So, how do we “distinguish” between “acceptable” vices and “unacceptable” ones?

Question by John Doe 1st: So, how do we “distinguish” between “acceptable” vices and “unacceptable” ones?
Continuing from my previous question about gambling, I really have no personal problem with it, I was just asking if it was the most “moral” kind of revenue. I was asking YOU.

Now, if gambling is okee-dokee, how is it that we cannot bring ourselves to legalize cannabis or prostitution?

We have laws controlling every other kind of adult “entertainment.”

Most policymakers in the Netherlands believe that if a problem has proved to be unsolvable, it is better to try controlling it instead of continuing to enforce laws with mixed results.

Users are not prosecuted for possession of small quantities of soft drugs (“for personal use”). but driving under the influence is nevertheless prohibited, as is being under the influence in public, mainly from a public nuisance perspective.

The Dutch drug policy is based on the general principle of self-determination in matters of the body. Specifically, that it is not illegal to hurt yourself.
Prostitution is defined as a legal profession; prostitutes have access to the social security system, may join unions, have to pay income tax and are treated like any other self-employed tradesperson.

Brothels are licensed legal businesses which are allowed to advertise. Pimping and trafficking in human beings is illegal.

Life is pretty good in the Netherlands, and the country is not going to Hell in a handbasket.

So, what’s our Puritanical problem with human vice? Where do we draw the line and why?
But Ruth, some of your own con-patriots will claim that gambling ushers in both prostitution and drugs. What do you say to that?

Best answer:

What do you think? Answer below!