drlove

Did anyone have the opportunity to see Brianna from "Book-Herself" while she was visiting? I didn't see any reviews on her, so I thought I'd ask here. Thanks!

Better yet, let's go ahead and release a client list of CONservative Mp's!! :whip:

I did... still waiting for a reply.

Does anyone have a link?

Will this new challenge at least take less time than the first one? I'm not cherishing the idea of having to give up the hobby for an extended period......

Still waiting for a PM...

Let us know how it goes if you see her!

"Sexy" has no expiration date... it's all about the total package for me... poise, grace, charm, elegance, intelligence, eloquence all play a major role. Physical beauty is but one element of the whole. For me, I have a deep appreciation of beauty in all its forms... intrinsically perfect in every way. I love all women of all ages, shapes and sizes. I've been with women that range in age from their 20's to their 60's, and they were all amazing.

Chronicle Herald

What does that mean??

This might actually work in our favour. Aside from wanting to be one up on the SCC, it's rather odd that the Cons framed their legislation in this manner. E.g. (to appeal to their base). I would suggest that they've got their base in their pocket, as who else would they really vote for? If all the Cons really care about is staying in power, they should have appealed more to mainstream society,and concentrated on winning the swing voters. It's clear that most Canadians are in favour of decriminalization, even if they don't approve of the industry. It's the principle that's wrong here - trying to legislate morality, passing a bad law in the name of politics, Harper's continued attempts to turn our democracy into a dictatorship etc.. These are the issues voters will rail against in the next election. Hell, even the Conservative party is divided on the issue. Moreover, they know the new bill would never pass constitutional muster, and yet they are hell bent on ramming it through anyway! They are content to make life harder for prostitutes, even if it means some will die. The Conservatives will have blood on their hands from the very people they are supposedly trying to protect. It doesn't get anymore hypocritical than that. Government should take the same approach to prostitution as they did with the abortion debate - hands off! Additional Comments: One more thing... they've since raised the ire of print publications everywhere, since they stand to lose a great deal of advertising revenue under the new proposed law - more votes that won't be going to the Conservatives!

That's for sure!

So, there's a good chance that after the next challenge prostitution will be decriminalized?

That's true... right after the SCC struck down the old laws, Peter Mackay gave an interview where he said that he didn't think the Nordic Model was the right fit for Canada, or something along those lines...

Interesting... So, what will the government's options be once the bill (and soon to be law) gets struck down by the SCC?

That is truly a remarkable achievement - Hats off to you, sir!

Ok.. I understand them being on the wrong side of a wedge issue, but I don't know how much of the voting population would cast their votes based on that. Moreover, I believe the SCC said there was nothing precluding Parliament from passing a law which does make prostitution completely illegal. Then again, maybe I'm wrong...

I have to say I concur with what you've said. Even though I reside in a slightly larger city than yourself, I feel the risks for me are just as great. I for one have too much to lose in terms of my career, so even so much as an arrest or a charge that doesn't stick would spell disaster for me, so I think I'd be out completely. I'm still hoping for the best in terms of a new challenge, but even if it's successful, what's stopping the government from making prostitution 100% illegal? That's what really worries me...

My biggest fear is that if the new bill/law is successfully challenged in the future, that the government of the day will make prostitution full out illegal. E.g (criminalizing both the buyer and seller, as well as all aspects related to the trade). However, I don't know how likely/realistic that scenario is. Are there any lawyers on the board to enlighten me? I hope I'm wrong, but is that a possibility? Thanks...

At last count, the CBC poll counted 92% against.

As far as I'm aware, the old laws are still in full effect until December 21st 2014. This is just Petey talking out of his ass again, as usual.

Does anyone know if Kera Gold is still around? She works at Halifax Playmates and I've been trying to set up an appointment. Trouble is, I've been calling them for days and all I get is their voicemail. Hope they're still in business.

