The morality of consent.

No, consent isn't the central moral value in regard to my worldview. It can't be if taken to it's logical conclusion. If it were, I basically couldn't advocate for and free speech or expression in the public square. Nobody consented to see your MAGA hat or your Che shirt. That doesn't change the fact that people have a right to express themselves freely.

Of course consent is an important moral value. We just need to have a coherent understanding of it.

Yes, there's a spectrum to consent. In a perfect world, I wouldn't have to pay for my coffee. But, I consent to exchange my money for the coffee. Ideally, I wouldn't work for less than a million dollars an hour; but, I consent to what people will pay. Sex is one of those few areas of life were, some times, ideally, both or all parties involved are enthusiastically consenting; but, even then, anybody who has been in a relationship for more than a couple of months knows that there are plenty of scenarios in which the enthusiasm might not be there for both parties while the consent still is. I would also argue that sex is one area where consent is the ethical baseline. Without consent, there is no sex - there's only violence.

What's becoming more clear to me is that the radical, socialist, woke Left eventually falls into two camps: People who lack a coherent understanding of consent and people who reject consent as a moral principle.

At least the people who reject consent as an important moral principle are being honest even though I find their views to be gross.

There may be some inconsistencies in my view of consent as a moral principle. I don't think that there are many. I generally think that consenting adults of sound mind and body should basically be able to do whatever they want. Children are where I really clash hard against the people who reject consent as an important moral principle because, well, that's where those people are defending Rainbow Dildo Butt Monkey twerking in front of kids (I'm not making this up) and I don't accept that kids have any capacity to consent to such a thing.

Most people on the other side of this discussion tend to hold consent as a paramount moral value in some cases and reject it every time it becomes inconvenient.

When it comes to sex, a lot of those people agree with me in general principle that sex should always and must always come with consent. I do disagree with how it's being handled under Title IX; but, the thrust of it (pun intended) is justifiably founded.

The problem is that it's impossible to have a coherent moral philosophy which bolsters consent and bodily autonomy in regard to sex and rejects it in every other aspect of human life, which is necessary for a socialist mindset.

I might be insane to say that we should do away with government entirely because its very existence is nonconsensual and a violation of the right to bodily autonomy and property; but, I'm not contradicting my view in regard to consent.

If you believe that consent is paramount in one aspect of human interaction, it's hard to completely defenestrate it in every other aspect of human existence. That's what most people on the Democratic Socialism Now! and Being Liberal pages are trying to square up. You can't believe in Socialism and consent at the same time. The two concepts are incompatible.

If you fall into that philosophical camp you basically have three options. You can say "Screw Consent" which is actually the title of a book that a professor at Yale wrote. You can admit that, at times, you're advocating for immoral actions to be taken for the greater good. Finally, last option, you can lie.