>A friend of mine, A, believes necrophilia cannot be engaged in with the dead body of a person who would have opposed it if alive. (A, tell me if I’m wrong about my understanding of your viewpoint). This is my attack on him, or my defense of my view. A person can’t own or transfer any property before they’re conceived because their consciousness does not yet exist.
>Therefore, since a person’s consciousness doesn’t exist after their death, they cannot own or transfer property once dead.
>If a dead person cannot own or transfer property then wills should state the following,
>One second before my death all my worldly possessions are transferred from me (X) to Y.
>However, imagine no one else exists or that no one wants to take X’s property.
>If that is the case then I’m sure you would agree that the body of X, along with the rest of his property enters into the abandoned property category.
>If property is either virgin or abandoned anyone may homestead it and do whatever they like with the property they homestead.
>This means a person could homestead an abandoned body and engage in necrophilia, even if the previous owner of the body would have objected.
By US law any corpse is government property no matter what you would put in a will.
Christian Mitchell
dead bodies can't consent >US law >ancapistan
US law breaks the NAP all by itself
Mason Harris
>By US law any corpse is government property Can you source me on that Sven, I have some rustling to do.
Jaxson Harris
So yes, it does break the NAP since it can't consent
Blake Davis
Dead bodies can't consent or not consent. They're not people.
Do you ask a watermelon for consent before you sitck your dick in it?
Nathaniel Mitchell
Neither can sleeping people or people in a coma consent, so? And no, no lifeform consents to being eaten
Evan Baker
anyone who engages in such acts should be drawn and quartered and put in public display in chains
Brayden Baker
>dead bodies cant consent >but infants and animals can daily reminder ayncrapism is made up as it goes along
Elijah Brown
Dead bodies can't consent and can't not consent either. They have no rights and aren't people or agents. Dead people can't own property
Juan Young
Check this now
Andrew Clark
And neither can sleeping people or people in a coma consent though, neither can a babby, so we can just rape them all because they can't consent?
Logan Lee
>The AnCap is concerned about what breaks the NAP some memes write themself
Michael Perry
>using a utilitarian argument in ayncrap society where its totally irrelevant BUT WHAT IF THE CHILD DOESNT CONSENT THO.
Luis Reed
a sleeping person is not dead you fucking ingrate
Liam Cruz
A sleeping person can't consent you antique farm equipment
Xavier Murphy
What is nap?
Parker Wood
Non Agression principle, it's the law of Ancaptopia But there are loopholes in there like Swiss cheese, for example you can rape a dog and a baby since they can't consent and thus 'they aren't persons'
Anthony Cox
You're entirely missing the point bro. Reread what I said. Dead bodies aren't even alive and have no rights to anything. Saying they can't consent is a categorical mistake. True they can't consent, but not because they're prevented from consenting for this or that reason, but because the mere concept of consenting doesn't apply to it. Dead bodies that aren't owned by anyone (aka a living person) are the property of whoever homesteads them first. In ancap theory consent = using your property and/or letting others use it. Once you're dead you can no more own a body than Genghis Khan can own castles. A dead body is not even in the same category as children, or even animals (which arhuably don't own anything either), they're in the same category as meat and pork
Wyatt Taylor
Let's freaking finish this Something that CAN'T CONSENT, WILL NOT BE RAPED AND MURDERED Leave those animals and kids alone
Luke Myers
...
Jace Fisher
I bet you're fat.. Just a random statement
Grayson Hughes
the imaginary law that people will not offend anyone else. basically a "mutually assured destruction" policy on an extremely individual level obviously unworkable in reality because MAD only works when all parties are equal.
Cameron Allen
>tfw no ghost gf
Ethan Cruz
what kind of lame insult is this o.o how old are you, son.
Ian Ramirez
I bet you can't beat a sleeping person in a fight Just observing
Zachary Gonzalez
A dead body can't be raped. Nor can animals (there are analogous crimes that apply to them tho)
I'm trying to expose ancap degeneracy but you argument is awful
Charles Long
>A friend of mine, A, burying in the cold, cold ground cannot be engaged in with the dead body of a person who would have opposed it if alive.
Sorry, Ithink necrophilia is disgusting, but that aside I don;t see how ownership continues after death, nor rights.
You could make a case that the ESTATE of the deceased would have to be contacted to secure permission.
Asher Nelson
What about a ghost? Does fucking the ghost violate NAP?
Benjamin Gutierrez
And yet I just showed ancaps shilling for NAMBLA
Luke Myers
Because it can't consent? Neither can a baby for the matter
David Rogers
if the ghost can retaliate, then yes, dont violate the NAP if the ghost can't retaliate, then it doesnt even matter if it has a NAP in the first place.
