I think Jonah and I are pretty close on this Spitzer thing, as I now understand it. Jonah also writes: “But I think Mark would agree with me that this is not an absolutist position. There have been plenty of laws that have reflected culture and tradition which have, with the illumination of reason and conscience, proven to be unwise, unconstitutional or unjust.” Jonah is right about change, and hence all the scholarship out there on prudential change. And in this case, I would argue that prudence informs us that prostitution is detrimental to individuals and society, and there is no moral or popular justification for it. And although some modern libertarians argue that this is evidence of big government, I would argue Adam Smith was a brilliant proponent of ordered liberty and, yes, a moral order. I don’t think it is at all certain he would have advocated that prostitution should be a protected commercial-based transaction. Anyway, I’ve spent enough time on this topic. Fire away.