Dear Ms. Sullivan,

Thank you for your thoughtful and deeply considered article posted on Online Opinion on June 25. Clearly your publication with Spinifex Press and Arena Magazine is due to rigorous logic, wealth of experience, and great knowledge in the disciplines of economics and law, on which consideration of the legalisation of prostitution rests. Your recent publications will, without a doubt, further enhance the reputation of excellence that Spinifex and Arena command.

Follows at:

http://au.geocities.com/lev_lafayette/0706sullivan.html

Saying trafficking of humans is about prostitution is like saying black slavery was about farming.

Dear Steely one :)

we 'Christians' and other 'morons' want to 'impose' our views about pedophiles too.. gee.. shock horror.

I disagree,..that IS democracy, where citizens who have a vote, can vote on issues they feel passionately about.

No matter WHO wins an election, they do so on that basis. WE also have to endure laws produced by others which are not palatable to us.

Your comment 'They just want to impose' blah blah is about the level of 'You hate us' when in fact we just disagree :)

Yvonne.. if we explored your accusation "sanctimoneous crap" logic a bit futher, you might re-think that mate. That kind of statement opens up a Pandoras box on steroids about where it can lead.
*you have been warned* 0_^

Oh.. by the way. .why do you hate us so much ? :)

BOAZ,""I disagree,..that IS democracy, where citizens who have a vote, can vote on issues they feel passionately about.
No matter WHO wins an election, they do so on that basis. "

I'm not going to argue with you about democracy. You either believe in individual liberty, or you do not. Would you support a majority that banned religion altogether? Would your co-believers? I thought not.

"WE also have to endure laws produced by others which are not palatable to us."

Whether they are palatable is not important. What matters is whether it is a majority law affects your individual liberty. For example, laws about gay marriage, would not despite being unpalatable.

Do religious people divorce? Yes. Do religious people commit the sin of adultery? Yes. If they truly believed in those sins, then they would not participate in them. The proper response is not to create a law that makes divorce a criminal offence for everyone else, when they do not share your beliefs.

"Your comment 'They just want to impose' blah blah is about the level of 'You hate us' when in fact we just disagree :)"

That disagreement has consequences for others' individual liberty who do not share your beliefs and don't want others telling them what they can and can't do. I will never advocate depriving you of your freedom to practice religion, so don't do the same to others.

@Steel

With you 100%; democracy is a system of decision making that applies only to common goods. When applied to individual liberties it quickly collapses in to the mob rule of "tyrany of the majority" which great democrats were quite aware of.

Democracy and liberty are two separate subjects. Democracy is not about the business of individual liberty. Social justice is about individual liberty. Democracy allows the right to the individual to vote on whether or not such liberties are just and right for that society. Not all democracies necessarily support all liberties.