4 ms·
As you realized, you have to add bunch of qualifiers to make consent works: age-of-consent, condition-of-consent, etc. The defense then shifted into defending t
by oiq 7y ago
As you realized, you have to add bunch of qualifiers to make consent works: age-of-consent, condition-of-consent, etc. The defense then shifted into defending those qualifiers.
From system design perspective, it operates on lower level rule-based design. This is weaker. I understand there's debate internally about Humanae Vitae, and it's good. But at least it gets the core design stronger by operating on higher level goal/paradigm constraint (the purpose of procreation)
- dragonwriter 7y ago> But at least it gets the core design stronger by operating on higher level goal/paradigm constraint (the purpose of procreation) That's actually not how it works; the intricacies of the dual procreative and unitive function model in the theology under Humanae Vitae is no less complex than that of the consent-based system, but it's just based on a moral system with a larger number of specialized axioms; the consent-based system is based on a simpler set of axioms, because it doesn't need a specific set of axioms for sex; the principle of consent underlying the consent-based system of sexual morality is the same one underlying all of the liberal enlightenment political/social/economic ideology.
- oiq 7y agoThis conflates paradigm of a system with its rules (axiom). It's not the same.