Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KnightofMists I would like to someone on the "No" explain logically how ownership has no conditions. That was not the premise of the poll, as stated. Choice #1 was to say "X is always true." Choice #2 was to say "X is not always true." Choice #3 was to say "I don't know. Choice #4 was to say "X is always true, and not always true." (wtf?) And explaining is probably pretty close to a ToS violation if you are going on the level of "well, it's conditional, because you can kill yourself". Quadraplegics would be hard pressed to do that, for instance. Several drugs can serve to prevent it. And so forth. The problem here is that the "no" side will inevitably stray into a domain of consent which most here appear uncomfortable with in the long term: that of prior consent without present consent. Most jurisdictions hold this to be illegal. If willing to enter this domain, it is a question of how much effort you want to put into keeping the slave. But that position cannot be covered adequately due to ToS restrictions.
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way. We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|