05-09-2016, 10:36 PM
(05-09-2016, 10:30 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You don't lose your logical functions when you're drunk. They might be impaired but you don't lose it. There's nothing factually inaccurate to that statement.
Impaired vs. loss is really irrelevant. You're grasping at straws here. Even impaired judgement/logic is too drunk to consent. If someone will do something they would not have done sober then they are at a point where their consent should not stand. Period.
(05-09-2016, 10:31 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Because I never said you cannot refuse consent when you're drunk. His statement is a straw man because he said "Or people who think the only time a drunk person cannot consent is when they are "blacked out"." His statement is saying that if you're drunk you cannot refuse consent. Which is obviously a straw man.
No, it is not. He is saying that you said the only time a person cannot consent, meaning incapable of doing so, is when they are blacked out.it is exactly what you have been saying.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
