1. Autonomy and Consent

* Only sane, competent individuals may form binding agreements.
* No contract may be valid if made under coercion, fraud, or extreme necessity (eg.,signing under starvation) — Copernicus

I see this as disrupting the whole thing. How do you define "sane" and "competent"? Where do you draw the line? How do you prove it wasn't under coercion, fraud, or extreme necessity? Subsequently, someone could claim that they've been coerced, under fraud or under extreme necessity and it would throw the whole legitimacy into question.

There are too many holes in which the binding nature can be called into question.

Yes, we'd have to standardize those terms.

I'll close this discussion instead of deleting it, since it has gained a response. If you would like to try again, please use text, not images, to present your ideas. And please do not just copy and paste.