, former Co-Executive Director of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW) wrote "State-Sponsored Prostitution" for the Seminar on the Effects of Legalisation of Prostitution Activities, in Stockholm on Nov. 5-6, 2002, stating that:
"We believe that State-sponsored prostitution is one of the significant root causes of sex trafficking. We call legalized or regulated prostitution State-sponsored prostitution because although legalized or regulated systems vary, the common element is that the system of prostitution itself becomes accepted and legitimated by the State. The term State-sponsored prostitution signals that in any of these legalized or regulated systems that recognize the sex industry as a legitimate enterprise, the State effectively becomes another pimp, living off the earnings of women in prostitution."
Diane Post, JD, in the July 1999 Off Our Backs article "Legalizing Prostitution: A Systematic Rebuttal," wrote:
"I personally have been physically threatened and attacked and sued for exposing pornography and prostitution. I don't believe those of us who oppose it are naive. In fact the huge economic profits and entrenchment of such economic activity in national economies by national governments is precisely the point - women are becoming commodities not only for private businesses but for the state as well."
Donna M. Hughes, PhD, Professor and Eleanor M. and Oscar M. Carlson Endowed Chair of the Women's Studies Program at the University of Rhode Island, wrote in the May 11, 2004 National Review article "Don’t Legalize" that stated:
"German lawmakers thought they were going to get hundreds of millions of euros in tax revenue when they legalized prostitution and brothels in 2002. But keeping with criminal nature of prostitution, the newly redefined 'business owners' and 'freelance staff' in brothels will not pay up. Germany is suffering a budget deficit, and the Federal Audit Office estimates that the government has lost over two billion euros a year in unpaid tax revenue from the sex industry. Last week, lawmakers started to look for ways to increase collection of taxes from prostitutes. Disgustingly, they expect to solve their economic problems, at least in part, off the backs of the some of the most abused and exploited women in the world."