...is that today you say that:

Not everything in the world should be decided by logic

...and tomorrow you attack the religion of the day for being illogical; and the other day you attack libertarians for being illogical. (And you'd certainly attack other ideologies if they were represented here.) And the other day you attack the anecdotal arguments for consent for being illogical.

You want to have your cake and eat it.

This isn't moving goalposts, because you do not do it over a single thread and over a single point of contention. You do it as an ad hoc process for whatever ran through your mind today, sometimes in reply to a thread and sometimes as a thread you post yourself.

You have accused me of being a tricky, maybe dirty, debater. I have never contested this because I think it may be so. I come from competitive debate and it is inevitable that habits built as abilities for competitive debate will stay with you even in other tasks, same as soccer kicks, basketball jumps and baseball throws do for those who practice sports while young. But for all the tricky debater I can be, it is you who want to win at all costs. You use entirely contrary worldviews and incompatible positions depending on what you are arguing.



Do you not want logic? Then do stop criticizing religion on having unprovable faith statements on the universe; do stop criticizing political ideologies on having a priori postulates on human nature; and do stop criticizing the sincerity of others' feelings when or because they are not yours.

You can run on empirical findings. You can run on faith. You can run on deductive a priori postulates. You can run on feelings. But agree with yourself. Don't attack others with ad hoc rationales to win at all costs which you yourself disown at other places and times.



Or bear the cost. Your questioning of the meaningfulness of consent, inasmuch as it is valid, also questions the meaningfulness of non-consent. Together with the child who retrospectively withdraws consent from sex, we also have the child who retrospectively gives consent to beating. Because I am sure all the "I thank my parents for spanking me" weren't showing that gratitude while the spanking was going on.

This is just about the specific argument you made here on this post. But think of the cost of your own arguments when you are making them; not just about whether that will make you win the round.