Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> On Mar 22, 8:44 pm, "Steve Walker" wrote:
>> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
>>> "informed consent"
>>
>>> Which you have yet to define, so 'there simply cannot have been'
>>> presently stands as groundless.
>>
>> It's a perfectly simple principle, applied millions of times every
>> day in
>> finance, medicine and law, as well as .uality. Admitting your
>> inability
>> to grasp it is a good first step though, and I recommend you start
>> athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informed_consent.
>
> Wow, a Wikiref - I am impressed.
>
> "Informed consent is a legal condition ..."
>
> Well, that's all we need to know. It is a 'legal condition' and
> nothing more.
>
> That is what I thought ... it is not about actual consent, informed or
> not ... it is a fluxional, temporary, social construct.
Oh, I see - this is the part where you dream of a future where child
molestation has become respectable through gradual changes in social mores,
and do that Dr Evil thing with your little finger...? Feel free to
squander your remaining years on this fantasy.
|