I find it kind of ironic that you are clearly, well versed on what the core meaning of consent is, yet you can't seem to apply this understanding to all things. Government is non consensual. Government is rape. However, if you take the idea of governance and make it completely consensual it ceases to be immoral, in the same way that rape is immoral and BDSM is not. In the same way that assault is immoral, but a boxing match is not. To argue that "we need government though" is to argue "but how am I gonna get laid without raping someone?" Its beside the point. Wanting (or even needing) something does not entitle you to it. not to say you can't do immoral things in the sake of self preservation, but immoral actions in the name of self preservation do not magically become moral. Being alive is a privilege, not a right (despite what many people think). A true "right to life" would constitute immortality. What is percieved as a right to life is a positive right, or a right that requires action, which is not actually a right at all, it is the contention that maintaining your life is everyone elses responsibility, which is fundamentally absurd. The only legitimate rights anyone has are negative rights, also known as natural rights, or inalienable rights, which are rights that are not granted by anyone, rights which are inherent to existence, and mostly stem from your natural right to personal property (which government stands in violation of).