Jaxon Rodriguez
He argues for necrophilia with bodies that have no owners. I suppose he would accept necrophilia as a crime if someone specifies a cemetery or person or estate to be the owners of his body after he dies
Jaxson Cook
Pretty sure cadavers are either propriety of immediate family, or if they have none, the state. This assuming the deceased passed away recently and still retains a humanoid shape, since you can't own dust.
Necrophilia is still disgusting and unhealthy, and you should get some therapy ASAP if you have strong, consistent urges, since it's likely you have other screws loose.
Luis Hall
ultimately ayncrapism is just "might makes right". when you point out that thats just barbarism they might call it "natural law" as if its some sort of well thought out legal principle
Robert Roberts
NAP is based on natural rights, dead people have no faculty of their own and therefore have no rights.
Now, there are two scenarios for things without rights: either they are left in their natural state, is this case the body was abandoned, hence you can claim ownership of it.
Or it belongs to someone, such as when it is buried within a graveyard or is concerned somehow. In the case, the owner needs to consent, else you are violating the NAP of to owner.
Nathan Torres
Because animals have no rights. Saying they must consent is unduly treating them as humans. By that logic it'd be illegal to use animals for labour, as mounts or in jobs (like police/guide/sheep dogs, transport llamas and horses, cattle/pigs for food, etc)
I suggest Roger Scruton's short book on this, Animal Rights and Wrongs
Josiah Fisher
>the state >not a violation of the NAP
Lucas Mitchell
You can't own objects that belong to the state.
You can contest the case in court, but if you have no relation with the deceased at all or no good justification for owning them, you're out of luck.
Brandon Nguyen
Are you saying a baby is equal to a dog? And even then no animal consents to be eaten, therefore that breaks the holy nap as well Just admit it, it's might makes right, WE are the predators, WE hunt and WE get what we want, right?
I don't endorse the NAP, and if you think what I said supports the idea babies are similar to dogs you have awful reading comprehension skills.
Zachary Myers
its a "mutually assured destruction" policy; if you offend someone supposedly the person will take revenge. yes its as stupid as it sounds
Colton Thompson
This answer ignores the NAP. It says since the state ignores the NAP (and it's mere existence does) than necrophilia violates the state's property rights, but the question is only about necrophilia and the NAP in general. They even make explicit that no one owns the bodies they're talking about. I don't think theres a good NAP based argument against necrophilia in this case
William Flores
>Yeah if you shoot me dead and steal my shit I'm gonna shoot you right back!
William Rivera
>However, imagine no one else exists or that no one wants to take X’s property. The market, somehow
Jason Robinson
>and a baby can't consent >"because animals have no rights" I either have awful reading skills other you're just a shite writer lad, and I think it's the latter
Angel Watson
Or*
Jace Bennett
exactly. they will then try to justify it, "oh the family members will step in!" or maybe the dead person has insurance so a mysterious assassin or private security will come after you after his death! its really fucking farfetched and hilarious.
Tyler Taylor
If there's no authority to enforce anything it's "finders keepers" and "might makes right".
If you can assert your authority over the corpse you can do whatever the hell you want to do with it. There are only moral arguments from whatever sort of family/community you live in.
Dominic Stewart
>discussing subjective morality that can't be enforced without a state >probably think that the same as ancommies that "society will come together to enforce it" ie a de facto state
Jacob Davis
It isn't this hard to understand
Ryder Lewis
Yeah, this is really stupid. There are no real debates to be had in a lawless, governmentless society.
Austin Nguyen
It is. Kek. I agree
Anthony Cooper
So just because they can't consent it gives us the authority to rape them?
Caleb Evans
>o.o Faggot
Hudson Murphy
If body's can't own property then a living will should be ignored
Justin Flores
Just a reminder that a human corpse loses aproximately 1°C per hour until it reaches room temperature, so you need to be quick to give it your dick.
Cooper Turner
1970: "I bet we'll have flying cars in the future"
2017: "Does necrophilia violate the NAP?"
James Phillips
Law doesn't have to come from a monopolistic state.
Luis Stewart
>oh nooo how will i ever recover
Owen Flores
pic is giving me feels for some reason
Ryan Davis
>authority whoa now that sounds like some kind of statist talk
Zachary Brooks
True, but the authority of a state helps a lot. Laws come from the morality of a society, but they are successfully, systematically enforced with a designed class dealing with it, not the tribe elder or monarch.
Adrian Brooks
There's no such a thing as an "owner of a body", once you die, you still exist, you're just unconcious and rotting, the NAP stands as long as your body still exists. Even though it won't be enforced it can still be violated. If it's ok to do anything to somebody as long as they don't notice it then it should be ok to fuck people in their sleep as long as they don't wake up during sex and don't notice anything once they wake up. Obviously that's fucked up and wrong and so is fucking dead people. You're violating the NAP by abusing the person's trust/wishes. Unless somebody gives you explicit permission you shouldn't do it. And even if they do then you shouldn't do it either, even if you're allowed to. That's nasty
it's not really law then is it? more of a suggestion really
Nolan Powell
You can't rape animals
Brayden Bennett
That has nothing to do with the idea that law should be monopolized by the state.
