Further to my earlier posting I was think of the issue from a strictly philosophical perspective and so thought of this as well. Of course citizen Smith is right! but is she being consistent, what is her actual philosophy on the Harm Principle.
Now get your heads around this one if you can. Jacqui Smith has announced a crackdown on brothels, massage parlours, and kerb crawling. Now then, relate that to Mills Harm Principle. Should the government be passing, and enforcing these laws. Do they have a right so to do, where is the harm.
Now before you answer think! Will they also close down massage parlours which cater for women. Basically, will they stop women who pay for sex from men. In our 'modern' society women too have needs, should they not be satisfied or must they forever paddle their own canoe.
This is a touchy subject but I am seriously interested in this from a philosphical prespective, philosophy in action if you like. Should we take gender more into account when passing utilitarian laws.
Also, think about pre-nuptial agreements, does this also not turn us into, as Shakespeare would say 'pimps and whores'. Or should we just be content to be, as Alastair says, 'pissed off'. There needs to be more debate on these sorts of issues before we accept knee jerk reactions.
Knee Jerk Reactions
Further to my earlier posting I was think of the issue from a strictly philosophical perspective and so thought of this as well. Of course citizen Smith is right! but is she being consistent, what is her actual philosophy on the Harm Principle.
Now get your heads around this one if you can. Jacqui Smith has announced a crackdown on brothels, massage parlours, and kerb crawling. Now then, relate that to Mills Harm Principle. Should the government be passing, and enforcing these laws. Do they have a right so to do, where is the harm.
Now before you answer think! Will they also close down massage parlours which cater for women. Basically, will they stop women who pay for sex from men. In our 'modern' society women too have needs, should they not be satisfied or must they forever paddle their own canoe.
This is a touchy subject but I am seriously interested in this from a philosphical prespective, philosophy in action if you like. Should we take gender more into account when passing utilitarian laws.
Also, think about pre-nuptial agreements, does this also not turn us into, as Shakespeare would say 'pimps and whores'. Or should we just be content to be, as Alastair says, 'pissed off'. There needs to be more debate on these sorts of issues before we accept knee jerk reactions.