RE: All Ownership is Conditional

RE: All Ownership is Conditional (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

All Ownership is Conditional

Yes

78% (78)

14% (14)

I don't Know

3% (3)

both

4% (4)

Total Votes : 99

(last vote on : 2/4/2008 3:06:29 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

KnightofMists -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 5:34:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists Even that is conditional. A couple of the conditions are until he gets caught by the authorities and they release her or until she dies. (Skipped the transhumanism debate.) Not all places legislate against this kind of treatment. And trying to turn it into a truism by death misses the point, I hope. Otherwise, this poll is nothing but a semi-elaborate joke disguised as a topic. You miss the point then because death is indeed an important factor in all our lives... It without question establishes that time is limited for all of us. At least our life as it is in this current time. What will occur to us after death is very much an unknown. Death establishes that we in life at best have Lease arrangements for the things we own.

aSlavesLife -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 5:34:24 AM)
If one wishes to apply external forces to the question, then all ownership is conditional, but this is simply a cop out. Property can be stolen, for instance. But this turns the question into a loaded game of semantic dice. Property can be taken by a government agency as well. But this then turns the question into a legally loaded game of dice. The whole situation smells of a logical fallacy called the straw man argument where somebody constructs a poorly framed question with the smug intention of tearing it down. But if you strip away the external forces, then it becomes quite possible to attain unconditional ownership. Ethics may forbid some from doing so, but those ethics do not negate the possibility. The question more fairly framed should be " Is all ownership conditional within the structure of the relationship between the people involved? ". When worded as such, the answer is most definitely no. Owner of slave L

KnightofMists -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 5:38:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad 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. chuckles yeah ok...

KnightofMists -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 5:47:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife The question more fairly framed should be " Is all ownership conditional within the structure of the relationship between the people involved? ". When worded as such, the answer is most definitely no. Owner of slave L Reality dictates that an individual is subjected to external forces just as they are subjected to internal forces. A relationship is not going to be isolated from reality no matter how much a person wishes it to be. Just a Rover established earlier... to view Ownership as Unconditonal.. is indeed fantasy.... a lack of reality.

Mystique567 -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:09:37 AM)
There are always conditions including I am here and owned until I escape, I am here until you stop beating me daily, I am here because I love you. All of which set the stage for a change in conditions. There is no one that I know that is with someone of no reason at all, If that reason changes or no longer exists your conditions change and your relationship changes. So yes ownership, as with everything else in life is conditional

BeingChewsie -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:18:57 AM)
R's ownership is conditional in his mind, there are things I could do that would cause him to get rid of me. Maybe aslaveslife has no conditions under which he would get rid of his slave? That might make his ownership -unconditional- but I think it is unlikely most owners have some standards that must be met or your ass is out the door. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife The question more fairly framed should be " Is all ownership conditional within the structure of the relationship between the people involved? ". When worded as such, the answer is most definitely no. Owner of slave L Reality dictates that an individual is subjected to external forces just as they are subjected to internal forces. A relationship is not going to be isolated from reality no matter how much a person wishes it to be. Just a Rover established earlier... to view Ownership as Unconditonal.. is indeed fantasy.... a lack of reality.

Aswad -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:51:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shyinini Forget the jargon ~~ consensual and no consent ~~ legally no one owns another human being. Forget the legality, as well. Much of WIITWD is illegal in certain juristdictions. Neither should actually be illegal, IMO, though. Let people do what they want with their lives. Of course, a licence, evaluation or civil suit (similar to emancipation) would be a useful safeguard against those who aren't able to fully think through the implications of being legally owned property. It certainly has been legal in the past, although including the unethical practice of doing it without consent. For me, it seems unlikely that it never happened in a manner that resembles WIITWD. That is not to say that such was common, just that legal slavery is compatible with WIITWD, and can indeed enhance M/s relationships. Of course, it would also end the sub/slave debate right quickly. [:D]

Aswad -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:53:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists You miss the point then Please refer to where I said I skipped the transhumanism debate; this is not the place for it.

Aswad -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:54:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife The whole situation smells of a logical fallacy called the straw man argument where somebody constructs a poorly framed question with the smug intention of tearing it down. That was verified in post #41. My own wording of this was "joke", as opposed to "topic".

aSlavesLife -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:56:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife The question more fairly framed should be " Is all ownership conditional within the structure of the relationship between the people involved? ". When worded as such, the answer is most definitely no. Owner of slave L Reality dictates that an individual is subjected to external forces just as they are subjected to internal forces. A relationship is not going to be isolated from reality no matter how much a person wishes it to be. Just a Rover established earlier... to view Ownership as Unconditonal.. is indeed fantasy.... a lack of reality. Ahhh, so your intention from the start was indeed to construct a straw man argument, retreat into the realm of metaphysics ( ha ha! Death is a condition, neiner neiner, neiner! ) when addressed, and continue to make it seem as though everyone has conditions of ownership. Nice job! Give yourself a pat on the back. Owner of slave L

Aswad -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:58:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists Just a Rover established earlier... to view Ownership as Unconditonal.. is indeed fantasy.... a lack of reality. A question has no meaning without a frame of reference. Anything but a very ambigous solipsist position is a fantasy, in the limit. I mistakenly assumed a certain frame of reference in this poll, rather than a game or joke, based on a truism. As such, I'm with aSlavesLife on this one: the thread is a straw man.