Christopher Hill
Kek
Brandon Rivera
I think it's more "there's no spirit to give or not give consent"
Ian Carter
Just so we aren't confused here, what are you calling 'animal'? The baby? The dead guy?
Zachary Wright
You'd rather it be monopolized by the monarch, tribe elder or whatever individual has the most authority in a group? If you are alone there are no laws, only self-imposed limits.
Owen Reed
Does Lincoln still own property? Do dead indians in indigenous cemeteries still own the land?
Jose Diaz
What if I'm an atheist like most of the world at this point? I don't believe in a soul, so the body might as well be unconscious...
Eli Collins
fucking dead people is bad, pls OP stop
Colton Howard
Actual animals. You're the one managing to mess this up in your head in ways that shouldn't be possible.
Bodies can't be raped either
David Evans
fuck
Liam Long
I'd rather law be enforced on a decentralized basis than a centralized basis. Of course, a decentralized stateless society is highly improbable and remains entirely hypothetical.
The best solution is simply to have secession be universally legal.
Grayson Gray
Posting more ancap degeneracy. Tell me if this violates the NAP
>“Parents may try to persuade the runaway child to return, but it is totally impermissible enslavement and an aggression upon his right of self-ownership for them to use force to compel him to return.
>“Applying our theory to parents and children, this means that a parent does not have the right to aggress against his children, but also that the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.”
Murray Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (New York University Press, 1998)
>Suppose that there is a starvation situation, and the parent of the four year old child (who is not an adult) does not have enough money to keep him alive. A wealthy NAMBLA man offers this parent enough money to keep him and his family alive – if he will consent to his having sex with the child. We assume, further, that this is the only way to preserve the life of this four year old boy. Would it be criminal child abuse for the parent to accept this offer? >Not on libertarian grounds. For surely it is better for the child to be a live victim of sexual abuse rather than unsullied and dead. Rather, it is the parent who consents to the death of his child, when he could have kept him alive by such extreme measures, who is the real abuser14 . Walter Block
How do you obtain the corpse? Killing = NAP violation. Digging it up from a graveyard = NAP violation, too (since the graveyard will be privately owned).
Also, If the corpse was obtained from a person that died from natural corpses, and you somehow had it in your house, then you're actually free to do whatever you want with it as long as nobody finds out (just like with modern states). What happens when you're found out depends on the country/private covenant you live, if such covenant has rules pertaining necrophilia. You will most likely be ostracized by the rest of the mentally sane members of the private community.
Grayson Moore
So you want a democratic legal system? That doesn't work with hundreds, or thousands of people. You'd have too many daily cases, so that's why people are trained in society to deal with legal matters. If you feel you've been treated unjustly you can always take matter into your own hands, or appeal to authority for justice.
I don't really understand what sort of system you want in place. You either have a non-democratic system or you don't.
Isaac Myers
No, but they still own their body and the things that were buried with them. How do you feel about about people stealing king Tut's shit 3000 years after he died ? Was it ok for them to open the grave and take the shiny things with them ? Would it be ok to fuck the mummy ?
Michael Young
Animals can't consent because?
Benjamin Adams
>the solution is to simply have the king give up his kingdom
Carter Jones
A body can be owned if a person puts it in a living will.if you put a don't fuck my body in a will then it violates the NAP
Nicholas Hall
Do you need to ask animals permission to mount them? To eat them? To have them guard your property or your sheep? Why is that?
Justin Hernandez
>walk in the forest >find a deas body
>be home >grandma dies
>be in warzone >neighborhood bombed
Many such cases
Jaxon Brown
When you put what on your will? Giving ownership to someone else or "pla no fugging"?
Grayson Phillips
Again, what exactly prevents you from doing that in a modern state? I assume you live in such country. You will suffer no penalty if you're not found out.
If you're found out, that depends on where you're found out. Just like in modern states.
Isaac Sanders
If they don't own other property, why would they own this?
If king tut dislikes it he can sue people in a court of law
Bentley Carter
They certainly don't like to get eaten, not do plants or anything Tell me, in Ancaptopia, does a baby and a dog have the same level of 'consent'?
Parker Hernandez
Nor*
Joseph Bennett
Just because no one finding about it in normal countries preventa punishment it doesn't mean the question is resolved. In fact, how does someone who homesteads corpses and open a corpse brothel violates the NAP?
Carter Smith
Yeah, when you take the NAP and property rights to the extreme, that's what happens.
However, the people that don't want to associate with niggers and want to live in a civilized society will most likely want to have rules against degeneracy and live in covenant-based societies.
Nolan Reyes
Do wills have power under the NAP?
Nathan Foster
Do you violate the NAP when one of your corpses makes a customer sick?