Thanks Lyle for this article. I am a young woman and I know for certain that women work in prostitution because they have few other employment options.

I recently did some research on HIV/AIDS and prostitution and came across a frightening fact which I would like to share with readers.

A recent Cochrane database review concludes that condom use can reduce one's risk of HIV by up to 80% (when used consistently). This is not a great statistic considering the nature of the disease.

But when I looked at the studies on which this figure was based, NONE of them included studies of sex workers. All these studies specifically exclude sex workers because it is too hard to determine the personal exposure of an individual sex worker.

Just two other research findings (among many which suggest that prostitution can never be made completely safe for women):

Increased condom use had no effect on rates of gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and genital herpes in London prostitutes (Sex Transm Infections 75:340-343, 1999).

Increased condom use was significantly associated with an increase in genital/anal warts among prostitutes in Sydney (Genitourin Med 67:384-8, 1991).

There is no definitive evidence that condoms can prevent STDs of any type, including HIV. They can certainly reduce the risk of HIV infection; estimates range from 69-85%. But these estimates are based on data which specifically excludes studies of prostitutes. Sex workers have an extremely high frequency of sexual contact, and the risk of disease is influenced by multiple factors. The promotion of ‘safe sex’ practices, mostly involving provision and enforcement of condom use, is complicated and cannot guarantee a safe work environment for commercial sex workers.

Thank you Lyle for standing up for what is right. Clearly the degradation of sexual integrity in our society has clear and measurable negative effects. Any thinking person cannot deny that the negative impact that prostitution has. If you want statistics they are easy to find and impossible to deny. Do your homework.

And to "cynical of toowoomba" who posted the first response you should know that I have never been a pastor of any church!

Cynical,

I think you are about half right – it is good for people to identify who they are and their particular world view. And now that you have informed us that Lyle is a christian we can see where he is coming from and clearly he has allowed his christian faith to deeply impact his views on prostitution. Lyle was remiss in not identifying his church connexion and now you have filled in important detail. Thank you. I note however, that you have declined the request to identify your own biases, leaving us to guess what they might be…….

I note that your posts to this topic are your first. Welcome. You will note I use my own name and further as I have indicated on other threads I have identified myself as a minister of a church, a Presbyterian one for the record.

I want to assure you that Christians are active on Online Opinion – we are quite happy to hold our end up and you will just need to learn to debate with us – we are not going away – so get on with it and tell us, what’s your beef with Lyle’s article?

Thank you Lyle for an interesting but sobering article

Sure, it matters that Lyle excluded his connection with the Christian church but there's still plenty to read and comment on from his article without getting tied up in knots over his pastoral responsibilities.

So other than Lyle's religious affiliation, why is everyone focusing exclusively on the medical/physical side of prostitution? Sure, it's important - but how about the emotional impact prostitution has on the women involved? And how about the moral impact it has on society?

"Cynical" shows an attitude I see a lot of in America, too: "Someone
with faith in God has a slanted view, but I as a secular humanist am
perfectly objective, above the religious fray." Secular humanists
with this attitude are like a man who claims to be a fair judge in
a beauty contest--concealing the fact that his own niece is one of
the contestants and he plans to vote for her automatically.

Secular humanists are no more impartial than anyone else; they have
their own horse in the race every bit as much as a Christian or a
Muslim has. Materialistic philosophy is itself one of the belief
systems in the competition; and if Mr. Shelton is to be disqualified
from this discussion because he holds to a particular belief system,
then "Cynical" equally deserves to be disqualified for exactly the
same reason.

Thanks for your article Lyle.

You have to wonder what supporters of prostitution are thinking. If brothel owners had the interests of the workers at heart they would not be brothel owners, full stop. So how could they ever be expected to supply more than lip service to any form of care for workers?

As soon as any politician or group seeks to legalise or encourage prostitution we must sceptically ask, what’s in it for them. The lack of open and full information about the social and personal damages reinforce this concern. Since there is no social good from the practice of prostitution why would anyone, including the Crime and Misconduct Commission, consider extending legalization unless they had something to gain?

Any politician who supports legalizing prostitution in any way is crossing their own name off the ballot form as far as I’m concerned.