They argued prostitution is a constitutional right. Nice try, said federal court.

This one particular comment by this incredibly dumb-ass judge just stuns me:  

 

“There is no constitutional rights to engage in illegal employment, namely, prostitution,”

Judge Jane A. Restani wrote for the three-judge panel.

 

Its "illegal" because courts ruled it "illegal". Would she have the same opinion if it were at a time when it was "illegal" for women to work outside the home, to be nurses, teachers or...."judges"?

 

The irony here is painful, and that she doesn't get it, makes me think this is one particular female judge who should be...at home, barefoot and pregnant. This is some Saudi Arabia type of nonsense. You can't do it because its illegal, because we say its illegal, because it offends our religious "values", and even if you don't adhere to our religious ideology, its still illegal because we have deemed it to be....illegal. If your "Constitutional rights" don't cover what you want to do with your own body...what the fuck good are they?   :)