You don't prohibit an entire class of interactions, and then approve them on a case-by-case basis when the centralized authority deems that the interaction is consensual.
Approval-encumbered interaction is not consistent with how free society works, where people are presumed innocent, and not burdened with restrictions, until proven guilty.
Speech used to be like that. You had to get approval from the state, before being allowed to publish. This was to prevent things like libel. It was called Prior Restraint. Eventually courts ruled it violated the Freedom of Speech, and we are all vastly better for that ruling.
In practice it's also not flexible enough for innovation.
It regiments only one acceptable way to establish an informed and consensual interaction, which precludes innovative new ways opened up by technology.
Approval-encumbered interaction is not consistent with how free society works, where people are presumed innocent, and not burdened with restrictions, until proven guilty.
Speech used to be like that. You had to get approval from the state, before being allowed to publish. This was to prevent things like libel. It was called Prior Restraint. Eventually courts ruled it violated the Freedom of Speech, and we are all vastly better for that ruling.
In practice it's also not flexible enough for innovation. It regiments only one acceptable way to establish an informed and consensual interaction, which precludes innovative new ways opened up by technology.