On Consent

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Whether one is given consent is not a licence to do wrong.
The civil law gives consent to murder babies.
Doesn't mean it's OK to go ahead and murder babies just because you have consent to do so.

Same for encouragement.
Whether another encourages you to do wrong, the responsibility to give in or resist is still upon you.

Neither consent or encouragement is an excuse for anyone to do wrong.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Whether one is given consent is not a licence to do wrong.
The civil law gives consent to murder babies.
Doesn't mean it's OK to go ahead and murder babies just because you have consent to do so.

Same for encouragement.
Whether another encourages you to do wrong, the responsibility to give in or resist is still upon you.

Neither consent or encouragement is an excuse for anyone to do wrong.



yes, i figured we'd come to this

there's a reason i dint post this in the ECT forum, tam

obviously, what these dopey kids are doing is wrong


my interest is in the legal application of consent
 

PureX

Well-known member
How much responsibility do easily bedded women share for the reputations of pick up artists?
And why should anyone care either way? If we weren't obsessed with the sexual habits of others, such silly questions wouldn't even be posed.

We humans make very bad decisions when we're inebriated. And we all know this. Which is why we should not take advantage of each other when in such a state, regardless of perceived assent. Wise, intelligent, and mature men don't have sex with inebriated women, because they understand this. College boys are not wise, intelligent, or mature, and so sadly they must be held to account when they behave badly, or they will never learn to become wise, intelligent, and mature men.

Instead, they'll end up like many of the overgrown male infants we see posting, here.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Whether one is given consent is not a licence to do wrong.
The civil law gives consent to murder babies.
Doesn't mean it's OK to go ahead and murder babies just because you have consent to do so.

Same for encouragement.
Whether another encourages you to do wrong, the responsibility to give in or resist is still upon you.

Neither consent or encouragement is an excuse for anyone to do wrong.
Excellent comment! It's not the place of the law to make us be 'good people'. That's our own responsibility. The law's purpose is simply to protect us from each other while allowing us the freedom to mind our own morality.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
my interest is in the legal application of consent
If you are only interested in the civil law about it (for this particular argument, not that it is the only thing that concerns you), then take the same approach for homos, abortion, adultery.
All have legal consent per the civil law.
According to civil law, none have committed a wrongdoing and none should be punished for it.

It is also permissible to revoke consent.
A woman can consent to having sex with a stranger, and can revoke that consent at any time she feels uncomfortable due to the fact that she realizes the stranger's intentions went beyond what her intentions were.
The extent of his arousal makes no difference as to whether she has to go through with or not.
The decision is entirely hers to continue or not.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
If you are only interested in the civil law about it

yes, i am
tam said:
(for this particular argument, not that it is the only thing that concerns you)

lots of things concern me, tam, including your bizarre behavior


tam said:
, then take the same approach for homos, abortion, adultery.

nope

if you want to, start another thread


my interest is on the current application of law when it comes to consent and inebriation
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
It doesn't any more than it respects any decisions made while not inebriated.

looks like you're having difficulty following along

in the case of consent while inebriated, the law (as currently written) appears to be that consent cannot be given while inebriated

denial of consent (aka consenting to refusal) is ok


my interest is in discussion the disparity


it occurred to me earlier, as i was walking across campus to get a coffee, that this is a case of the state infantilizing women, by removing from their control aspects of their sexuality, in certain conditions


If the state can remove your right to make certain specific choices (the choice to consent) while inebriated then is it just/logical/reasonable that the state holds one responsible for other choices made while inebriated (for example, driving drunk)?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Not if she's still buzzed from the bottle or two of wine she had before "other things."


so it's ok for her to continue forcing her unwanted attentions on me if she's drunk


is it ok for me to continue forcing unwanted attention on her if i'm drunk?
 
Top