聽神談【關於「性表達」、「道德」與「賣淫」】
關於規範人類性表達(sexual expression)方面的律法，據我的觀察，並不會有益於人類。
尼爾：喔，反正它們全被破壞了。
一點都沒錯。
尼爾：所以他們所做的一切，只是在我們的性行為周圍，創造出更多的憤怒、羞恥、內疚，與「遮掩」的情緒。
這是真實的。
尼爾：然而，總該制訂一些法律，比如防範強姦的法律。
那並非一種防範「性表達」的法律，那是個防範「攻擊」的法律。任何一種攻擊───攻擊的定義是：一個人對另一個人未經准許或不想要的身體上的接觸───都是犯法的。人類已經同意這些。
尼爾：那麼那些歧視性偏好者的禁令呢？還有所謂的仇恨罪行(Hate Crime)───一種針對基於個人的種族、性別、國籍或性生活方式，而犯下的攻擊行為的額外懲罰───的立法，又如何呢？
那些也不是禁止或管制「性表達」的法律。我對這些中的任何一項，都不會有評斷。關於這些，人類必須為自己做決定。
尼爾： 我想，美國最後一項禁止性愛表達方式的律法，就是反對所謂雞姦的法律。這部法律在2003年夏天，最終被美國最高法院駁回。發生在兩個成人都同意的私密行為，我不覺得是法律、法院或司法審判系統之任何面向有權干涉預的範圍───而最高法院顯然同意。不過，許多人仍在怒吼。
是的。這又回到我們先前的話題：許多人希望根據宗教價值來訂定民事法(civil law)。然而，去探索「在沒有民事損害的情形下，不該創立或執行民事法規」(where there is no civil damage, no civil law should be created or enforced)的思維，可以有益於人類。
尼爾：包括禁止賣淫的民事法嗎？
在許多地方，賣淫是合法的。
尼爾：是的，我知道。在比利時、德國、荷蘭及瑞士，它是開放經營的業務，還設有堂而皇之光鮮的店面。事實上，它就只是為了性服務所做的金錢交易，在世界上大多數國家是合法的。不過，美國卻不然───但很奇怪，在內華達州大多數的郡裡是合法的。
那麼，從道德上或從地理位置上來看，賣淫的爭議是什麼？
摘自《走出靈性文盲》第7章
Laws about human sexual expression are not observed to be beneficial to humanity.
Neale: Well, they are all broken anyway.
Exactly.
Neale: So all they do is create more anger, shame, guilt, and "hiding out" around our sexual behavior.
That's what is true.
Neale: Yet surely there should be some laws, such as the law against rape.
That is not a law against sexual expression, that is a law against assault. Assault of any kind—defined as the unwarranted and unwanted physical advance of one person upon another—is against the law. Humanity has agreed upon that.
Neale: What about laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual preference? Or what about so-called Hate Crime legislation, which imposes additional penalties if an act of aggression is committed because of a person's race, gender, sexual life- style, or nationality?
Those, too, are not laws prohibiting or regulating sexual expression. I have no judgment on any of them. Humanity has to decide for itself about them.
Neale: I think that the last law actually prohibiting an actual form of sexual expression in the United States was a law against what had been labeled sodomy, and that law was finally struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the summer of 2003. I do not feel that the private sexual behavior of two consenting adults is the appropriate purview of the law, the courts, or any facet of the criminal justice system—and the Supreme Court apparently agrees. Still, many people howled.
Yes. This gets back to the discussion we had earlier about many people wanting civil law to be based on religious values. It may benefit humanity to explore the thought that where there is no civil damage, no civil law should be created or enforced.
Neale: Does that include the law against prostitution?
In many places, prostitution is legal.
Neale: Yes, I know. In Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, it is openly practiced as a business, complete with storefronts. And in fact the simple act of exchanging money for sexual services is legal in most countries of the world. It is not legal in the United States—except in most Nevada counties, where, strangely, it is.
So what, then, is the issue with prostitution, morality or geography?
