Message from @meratrix
Discord ID: 423332707058319361
speaking
You can only ever apply a best fit interpretation because you cannot account for every possible alcohol tolerance
and I cannot account for every single homosexual interaction
but banning it solves the problem
It actually doesn't solve anything, because you are transgressing against someone's civil rights in their natural state, being drunk while driving is not a civil right.
It was never defined as such
being gay was never a civil right
you are using circular reasoning anyway
"homosexuality is a right because we said so"
“Free speech is a right because we said so”
yes
being gay isn't the civil right, the civil right in this case is, in crude terms, freedom to fuck who you wish consensually.
that is not a right either
Example: incest and pedophilia
consensually, so not pedophilia, and I am not against incest if they consent.
that is your arbitrary judgement that children under a certain age cannot consent
it's really just a loophole
are there really no children under the age of consent who have agency?
do they magically gain it when they hit that age?
do they gain agency when they cross state borders?
no, it's because we have to define it somehow, and most people at the age of 18 can make that descision with decent judgement.
it's never perfect
but it somehow must be defined
and we have to do the best we can
let me restart @radeon
what if the child consents tho?
Children cannot, we consider them unable to consent due to very specific things regarding the development of the childs brain
we have to make the pragmatic decision that at some point you cannot ream negholes with your poz loads
@Deleted User Up for VC?
I’ve got class
Goin to the gym in a few minutes
Yea