Are there harms to an individual which may not be consented to?

[Trevor Watkins]

Dennis Baker's article on harm and consent is eye-opening, at RETHINKING CONSENSUAL HARM DOING 

.I have always thought of the autonomy of an individual as supreme, and their right to give informed consent as inviolable. He offers a different view

According to the ideas in this long and scholarly work, consent is not the only criteria regarding criminality.  

However, once the harm crosses a certain threshold, it degrades the consenter’s dignity to an unacceptable degree and is properly criminalisable.

We are not the first or only folk to give this serious thought.

Trevor Watkins .. cSASI
bas...@gmail.com - 083 44 11 721 - www.individualist.one

[Stephen vJ]

I think that's what a "safe word" is for. Blurts out before even reading the article... ;-)

Stephen.

On Oct 29, 2024, at 08:47, Trevor Watkins <bas...@gmail.com> wrote:



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Individualist Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to individualis...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/individualist/CAN6K2L%3DhyfdXhWfRc3%2BBohCax8NfrgMDN6Rxt%3DTPKxNwvEpGRQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Stephen vJ]

Ok, now having read the paper, he does make a few interesting points but it's interesting how he sees the human ability to decide and to consent as fallible, yet he seems to view the governments ability to legislate, monitor, detect and act on only transgressions as immaculate.

He also has a strong focus on rights and specifically the right to dignity, but I would argue that, had I believed in rights, I would not consider dignity to be inalienable. What about the kid who's dream it is to become a circus clown ? The very point of being a professional clown is to be utterly undignified in public in front of a paying crowd.

Dignity is subjective too, so not a great measure of rights. The one open issue for me is the negative impact one person's consent has on others i.e. I decide I want to die, but my family will be harmed by it. Should I be forced to stay alive and continue suffering illness and pain in order to not have my family members lose me without their consent ? If so, forced by whom ?

Stephen.

On Oct 29, 2024, at 08:53, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think that's what a "safe word" is for. Blurts out before even reading the article... ;-)

[Stephen vJ]

Oh, I should have added, it's not really an open question as much as a point of contention... seeing as the question here is really just a rephrasing of the trolley problem.

Stephen.

On Oct 29, 2024, at 09:13, Stephen vJ <sjaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ok, now having read the paper, he does make a few interesting points but it's interesting how he sees the human ability to decide and to consent as fallible, yet he seems to view the governments ability to legislate, monitor, detect and act on only transgressions as immaculate.