RE: [lpsf-discuss] Re: My op-ed in defense of sex work (Bay Area Reporter)

The support of the trade is not the business of LPSF. The business of LPSF is the prohibition of government's Interferrence in people's affairs.

Thank you for the further information, Mitch. The venues from my perspective are the proverbial "too much information!" So I only Googled the sites but did not click the "I Agree" in order to enter.

If I may, here is my interest in this discussion: Are the folks I see at the Tenderloin non-profit I mentioned earlier typical of the profession? Now I know that is apparently not. Is there room in the profession for affection and companionship. I still maintain, apparently not. Is this trade a business like any other which the Libertarian Party of San Francisco should feel comfortable supporting. I would say "yes!," as long as the LPSF is aware that -- given the graphics on websites such as you mention, as well as vision of folks that end lining up for a free breakfast at a non-profit -- the average voter (the LPSF is a political party) would probably view our principled stance with a jaundice eye.

I apologize for being my usual curmudgeon self and perhaps bringing this discussion from its initial poetic plane down to such a mundane level. But, please, nobody be discouraged from returning to the lyrical stage.


You have expressed my view precisely, John.


Exactly. No more than it is the LPSF's business to support accounting, or medicine, or landlords, or any other legitimate profession. And no less.

Love & Liberty,
                               ((( starchild )))

...and no less than it's the ASPCA's mission to protect weasels. :wink:

(BtW, Starchild, do you really want to go on record -- as a matter of "principle," in San Francisco these days? -- explicitly as supporting landlords?)