A new poll was released on Wednesday outlining the average Canadian's opinion on the country's new prostitution bill and, while it wouldn't be fair to call it an all-out rebuke, the response certainly wasn't positive. The [URL="http://www.angusreidglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ARG-C-36-Prostitution-June-2014.pdf"]Angus Reid Global poll[/URL] found that only 35 per cent of Canadians supported Bill C-36, the Conservative government's controversial response to the Supreme Court of Canada deciding the country's previous prostitution laws were unconstitutional. Just under half â?? 47 per cent â?? of respondents said they opposed the bill. But while support for the legalized sale and purchase of sex was generally split, the question of morality was a bit more one-sided, with more people thinking prostitution should be legal than those who consider it morally justified. Under Canada's current, but soon-to-be expunged, prostitution laws, selling sex is legal but the laws that surround the practice make it untenable. In December, the Supreme Court ruled those laws would be removed and gave the federal government one year to replace them. [B][ Related: [URL="https://ca.news.yahoo.com/prostitution-law-changes-chance-surviving-090000501.html"]Prostitution law changes have chance of surviving court challenge[/URL] ][/B] Justice Minister Peter MacKay unveiled the government's response last week. Under the proposed bill, prostitution would remain legal but the purchase of sex would be against the law. The new bill would also make it illegal to sell sex in public places, where children could be present. It also bans the advertising of sex for sale. Despite the tepid level of support evident in the Angus Reid poll, Canadians generally support many of the specifics in the new bill. Specifically, 89 per cent of respondents supported the prohibition of prostitution in public areas. A total of 51 per cent of respondents said selling sex should be legal, while 45 per cent said buying sex should be legal. But beyond the questions of legality, wording and all the political games played on the topic, there is an underlying question of morality. Is it right to for men or women to sell their bodies to make a living? Is it wrong for government officials to dictate how and where and when that can happen? Is prostitution something Canadians can justify? The Angus Reid poll found that more Canadians were willing to legalize the buying and selling of sex than those who felt the actions were morally justified. In total, 21 per cent of respondents said selling sex can "always be justified." A slightly lower percentage felt buying sex was justifiable, with 17 per cent saying it was morally justifiable. In short, while half of Canadians think the government should allow the sale of sex, only about one-fifth consider the act above moral reproach. And while 45 per cent say buying sex should be legal, just 17 per cent say it is morally justified. It should be noted that there is a fairly steep gender divide on the question of morality; men were twice as likely to offer moral support to the buying and selling of sex, 27 per cent of men and 15 per cent of women said selling sex was always justifiable, and 23 per cent of men and 12 per cent of women say buying sex is always justifiable. That disparity between what people believe should be legal and what people see as moral is perhaps the target the government's new bill is trying to hit. MacKay, after all, went out of his way to describe johns as "perverts" when announcing the new measures, and blithely stated the government wasn't forcing anyone to sell their bodies, when asked about the dangers these new measure would place in front of prostitutes. With a bill intending to create a legal framework for Canada, the government has managed to implement its moral stance. But average Canadians seem to understand thereâ??s a difference between what they would do and what should be legal. [CENTER][I][I]Want to know what news is brewing in Canada? Follow [URL="https://twitter.com/MRCoutts"]@MRCoutts [/URL]on Twitter.[/I][/I][/CENTER]

Indeed... First They Came .... poem by Martin Niemöller "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." -- by Martin Niemöller, prominent German anti-Nazi theologian and Lutheran pastor, best known as the author of the poem First they came.... Point being, regardless of whether the general public advocate for prostitution, perhaps they will become staunch advocates for our rights and freedoms governed and provided for by our Charter, which are slowly but surely being eroded by this government. Moreover, the push toward the loosening of privacy laws now underway will play right into the hands of the Conservatives, giving LE new and sweeping powers to spy on our activities online and elsewhere, which may ultimately be used against us.

Hypothetically speaking of course, assuming some form of Bill C-36 is eventually passed into law, and it is successfully challenged, what would be the likely outcome? That is to say, if the SCC were to rule it unconstitutional, would the government of the day have no choice but to create fair and equitable laws? e.g.(essentially decriminalizing the industry) or, could the government find a way to keep the purchase of sex illegal?