If a woman consents to taking Quaaludes from a man for the purpose of sex then that is not rape!
It's "having a good time" from both sides.
shareIt is rape because you don't know if she would have told him to stop while she was on Quaaludes. I am also concerned with you the last week trying to find variables of how this can be deemed okay.
shareSo, if a man and a woman both get drunk and hammered and they slept together. The woman wakes up next morning and regrets it, is that rape to you? Or just a "bad mistake"?
shareWould you feel the same way if they murdered someone else who is drunk?
shareDrunk people aren't in the right frame of mind, so it can't be "murder". But I would classify it as possibly "manslaughter".
shareSo we go to people having not-legally consenting sex while intoxicated to a drunk person killing someone else? Well, both parties did consent while intoxicated, but it isn't an legally binding form of consent.
For your thing to work, one person would need to non-legally consent to being killed by the other person while intoxicated. Even if drunk, I can't imagine anyone being perfectly fine with that.
So in that case your person agreed to stand still while the other person shot a bottle off his head, he didn't non-legally consent to being murdered, just non-legally consented to doing something stupid.
YOU DON'T HAVE SEX WITH INTOXICATED PEOPLE...IT REMOVES THE PROTECTION OF CONSENT...PERIOD.
shareEven if the man is also drunk too?
shareSO I GET DRUNK AND RAPE A WOMAN...IT'S RAPE...I GET DRUNK AND RAPE A DRUNK WOMAN...ITS RAPE...WHAT ARENT YOU GETTING?
shareYou're using loaded language here. "Rape" is a legal term, a drunk person can non-legally consent to sex while drunk... no one is arguing that you go up to someone who has not given consent (legally or non-legally binding) and have sex. The argument is that consent given while drunk is still consent, even though it isn't legally binding consent.
sharePROOF THAT COSBY GOT CONSENT BEFORE THE WOMEN TOOK THE DRUG?...PROOF THAT COSBY EXPLAINED THE REACTION THEY WOULD HAVE TO THE DRUG?...THIS WHOLE TOPIC IS LOADED,MOSTLY WITH COSBY CUM.🤢
shareAmen 🙏
shareThe argument is a woman agrees to have sex with a man and she agrees to take sleep medication prior to having sex with him. Once she has taken the drugs she is in an impaired state of mind which means it doesn't legally matter what she says, but the man already got consent from her prior to her taking the drugs.
shareThat doesn't make them immune from any crime. Say they go along with it but realize they don't feel comfortable doing it. They are not in their right mind to say no.
shareActually, it legally does... convincing a jury is a different matter.
The woman, with full rational state of mind, gave up her right to legally revoke consent while having sex by willingly and knowingly taking a drug that would impair her.
This is why drunk drivers get punished, because before the person was drunk the person made the decision to drink fully knowing that they had no other transportation home other than their own car.
They do get punished for what they did while impaired, even though they weren't in the right frame of mind.
shareWho gets punished for what? You need to indicate what your subject is before using pronouns.
shareDrunk drivers. It's illegal to drive drunk, but any crime committed while intoxicated get further charges.
shareI clearly explained that the reason drunk drivers are held liable for their actions while drunk is because it requires premeditation while sober to drive to a bar, knowing you have no ride home, and then drink until you are heavily intoxicated. Where you got the notion that I said drunk drivers don't get punished is unknown.
shareBecause you only explained the act of getting drunk and then driving is illegal. Not the other acts that can happen like running someone over.
share
This is why drunk drivers get punished, because before the person was drunk the person made the decision to drink fully knowing that they had no other transportation home other than their own car.
Do you have any idea how easy it is for someone to get off of a hit and run while drunk? Our laws make it HARD to convict someone if they use the "but I was drunk" defense. It's easy to say the person intentionally setup a condition where they'd have to drink and drive, but the other way is a complete mess and there is a very high attrition rate of people getting off
shareIt's still illegal whether or not it's hard to convict.
share"she is in an impaired state of mind which means it doesn't legally matter what she says"
NOW WE KNOW HOW YOU MANAGE GET LAID.😣
I'm asexual you pervert.
Also, it doesn't legally matter what a person says while intoxicated, because that person cannot legally consent while intoxicated. Even if the person consents while intoxicated it isn't legally binding.
"she is in an impaired state of mind which means it doesn't legally matter what she says"
QUESTION...SHE CONSENTED TO SEX,TOOK THE PILL...HE SLIDES IN AND SHE STARTS SCREAMING "NO","NO STOP PLEASE"...
NEVERMIND,NO QUESTION...IM JUST GLAD TO HEAR A PERSONS OBJECTIONS DON'T MEAN ANYTHING ONCE I HAVE STARTED.🙂
We're talking about sleep medicine aren't we? She's supposed to be asleep isn't she, which is what samoanjoes was complaining about, that because she was under medicated sleep she couldn't start screaming "NO","NO STOP PLEASE"...
Of course, you bring up a good point, since under the law what you do while drunk isn't legally binding, revoking a prior given consent would get into some legal issues.
This brings us back to accepting that someone can legally consent to sex while drunk, so that we can legally accept that a person can revoke legally given consent while drunk.
Remember, legal consent has much of its history in contract law. So instead of developing something unique to the situation of sex, we're talking about something that is meant to protect people from making dumb money related mistakes while drunk, and backing out of a contract while drunk certainly falls under that realm.