Would you allow this paladin in your game? (new fiction added 11/11/08)

[genshou]

Oh, since I haven't answered the original question:

No.
I don't care how you wheedle and try to rationalize it, or put up strawman arguments about cultural bias. Prostitution is wrong as far as I'll ever be concerned.

Let's look at some of the rationalizations I've seen.
1) Some prostitution rings are... er, something gumdrop-related. Can't remember the exact term.

Well, I can understand this, to some extent. Slavery is an evil thing, but bondage is something some couples freely choose to explore in their consentual sexual relations. Does that make BDSM evil? Certainly not, not in any sense of the word. So, I'll give you that one. However, how many of these institutions TRULY exist? There might be a fairly "civilized" prostitution ring, but the fact is that those in it aren't all going to be idyllic. The majority of them will still be in prostitution simply because they are desperate for cash.

2) There is no support in the RAW for prohibition of paladins being Johns.

This one is subject to interpretation, and I'm with The Sigil. It can be argued either way ad infinitum, but my view goes beyond the RAW and into the concept of moral objectivity. As if RAW matters to a tinkerer like me.

3) Prostitution is not evil because objectifying women is no less wrong than objectifying a dancer.

What percentage of dancers entered the career because they had no other choice besides selling drugs or other criminal activities? What percentage of prostitutes entered the career because they believe it to be an enjoyable career which allows them to express themselves artistically?

4) Prostitution is actually good for society, because it allows for the destitute to have a source of income and/or allows for people to ease off their sexual frustration.

There are plenty of other ways for the destitute to make money. The only reason we have 'destitute' in the first place is because a free market allows few to be wealthy at the expense of everyone else. There wouldn't be a financial need for prostitution in a socialism or communism, ergo that argument is not applicable except in certain circumstances. As to the idea that it allows for sexual mores to be let out in a constructive manner, let me toss out a wrench. What if legalized prostitution, instead of making a safe outlet for such aberrant behavior, acts as a positive reinforcement for it? Discuss.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still alive after all this time

Good job, shilsen

 

[genshou]

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still alive after all this time

Good job, shilsen

Not too much longer, and it'll have a birthday!

 

[shilsen]

Yes, I think Shilsen wants to have Cedric pimp slap my paladin, who believes in the goodness of everyone and has hope in those who show no signs of hope.

Nope - just give him an idea of a teensy-weensy different perspective

Not too much longer, and it'll have a birthday!

By George, you're right!

 

[Furby076]

If I may respond.

First, it is your opinion you are speaking of, and the "strawman" argument doesn't qualify here. Many many countries legalized prostitution and I am not talking about forced/slave prostitution. Not to mention, our own country allow prostitution on wholesale until the 20th century. Now it is governed on a state level.

1) I am not folloing the first sentence at all.
Nobody said prostitution was idyllic. It isn't a halo profession. Not many women want to have sex with random, strange men who might be disgusting. That doesn't mean every prostitute is doing this job because she is a slave. There are many women who choose to do this on their own, and in the course of a short night make thousands of dollars - if not more (some of the higher ends make anywhere from 10-50k/night).

2)When we are talking RAW we are talking Rules as Written, not Rules as Interpreted. Where in the RAW does it flat out say "Prostitution is wrong" or some such words. In fact, the only topic it came close to brooch is with regards to drugs. Defenders of the Faith, page 9, "The Code and the DM" sidebar says paladins should do things in moderation - EVEN substances that alter perceptions aka DRUGS! The RAW says a paladin can do drugs!

That is fine if you don't care about the RAW, but you cited the RAW a number of times so it must matter somewhat. As for your views of morality...well a d100 does have enough facets to cover the full spectrum of people's morality. You may consider prostitution evil - but not everyone does...in fact, i'd wager the majority of the world disagrees with you.

