Where do we draw the line on freedom? We shouldn't yell “fire” in a crowded theater (especially with NRA members around), but there are areas where the limits of freedom are not so clear. For instance, getting into a car.
Should a person be allowed to get into a back seat? What if there's another person in there too, should the law step in then? What if they were drunk during the commission of this act? For that matter, should a person be allowed to get drunk in the first place?
Some feel that these actions exceed the limits of freedom and that anyone who gets into the back seat of a car should suffer some consequences, like say being violently raped.
That is the opinion of ancephalic menstrual clot James Taranto, whom the WSJ, incredible as it seems, pays. Their money got them a delusional failure at attempting to join a debate on whether a commander should have authority to overrule a formal court-martial. On this complex legal question, mister Ambulatory Bloody Discharge opined, in summary:
Woman. Pussy. Me want fuck. Y U no let me. U mean. BWAAAHHH.
When rational human beings called him on his misogyny, he interrupted his fapping to stories of Ariel Castro to explain(sic) that a woman blocking another woman's advancement is a “war on men”, that started in the 60's when women wanted freedom to get in a car with their co-workers without getting raped.
they wanted sexual freedom. Well what is female sexual freedom? It means, for this woman, that she had the freedom to get drunk, and to get in the backseat of the car with this guy.
Which brings me back to my original question. Is it reasonable to allow a person the freedom to get into a car? I'd say any person should have that freedom. Hell, even the freedom to get drunk if they want.
(Although, if the person was James Taranto, he's not getting in any car I'm in.)