[ndigila]

Now, as a freethinker, I do not think that prostitution should be illegal under the law! So prostitutes should be allowed to do their thing with willing customers, and even remit taxes from their incomes to the IRS. But as much as I am for prostitution being legal, if I had an adult sister who decided to be a prostitute, I definitely would condemn her choice of career, and I would have rational logical reasons for condemning it e.g. risk of disease, death through violent customers, unwanted pregnancy, tarnishing of reputation, risk of jail, etc. I would also understand if she was looked down upon by people, fired from her day job for projecting a bad image on her company, and ostracized by her friends. But under no circumstance should the law be allowed to arrest her, jail her and fine her. No way. Same way I can be a none-drinker, but I wouldn't want alcohola prohibited in my country because of that. Ama I can be a Muslim who doesn't eat pork, but I wouldn't want the country to ban all sales of pork products.

Compare my logical approach to that issue, then compare it to that of a Christian whose primary reason for condemning prostitution or eating pork is because god is against fornication and eating of swine!

ATLian, tafadhali re-read your post. You've given logical (by your own admission) reasons to condemn prostitution, and the only argument you have for prostitution is 'prostitutes have a right to do anything.' If you honestly weigh out the pros and cons of prostitution (using your post above), do you still think there's rational and logical reasons to support it?

The burden of proof is always on the person claiming the truth. If I say that there are 7-legged pygmies who speak Portugese and live in the Nandi Hills, the burden of proof to bring that evidence is 100% upon me. I cannot claim that, then you naturally say you don't believe me, then I expect you to provide me evidence that those pygmies do not exist! Ditto with god. You cannot blame atheists for not believing in god, and you cannot then tell atheists to prove that god doesn't exist.

The existence of the supernatural (by definition) cannot be scientifically proved or disproved. But since it plays such an important part in human history, it's an issue that cannot be ignored. So there's 2 ways of approaching this problem:
1) Insist that until there's scientific evidence (which there''ll never be) there's no reason to believe in a supernatural being
2) Use a philosophical argument (which would require the so-called "free thinkers" to step out of their comfort zone of naturalism)