I am going to write a long answer for this. Let’s examine some analogy first:
Say you are farmers of mangos. Say there are those willing to pay a lot for those mangos.
You have several options
1. You can give the mangos away for free.
2. You can let your mangos rots.
3. You can sell your mangos to “small buyers” with great discount for those least able to pay for it.
4. You can max out your profit by selling it at market price?
As usual there are 2 parts. There is the ideal part and there is a damage reduction compromise. For the former I am all in. For the latter, just come up with better idea than mine then, anything that works.
1. Government must not interfere at all in consensual sex and reproduction. Every sex and reproductive acts between consenting adult should be legal whether it’s commercialized or not. Marriage should not get any favorable treatment compared to prostitution. It’s not up to government to decide which one is which (which is very confusing even for most philosophers anyway).
I must be missing something. Through all ages, most philosophy, especially those that answer ethics, allow and encourage cruel acts against other human being. It’s the norm. It’s not the exception.
We like to believe that it’s only done on exceptional cases. Still, those exception is more of a norm than exception.
In fact, libertarianism is the only school of ethics that do not justify cruelty, at least not consensually, nor encourage cruelty to others. Exceptions are arguable like in cases of shooting burglars slowly to death. But the burglars ask for it so it’s like consensual right? Okay just kidding but you got the point.