3) You don't know why each and every woman decided to become a prostitute. Maybe one specific girl is dumb as doornails and realizes that is the only way she will make good money. Maybe another girl wants to have sex with many men and get the benefit of pay. Maybe another is paying her way through college. Maybe another wants to make 25k/night. Then there are those who are looking to live on the streets because they can't find a job - but nobody forced them to be prostitutes. There are MANY homeless men/women who are not prostitutes. There are many homeless people who got off the streets without resorting to crime. You cannot generalize for every prostitute.

4) As far as destitute - I disagree with you, and I disagree with the person who said "destitute" and relating it to prostitution as if to be a prositute you have to be destitute. Again, we cannot speak for each and every woman - but I am pretty sure the girl making 25k/night (for ONE guy) is not destitute...in fact, she is going to retire after one year's worth of work -we are going to be working for the next 30-40!

Prostitution is all about opinions. Your morals may say it is wrong - and that is fine. Don't tell me however that prostitution is wrong and evil because I frankly don't buy it. Don't come to me and say "yea but these girls are slaves" because not all prositutes are slaves (or indentured servants, etc) - some - MANY - do it on their own free will and can leave whenever they want. And as for the game rules...find me a pssage in WoTC's books that say prostitution is evil and then my paladin will start smiting the hookers in Sharn.

Oh, since I haven't answered the original question:

No.
I don't care how you wheedle and try to rationalize it, or put up strawman arguments about cultural bias. Prostitution is wrong as far as I'll ever be concerned.

Let's look at some of the rationalizations I've seen.
1) Some prostitution rings are... er, something gumdrop-related. Can't remember the exact term.

Well, I can understand this, to some extent. Slavery is an evil thing, but bondage is something some couples freely choose to explore in their consentual sexual relations. Does that make BDSM evil? Certainly not, not in any sense of the word. So, I'll give you that one. However, how many of these institutions TRULY exist? There might be a fairly "civilized" prostitution ring, but the fact is that those in it aren't all going to be idyllic. The majority of them will still be in prostitution simply because they are desperate for cash.

2) There is no support in the RAW for prohibition of paladins being Johns.

This one is subject to interpretation, and I'm with The Sigil. It can be argued either way ad infinitum, but my view goes beyond the RAW and into the concept of moral objectivity. As if RAW matters to a tinkerer like me.

3) Prostitution is not evil because objectifying women is no less wrong than objectifying a dancer.

What percentage of dancers entered the career because they had no other choice besides selling drugs or other criminal activities? What percentage of prostitutes entered the career because they believe it to be an enjoyable career which allows them to express themselves artistically?

4) Prostitution is actually good for society, because it allows for the destitute to have a source of income and/or allows for people to ease off their sexual frustration.

There are plenty of other ways for the destitute to make money. The only reason we have 'destitute' in the first place is because a free market allows few to be wealthy at the expense of everyone else. There wouldn't be a financial need for prostitution in a socialism or communism, ergo that argument is not applicable except in certain circumstances. As to the idea that it allows for sexual mores to be let out in a constructive manner, let me toss out a wrench. What if legalized prostitution, instead of making a safe outlet for such aberrant behavior, acts as a positive reinforcement for it? Discuss.

 

[laughingbuhda]

I wouldn't go expecting anything till the winter break. By which time this thread will have surfaced three or four more times, I'm sure

Is it winter break yet?

as an aside to the actual thread, would there be any objection to pulling out the story of Cedric and having it as it's own thread in it's entirety? It's an excellent story on it's own.

 

[Furby076]

Is it winter break yet?

as an aside to the actual thread, would there be any objection to pulling out the story of Cedric and having it as it's own thread in it's entirety? It's an excellent story on it's own.

It would make it easier to find the stories. leave this threadfor the debate, but have the other thread for the story alone. And the usual bumps.

 

[shilsen]

Is it winter break yet?

