Should the government regulate the sexual activity of consenting adults?
Some individuals believe that the government does not have the right to prohibit behavior deemed unethical or deviant by societal standards. While other believe, that the purpose of government is to make laws to protect the innocent and punish the guilty, thereby placing norms upon it’s citizens. It’s important to note, that what seems abnormal and immoral to one person, may be perfectly ethical to another person, and trying to categorize individuals based on their sexuality is almost impossible.
In my opinion the government should not regulate the sexual activity of consenting adults. It’s not the governments responsibility to regulate the private affairs of consenting adults. Trying to do so places a burden upon the courts and criminal justice system of the United States. Trying to control a consensual activity would take valuable resources away from police, like time and money, which otherwise are better suited for other purposes like preventing violent crimes such as murder and rape.
A victimless crime also known as a consensual crime, is any illegal activity in which adults choose to participate in, that does not harm other nonconsenting individuals (McWilliams, 1996). Prostitution and illegal gambling are usually considered victimless crimes. My personal beliefs about such topics as prostitution or homosexuality are irrelevant in determining whether these acts should be legal in society. I strongly feel that it’s not the government’s job or my job to protect someone from themselves. The underlying issue is, does a person capable of rational thought and aware of the possible risks associated with his/her behavior have the right to make personal decisions without government involvement.
Another problem with government regulation of sexual activity is the issue of enforcement. Regulating the activity of adult individuals, while ...