JE: Thanks for the add! I was wondering if you’d be willing to like my page Self-determination Advocates. We’re eager to help everyone achieve self-ownership, Does that sound like something you would be interested in? https://www.facebook.com/SelfDeterminationAdvocates/
SL: “Achieve” self-ownership? That makes no sense to me because I believe self-ownership is an innate human quality. My whole philosophy can be found in my book Consent Is Morality.
JE: What is your book about, Sean?
SL: Using fundamental logic, it proposes that consent is a universal human concept, and that respect for consent choices is the basis for all moral actions.
JE: Have you read, “Your Next Government: From Nation-States to Stateless Nations” by Tom W Bell? He goes into detail about the different levels of consent.
SL: No, I haven’t. But I would disagree that there even are “levels” of consent, and I argue as such in my book. Consent is purely individual (cannot be granted by others without previous agreement) and binary — it has either been given or it has not.
JE: His argument is similar… This chart is based on common law tradition.
Are you a libertarian or classical liberal? I think I saw you identified as a voluntaryist?
SL: Interesting chart. I argue that implied consent is not possible, as it either makes assertions or assumptions, neither of which speak to an individual’s consent choice.
Yes, I’m a voluntaryist. I believe in the primacy of property rights.
JE: The charter city movement is working to make consent more explicit. How did you become a voluntaryist? and what does that mean to you?
SL: It was a slow process. I was a Reagan Republican in the 80s, but after Bush Jr’s lies, I started reading a wider variety of material, including Radley Balko and the Cato Institute.
It occurred to me that there were still inconsistencies in their philosophy. Roger Pilon put it best — you can’t give away [rights or powers] which you first don’t possess. But I wondered how someone who believed that could also believe in the validity of the Constitution.
Voluntaryism — the simple view that only mutually voluntary acts are moral — is the most consistent viewpoint.
JE: So why did you write this book, Sean?
SL: It’s all in the preface. 😉 Ultimately I got sick of the “subjective morality” arguments. They didn’t sit well with me. So I sat down to think about WHY one act was “good” and another act was “bad.”
I came up with a way to equate consent with morality which I don’t think anyone else has used.
JE: Where can people buy your book?
SL: People can get it at ConsentIsMorality.com. And for your readers, the first 10 people to use the code SDA30 will get 30% off an autographed copy.
I ordered my copy a few days ago. Sean’s history closely parallels my own which is how I found him on FB. Dyed in the wool Reagan conservatives made up my family. I married young and started a family. Raising six sons, all of whom were gifted with an above average intellect, got me challenging my beliefs. When the little humans that you love beyond measure ask you, ‘Why?’, you must never mislead or dismiss them. I had to think. I had to employ true logic. My sons finished raising me in a real sense!