The OC Blog Back Issues Our Mission Contact Us Masthead
Sudsy Wants You to Join the Oregon Commentator
 

Ol’ Dirty Watch: Moral Majority Edition

The Ol’ Dirty has a rather interesting editorial up today decrying the Oregon State Supreme Court’s decision to overturn two sex show laws. It isn’t worth my time to address the Editorial Board’s entire opinion, so instead I’ll focus on the last four paragraphs:

Business managers at clubs argue that those involved in sex shows are consenting adults who deserve their rights to free expression. Yet such a viewpoint ignores the slippery slope from nude dancing to prostitution.

Of course there’s a slippery slope from nude dancing to prostitution. But slippery slope arguments don’t hold much weight in my mind, as they can be used to disrepute pretty much any freedom we citizens have. There’s a slippery slope from occasionally drinking alcohol to being an alcoholic, from owning a gun to hunt to owning a gun to kill another person, from using abortion as a means of last resort to using abortion as a regular form of birth control, from driving a car safely to driving a car recklessly. People should have control over their own bodies, even when it means using said bodies for practices the majority finds immoral or disgusting.

In a strip club, dancing on stage garners less money than a lap dance, which garners far less money than a private sex encounter with a John in a motel room. Such monetary earning patterns partially explain how strippers become gradually more comfortable with the idea of prostitution.

And why is that? Because “a private sex encounter” is illegal and thus scarcer. This illegal encounter is far more dangerous for both parties than a legalized and controlled encounter would be. (And, of course, more profitable for the middleman pimps.)

As long as prostitution remains morally objectionable in Oregon, the legality of live sex shows should not be validated by the court. The Oregon Legislature should address this issue by crafting laws that specifically prohibit the exchange of sex for money.

Another worthless, hypocritical argument. Homosexual marriage remains morally objectionable to most Oregonians, if the last ballot measure is any indication. Does that mean it should continue to be illegal? Of course not. Individual rights should trump the right of the moral majority to invade people’s bedrooms and hotel rooms.

The court’s decision to authorize private sex performances is in compliance with neither the values of constitutional framers, nor with the values of most Oregon citizens today.

Since the ODE suddenly values the opinion of the moral majority (and the imagined morals of a bunch of dead politicians) over that of an individual’s rights, one would expect the Editorial Board to soon come out against abortion in red states and assisted suicide and gay marriage nationwide. We’ll see. It’s funny how organizations with no institutional memory change over the years.