Guy hires a prostitute, gets into a dispute about payments after services are rendered, gets in a fight. Happens all the time. It's the main reasons pimps exist.
Let's talk about this as if it weren't sex or a crime. Secret Service guy buys something, has a dispute about the price, gets in a fight. Not the best behavior but not the worst. His boss probably gives him a warning to act more professional and that's it.
So, why do we get so upset about this? It's not the argument, although that does adds to the spice.
My personal experience with sex workers - strippers at bachelor parties - is that they tend to cheat. Well, actually their managers tend to cheat. They promise you two hour of service, then show up an hour late and insist on the full price for two hours of service. What, you gonna do without strippers at the bachelor party? What, your gonna call the cops? Either way the party is ruined. That may just be a bachelor party thing, but it happens. Maybe prostitutes are more ethical, I don't know.
No one really knows what happened with the Secret Service agents. Maybe they were cheap SOB's that didn't pay what they promised to pay. Maybe they were being ripped off. The Secret Service guys aren't talking so we get just one side of the story.
I don't think the argument about pay is the issue. From what I have heard, no one else does. People aren't upset that he didn't pay, though it does add some spice.
Well, lets start out with the is it a crime aspect. Guess what, prostitution is not a crime everywhere. There are places in Nevada and Europe where it is legal. It's the same in Columbia. They are called 'designated tolerance' zones in Colombia. Prostitution is legal there, just like certain parts of Nevada. The Secret Service agents were in one of those areas. They did not break the law. Nor were they married. They didn't even break an oath to their wives.
They did however violate Secret Service policy - as the agency has a policy against prostitution. Frankly, that's not that big a deal. I know that some people steal office supplies, surely stealing from a company is worse than disobeying a policy about behavior outside the office? How you feel if your boss tried to tell you who can have sex with?
Frankly, the policy says something worse about the government, than it does about the men. Was what these men did really did so bad? They disobeyed a rule - a rather crazy rule - of their boss, not a law.
So it's not the argument, not the crime, and honestly not the disobedience that get's people upset and all worked up.
It's the sex. There are people in this world that still think sex is evil. I am not one of them, but they do exist. They do recognize that sex is necessary, but they want the power to say which kinds of sex are OK. Usually they are religious and following their bible, (which makes this religious persecution) but not all the time. The core of this issue is not religion, but POWER. They want to tell other people what sex is allowed and what is not allowed. I say, no, you don't get that power. Not over me, not over your employees, and not over government agents.
We need to get the government out of our sex life. That includes the government telling their employees what to do. It especially needs to get out of the sex lives of people on their own time in a foreign country.
How would you feel if your boss fired you because they find out that you did something legal in another country? Because he didn't like it? He has no business knowing about it.
Did these guys exercise poor judgement? Yes. He should have realized that while what he was doing was legal, that in his job he is expected to do more than just be legal, but to also to stay away from scandal.
Frankly, if they were private security, it would be no big deal. This shows more about the still prudish nature of politics than anything else.