my room is a god-awful mess. it's truly horrendous...

OKAY TOTAL problems arising. Contracts. can someone PUH-LEASE tell me about the moral aspect.. because MY BOOK told me that MORALITY DOESn'T COME INTO IT.

BUT CONSIDER THIS:

Q has a mistress. Q also has a child. Q wants R to deflower his child (child is 13 and R is 45 white male who lives with his mother). So, Q promises R that R can have full use of Q's mistress in return for the deflowering of his 13yr old child. I would say that there is good consideration there. Definitely there is an exchange, so bargain factor is there. Now to the detriment - well R has, to his detriment, to deflower child. Now according to the sufficient rule, the court cannot tell me that deflowering is insufficient - because it is. (it may not be adequate, but who can say what is a detriment, right?). And Q is conferring a benefit, right? Because this is what he wants for his child. SO I WOULD SAY A CONTRACT IS THERE.

Now R would be criminally prosecuted because of the underagedness. But let's not say child anymore. Let's say 19 year old virgin. OKAY SO NOW, totally a valid contract. So R takes 19yrold virginity and Q refuses use of his mistress. CAN THIS CONTRACT BE ENFORCED? Yes goddammit BECAUSE contracts is NOT morally obliged. and so i am anti contract law. and that is all.

full stop.