But then you have University of Rochester professor Steven Landsburg posing this "enlightening" question on his blog:
Let’s suppose that you, or I, or someone we love, or someone we care about from afar, is raped while unconscious in a way that causes no direct physical harm — no injury, no pregnancy, no disease transmission. (Note: The Steubenville rape victim, according to all the accounts I’ve read, was not even aware that she’d been sexually assaulted until she learned about it from the Internet some days later.) Despite the lack of physical damage, we are shocked, appalled and horrified at the thought of being treated in this way, and suffer deep trauma as a result. Ought the law discourage such acts of rape? Should they be illegal?Obvious answer: YES!
Any form of sex without consent is rape. This sexual act was committed without consent. Therefore, it's rape. Even if it doesn't result in any physical harm, the act itself was still committed without the victim's consent, and thus was a violation of their bodily autonomy. That makes it illegal, as it should be.
But that's how any sane individual, even one lacking a high school education, would answer the question. How does the more "educated" college professor answer it?
As long as I’m safely unconscious and therefore shielded from the costs of an assault, why shouldn’t the rest of the world (or more specifically my attackers) be allowed to reap the benefits?WHO THE FRIG BENEFITS FROM RAPE?!
Nobody. That's who!
Perhaps the rapist does, but only at the expense of the rape victim, whose bodily autonomy was violated. Nobody should benefit from violating another's individual rights. Period.
Sweet Celestia, how is that not freaking obvious?!
And you know what makes this worse? This guys claims to be a libertarian. You heard me: a libertarian. If he's a libertarian, than I'm a freaking Marxist!
No self-respecting libertarian should claim it's okay to rape someone as long as they don't know about it. By that logic, the government has a right to wiretap our phone conversations without a warrant just as long as we don't know about it. So why worry about the PATRIOT ACT?
In a just and sane world, a professor like this would be stripped of his title, kicked to the curb, and barred from ever teaching again; but knowing how messed up higher education is, he's probably going to retain his tenure.
Speaking of college professors unfit to teach, Columbia University recently hired a former Weather Underground radical who spent 22 years in prison after killing two cops. Of course colleges don't have radical far-left agendas. They only hire far-left radicals is all!
With such lunatics teaching the future generation, why is criticizing our education system considered so taboo and "anti-intellectual"?