First International Conference
... Creating sentient beings to carry out the tasks most of us would prefer not to do,like
caring for the elderly and infirm and providing sexual services, is ethically complex.
While sexbots may spare the humans who are currently carrying out this work, how far
this justifies their being created to do ...
Canada (AG) v Bedford
Canada (AG) v Bedford 2013 SCC 72, [2013] 3 SCR 1101 is a ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada relating to Canada's laws relating to sex work. The applicants, Terri-Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott, argued that Canada's prostitution laws were unconstitutional. The Criminal Code of Canada includes a number of provisions, such as outlawing public communication for the purposes of prostitution, operating a bawdy house or living off of the avails of prostitution, even though prostitution itself is legal.The applicants argued that the laws deprive sex workers of their right to security by forcing them to work secretly. In 2012, the Court of Appeal for Ontario ruled that some, but not all, of these prohibitions violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a 9-0 decision on December 20, 2013 that all of these laws are unconstitutional; although, it delayed the striking down of the laws by one year to allow Parliament to update the laws in accordance with the ruling.The term ""sex work"" is used interchangeably with ""prostitution"" in this article, in accordance with the World Health Organisation (WHO 2001; WHO 2005) and the United Nations (UN 2006; UNAIDS 2002).