Just a couple more days. I'm technically on break already, since I'm not teaching this semester, but I have the little matter of helping to produce a literary magazine (which, sadly, I'll be doing through the break), helping a colleague wrap up the semester whose dad just died, doing prep work for my Ph.D. prospectus, and trying to make life miserable for my players in the group AviLazar is in.

But I definitely want to do a little more writing on Cedric soon.

as an aside to the actual thread, would there be any objection to pulling out the story of Cedric and having it as it's own thread in it's entirety? It's an excellent story on it's own.

I'd considered doing that, but I don't write enough on it to make it worthwhile, it seems. Maybe at some point instead I should start a story hour using one of my campaigns, as one of my players suggested.

 

[Fighter1]

This is awesome! I love it! Do you mind if someday I use a likeness for one of my characters?

 

[The Sigil]

If I may respond.

2)When we are talking RAW we are talking Rules as Written, not Rules as Interpreted. Where in the RAW does it flat out say "Prostitution is wrong" or some such words.

I'll point you back towards one of my posts earlier in this thread. In a nutshell, the debate can be reduced to a single point:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

The "and so forth" phrase in the rules as written implies that the list of forbidden activities is *exemplary*, not *exhaustive* - i.e., just because a given activity is not specifically written out as forbidden in the rules, that does not automatically make it okay (kind of like if I tell my kids they can't do heroin, cocaine, meth, marijuana, or LSD ... I'm not going to accept as a defense when they come home stoned on PCP that PCP happened not to be on my forbidden list so I obviously intended for them to use it - my intent was obvious in proscribing drugs entirely, and they're just trying to loophole their way out of it).

Note that The Rules As Written themselves require the paladin's code to be played as the Rules As Interpreted! Unless you would like to suggest that the phrase "and so forth" should be read as not adding any activities to the list of those specifically prohibited.

And of course, once you get started on creating that list, it becomes a matter of philosophical interpretation, whether you like it or not.

If we truly wish to nitpick and slavishly bind ourselves to RAW, without concern of interpretation...

“Evil” implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

Hurting, oppressing and killing others is Evil. A paladin is forbidden to commit an evil act. Therefore, the moment a paladin hurts another creature - does one hit point of damage to any creature any time, anywhere, ever - he automatically loses his paladinhood. Except, of course, when they use their "Smite Evil" ability, because that is specifically allowed by the rules... so a paladin can attack once or twice a day (or a few times a day at high levels). Sure hope he hits on that attack!

Do you believe in this view of the paladin? A holy warrior who is forbidden to unsheath his sword except to attempt to Sunder weapons and fight defensively the entire time, never able to actually attack? It's based on a strict reading of the rules as written!

Of course not... you INTERPRET the rules to allow a paladin to attack - and destroy - the agents of evil. But that's not what the Rules as Written allow, is it?

2)When we are talking RAW we are talking Rules as Written, not Rules as Interpreted. Where in the RAW does it flat out say "Prostitution is wrong" or some such words. In fact, the only topic it came close to brooch is with regards to drugs. Defenders of the Faith, page 9, "The Code and the DM" sidebar says paladins should do things in moderation - EVEN substances that alter perceptions aka DRUGS! The RAW says a paladin can do drugs!

As I mentioned before, the Rules As Written themselves require (by the phrase "and so forth") that the paladin code contain AT LEAST one more item on the "forbidden list" and possibly more... and determining the remainder of that list can only be done by Interpretation, so the Rules as Written ARE the Rules as Interpreted.

In addition, Defenders of the Faith is not a core book (which, IIRC, was the stipulation at the start of the thread). But it brings up an interesting question... I don't have a copy of the Book of Vile Darkness, but I seem to remember on my brief pass through it that it mentioned certain activities (torture, murder, mutilation, etc.) as "Evil" as defined by D&D. Would someone who has a copy of the book care to check to see if "prostitution" or "visiting prostitutes" or "fornication" or "adultery" or some other activity that could directly be applied to Cedric's brothel visits is on that list?

(Takes off devil's advocate hat).

--The Sigil