Mercnbeth -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 6:59:38 AM)
I am a NO voter. Conditional ownership is a reflection of dominance over another. Not qualifying that as good, better, bad or worse. Dominance differs from ownership in that it is in its very nature conditional. It requires conditions similar to conditional submission. Limits, of time and activity, are reasons I apply that distinction. As an unconditional owner I'm enjoying a life of "fantasy" and "lacking reality". Gotta love those absolutes by people. I always think it is a craving for personal validation. In order to rationalize their "one true way" any other way must be un-real and fantasy. A very good indicator that the strength of their position is only validated by weakening another. Oh well... In answering the query, I tried to wonder under what condition I would relinquish my ownership of beth. Quickly, death comes to mind. My ownership isn't conditional if that occurred. And if beth's faith is correct it is not over then either. Were she ill or needed care, my first instinct as an "owner" would be to get her the help or care she needs; not to abandon her. I buy her things I enjoy seeing her wear. I'm responsible for her well being and provide a healthy and protected environment for her. We each trust the other to live up to our responsibilities - unconditionally. I'd like to turn it around. For those that claim to be owners or owned, what condition, short of death, would terminate ownership?

KatyLied -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:01:31 AM)
All relationships are conditional. Why would anyone enter into a relationship that did not have conditions? I think it is a fantasy to think that relationships are unconditional.

Aswad -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:06:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied Why would anyone enter into a relationship that did not have conditions? Why does anyone do anything? Some ask questions like "why would anyone allow themselves to be tied up and have pain inflicted upon them?", or "why would anyone choose to allow another person to control major parts of their lives?", or even "why would anyone want to have sex with the same gender as themselves?". Fortunately, few of those go on to denounce S&M, D/s, and LGBT as fantasy based on a lack of comprehension.

yourpet2345 -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:12:23 AM)
I do not pipe up very often ... However I believe they my next Owner will have several conditions placed on him He must love me (not always but hopefully like me but definately love me) he must see to my health and well being... those are conditions i place in his hands, if they are not met how can i possibly be the best i can be??? V[8\|]

laineyjade -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:13:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth I'd like to turn it around. For those that claim to be owners or owned, what condition, short of death, would terminate ownership? Only conditions for my release: 1. death 2. if we became so incompatible that nothing, no matter how hard we tried nor for how long, could lead to anything except a life of continual misery for both of us (I'm not sure I can imagine how something like that could happen but I've been told it can very rarely happen over the years). When I imagine condition #2 it's hard to think that a relationship that's kept for the sake of being kept, when it's badly hurting everyone involved and will go on doing so, is "sane".

SeeksOnlyOne -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:14:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BeingChewsie R's ownership is conditional in his mind, there are things I could do that would cause him to get rid of me. Maybe aslaveslife has no conditions under which he would get rid of his slave? That might make his ownership -unconditional- but I think it is unlikely most owners have some standards that must be met or your ass is out the door. but arent there things he could do, even if you have faith he never would, that would make you walk away too?

MasterFireMaam -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:24:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists So.. what do you think? Is all Ownership Conditonal? and why? Even if we don't want to admit it, we come into all relationships with certain expectations. Even those who say they have no limits...they come into it expecting basic survival care. Thus, they have a condition. Master Fire

ownedgirlie -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:28:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeeksOnlyOne quote: ORIGINAL: BeingChewsie R's ownership is conditional in his mind, there are things I could do that would cause him to get rid of me. Maybe aslaveslife has no conditions under which he would get rid of his slave? That might make his ownership -unconditional- but I think it is unlikely most owners have some standards that must be met or your ass is out the door. but arent there things he could do, even if you have faith he never would, that would make you walk away too? Answering for myself, I'd say no. But I agree with Chewsie, that there are things I could do which would result in him ceasing to own me. Mind you I would not do them, but I know his ownership of me falls under the conditions that I won't. I do not relate to the concept of death as an ownership ender. Just as many married couples still consider themselves married when their spouse dies, I will continue to consider myself owned when he dies. Oddly enough, we talked about this just last night.

DaddySur -> RE: All Ownership is Conditional (7/19/2007 7:44:11 AM)
Please note that "unless...", "as long ...and "until...", are all nothing more that conditions. To say your slavery is unconditional as long as ______, is in itself a completely contradictory statement. Further, to say that your ownership is unconditional, requires that you have both the mental and legal capacity to consent (...have reached the age of consent in your jurisdiction and not legally declared insane are both requirements of a contract). Given that your slavery in itself 'required' your consent, (i.e. you were not sold against your will and living in a society that would enforce that sale), then its also true that you can just as easily withdraw that consent. Whether or not you ever choose to excercize that right is up to each person and their relationship. I am also alluding to the mental dynamic, that just because someoan "can" technically to a certain thing, does not mean they would actually physically be able to, as there are many who would willingly kill or die rather than betray a promise. an oath or an allegiance, ...or their religion. To Love, Trust, Honor and Obey, "until" death do us part. ...After that we'll negotiate!

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875