Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

On Consent

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    33 years


    can you answer my question?
    Have you had any action lately?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      If you're drunk, too.



      If she's drunk, too.

      There! Answered your questions!


      thank you



      obviously, none of this applies to a Christian marriage


      my interest in consent has to do with the inevitable next wave of social acceptance of perversion, which i suspect will focus on pedophilia

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by patrick jane View Post
        Have you had any action lately?
        i was tarping the boathouse roof in the dark last night to cover some fresh shingles in anticipation of the rain we got overnite

        that was pretty action filled



        and i was inebriated!


        but i dint consent to having sex up there
        Last edited by ok doser; October 29th, 2016, 12:45 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by ok doser View Post
          my interest is in the legal application of consent
          Originally posted by ok doser View Post
          according to civil law, it's not ok to do anything while drunk
          I guess you have your answer.

          /thread

          We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
          They already know monsters exist.
          We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Tambora View Post
            I guess you have your answer.

            /thread
            then why hold responsible drunk drivers?

            or drunk rapists?

            why penalize them for the choices they make while drunk?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by ok doser View Post
              then why hold responsible drunk drivers?

              or drunk rapists?

              why penalize them for the choices they make while drunk?
              Maybe you should pay attention to your own words.

              Originally posted by ok doser View Post
              according to civil law, it's not ok to do anything while drunk

              We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
              They already know monsters exist.
              We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                Maybe you should pay attention to your own words.

                apparently it's ok to deny consent

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                  apparently it's ok to deny consent
                  Not by your words.

                  Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                  according to civil law, it's not ok to do anything while drunk
                  According to your words a drunk can neither consent nor deny consent. Completely neutral and not even in the game.

                  You might try changing your mind about your own words.
                  Mainly because your statement is wrong.
                  There are many things in which civil law is neutral concerning what drunks can do.

                  We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                  They already know monsters exist.
                  We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                    Not by your words.

                    According to your words a drunk can neither consent nor deny consent. Completely neutral and not even in the game.

                    You might try changing your mind about your own words.
                    Mainly because your statement is wrong.
                    There are many things in which civil law is neutral concerning what drunks can do.
                    apparently, it's ok to deny consent

                    and apparently it's not ok to consent (unless you are consenting to denial)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                      apparently, it's ok to deny consent
                      Is that what civil law says?

                      and apparently it's not ok to consent (unless you are consenting to denial)
                      Is that what civil law says?

                      We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                      They already know monsters exist.
                      We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        apparently



                        if only we had someone here who could pretend to be an expert on the law

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                          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)?
                          Here is what civil law says:
                          You do not have consent to drive while drunk, ever.
                          Per civil law, it doesn't matter if you decide to drive while drunk; you never had consent to do so.

                          We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                          They already know monsters exist.
                          We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Tambora View Post
                            Here is what civil law says:
                            You do not have consent to drive while drunk, ever.
                            Per civil law, it doesn't matter if you decide to drive while drunk; you never had consent to do so.
                            and apparently, you do not have consent to have sex while drunk, ever

                            Per civil law, it doesn't matter if you decide to have sex while drunk; you never had consent to do so.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              which means that all those times I had sex with my wife while i was drunk, she was raping me

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                                and apparently, you do not have consent to have sex while drunk, ever
                                Civil law does not say that.

                                Per civil law, it doesn't matter if you decide to have sex while drunk; you never had consent to do so.
                                Civil law does not say that.

                                We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
                                They already know monsters exist.
                                We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X