re: Florida teacher, Disney employees among 219 arrested in human trafficking operation

quote:

---

The majority of human trafficking (in the world, for the dullards who don't understand context), is labor traffkcing nowhere near the US.

---

A headline from earlier this week:

quote:

---

I hope that you, as a stated libertarian, understand the game going on here and the push towards state expansion.

---

Since adolescence is a spectrum and the ability for a minor to consent is thus on a continuum, protecting children from exploitation seems to me to be one of the few legitimate functions of the state.

quote:

---

Since adolescence is a spectrum and the ability for a minor to consent is thus on a continuum, protecting children from exploitation seems to me to be one of the few legitimate functions of the state.

---

Why are you bringing up minors?

This is about human trafficking in totality. OP has nothing to do with minors. This discussion isn't about trafficking of children.

The OP is a great example of how the state is manipulating terms (like Leftists) to create an emotional reaction to justify increased state intervention. What was once prostitution, an agreement among consenting adults, is now "human trafficking", to increase pearl clutching.

You, and others in this thread, are actually displaying the emotional-irrational reaction, by bringing up child trafficking, when it has nothing to do with OP (or, by reference, this discussion in this thread). You've been manipulated to react emotionally to internationally obfuscated terms.

The War on Sex Trafficking Is the New War on Drugs

quote:

---

Forcing others into sex or any sort of labor is abhorrent, and it deserves to be treated like the serious violation it is. But the activity now targeted under anti-trafficking efforts includes everything from offering or soliciting paid sex, to living with a sex worker, to running a classified advertising website.

What's more, these new laws aren't organic responses by legislators in the face of an uptick in human trafficking activity or inadequate current statutes. They are in large part the result of a decades-long anti-prostitution crusade from Christian "abolitionists" and anti-sex feminists, pushed along by officials who know a good political opportunity when they see it and by media that never met a moral panic they didn't like.

The fire is fueled by federal money, which sends police departments and activist groups into a grant-grubbing frenzy. The anti-trafficking movement is "just one big federal grant program," Michael Hudson, a scholar with the conservative Hudson Institute, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. "Everybody is more worried about where they're going to get their next grant" than helping victims, Hudson said.

Because of the visceral feelings that the issue of paid sex has always provoked, it's easy for overstatements and false statistics to go unchallenged, winning repetition in congressional hearings and the press. Yet despite all the dire proclamations, there's little evidence of anything approaching an "epidemic" of sexual slavery.

---

quote:

---

Expanding police/prosecutorial power to fight and profit from trafficking is also common. At least 21 states now allow police to use wiretapping in trafficking investigations. And many states allow asset forfeiture for those convicted of sex trafficking or prostitution. For instance, in Colorado, "every building or part of a building including the ground upon which it is situated and all fixtures and contents thereof, every vehicle, and any real property" are up for grabs if they've been used in conjunction with prostitution of any kind.

---

There are two hills that SFP is willing to die on. One is defending Sex traffickers. The other is defending Satanists. Very strange.

I predicted early on this would be a 20 page thread, with 17 of them being SFP’s replies. I bet this thread still has legs.

quote:

---

One is defending Sex traffickers.

---

A lie.

quote:

---

The other is defending Satanists.

---

No I call them atheist edge lords pretty often. I'm talking about COS/TST Satanists, not fantasy characters, though.

If you're talking about fantasy characters, then I can't defend them because they don't exist. That would be like saying I am an avid defender of elves or dwarves.

quote:

---

I do like your open racism, though

---

haha smartest guy in the room doesnt know the difference between racism and stereotyping…

quote:

---

haha smartest guy in the room doesnt know the difference between racism and stereotyping…

---

Harboring ill will towards a race due to stereotypes is literally (non-Leftist) racism. While he relied on a stereotype, the usage was for racist commentary (making human trafficking a problem caused by black people).

quote:

---

Someone took up the defense of human trafficking

This is a lie.

Nobody did any such thing.

---

so... boredom it is.

quote:

---

dwarves

---

I believe they prefer to be called little people. I think they find the terms midget and dwarf to be derogatory.

quote:

---

the majority are runaway teens who have no other economic avenue. It's not the same thing for a 6 year old Central American child to be brought here specifically for rape and a 17 year old to rely on sex work as a runaway.

---

So freaking what? Sexual trafficking is sexual trafficking.

A 15 year old girl working in the illicit sex industry is not some entrepreneurial minded and empowered young woman living out some Hollywood “Pretty Woman” fantasy like Julia Roberts. That girl is being exploited by a pimp.

quote:

---

Because you said above human trafficking is not happening in this country.

---

No I didn't

And this is a thread about adults entering into agreements with each other for sex. Now, we can debate how consentual those agreements are, but minors and child sex trafficking has only been injected by you and a few others (who also are incorrectly stating my positions). Again, why?

quote:

---

Minors being exploited by human traffickers is a recurring problem in this country.

---

Sure. Nobody is disagreeing with that, and that statement has nothing to do with OP. Why are you forcing that into this discussion?