Opinion
Featured Image
 Shutterstock.com

Evil begets more evil. Sin begets more sin. Some people call this the ‘slippery slope’ principle. Theologians agree with this principle. Philosophers agree. And now even anthropologists and sociologists agree. 

Take the issue of prostitution being fiercely debated in Canada right now. The Conservative government has tabled a bill that would criminalize the johns. But some of society’s elites don’t like that, since they believe buying a woman’s body for sex is a legitimate and honest “trade” that needs to be defended.

Take Frances M. Shaver for instance, a professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Montreal’s Concordia University. In her piece appearing in the Globe and Mail yesterday she predicts the proposed bill will fail because “laws should not be about morality.” Never mind that we have laws against murder, stealing, perjury, and a whole host of human behaviors that most people would consider immoral, dishonest, and outright dirty. For Shaver, laws that touch moral issues are reaching way beyond their bounds.

But most problematic in Shaver’s piece is her defense of prostitution using the slippery slope argument.

“In a pluralistic society such as ours we must separate personal moral values and opinions from the legal and policy positions we take. We have accomplished this with legislation governing birth control, abortion, homosexuality, and gay marriage. Why not with sex work?” she wrote.

In her viewpoint, since we have already legalized chemicals that destroy the purpose and meaning of the sexual act within marriage act, legalized the crushing, slicing, and decapitation of unborn children, legalized the practice of a man inserting his male-member into the rear-end of another man and calling it “marriage,” then why not legalize the buying and selling of a woman’s body for men’s sexual pleasure?

Makes perfect sense, right? Only according to the logic of evil.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

It’s noteworthy how Shaver links legalized prostitution right back to the acceptance of the birth control pill. Life-and-family leaders have linked the rise of the pill to the demise of civilization. In fact, Paul VI wrote in 1968 in the Church’s epic teaching on human sexuality, Humanae Vitae, that the pill would eventually cause a “general lowering of moral standards.” But he said something even more startling, namely that men influenced by a contracepting culture would eventually “forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.” Sounds a lot like prostitution, doesn’t it?

Shaver argues for “decriminalization” since she says it “avoids the negative effects of one person or group imposing a moral position on others.”

I truly believe she wrote that with a straight face. Does she honestly think she’s not imposing her own ideas of right and wrong by arguing for prostitution? Of course she is, and she knows it: She ends her piece with: “It is not too late to get it right.”

I agree with Shaver. We have to get this right.

We have to get this right for the sake of my four daughters, all of whom I love dearly and would willingly sacrifice my very life if it meant saving them from a life of prostitution.

We have to get this right for every Canadian girl so that she can grow up knowing she is worth far more, infinitely far more, than a commercial object to be purchased by men for satisfying their own sick and demented sexual lusts. 

We have to get this right for every Canadian woman so she will be respected, honored, cherished, and valued as a person equal in dignity and worth to every other person. 

Yes, we have to get this right. Part of getting this right is telling the good professor of sociology and anthropology that she is absolutely wrong on this one.