During my recent accident and subsequent recovery, I was out of the pulpit for about a month (which seems remarkably short, now that I think about it). During that time we had several speakers come in and do pulpit supply, one of whom was Julie Waters, from Free the Captives, an anti-human trafficking organization here in Houston. Now I wasn’t there, but what I heard about the talk was that it was dynamite.

From a Scriptural basis and position, she presented an appeal to combating trafficking and slavery in our city (the Grand Central of trafficking in the States) – by holding THE BUYERS responsible – in other words, prosecuting the Johns. She presented some research from cities around the world showing how public exposure and jail time is one of the most effective deterrents to buying sex, thus reducing the demand.

Two thoughts:

The deepest depravity of the human heart is something that can’t be reformed by legislation – yet it can be curbed. Shame, fear of getting caught – breaking the law – these are effective deterrents. This is no moralizing, pontificating prohibition or censorship movement; rather it is naming a crime for what it is – a fundamental breach of human rights and mass victimization. Yet despite this the victimized are consistently the ones who are punished. And that leads to the second thought.

Regardless of how we view sex workers, they are often not in the seat of power, but of weakness. Whether willing or unwilling participants in the act, by virtue of their exposure and vulnerability they are victims. It is NOT sexual liberation:

Despite attempts to repackage pornography as essentially harmless “adult entertainment,” the truth remains: pornography hurts women, children, and men. It exploits those involved in making it, whether their participation is voluntary or coerced. [ECC 2007 Resolution on pornography]

Then why do we continue to prosecute the victims?

Which leads to why I write this post.

Julie encouraged my congregation to participate in a letter writing campaign to the mayor, Sheriff’s office, chief of police, and District Attorney (see: “Reducing the Demand” Campaign). I’m not sure how many officially did so, but we did. We added our voice to those requesting legislation and greater action towards the demand side. To which we recently received this response from the mayor’s office:

It is not completely obvious to me how focusing on the landlords renting space to traffickers is a solution. There are thousands of landlords, thousands of options. Perhaps it is the threat of prosecution of incriminating activities on premises? Yet somehow I am skeptical that this will get results, strike at the heart of the problem, see measurable progress in years to come. How will it be enforced? Stiffer fines on landlords? Could it then potentially lead to graft and corruption? Close your eyes here, ignore a little there?