Comment: I don't think it would be much of a debate...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I believe you - (see in situ)

I don't think it would be much of a debate...

because from what I gather, we agree that harm is totally subject to the perception of each individual. What harms one, may not harm another.
(the following is for the benefit of someone who may be reading this thread- I know you don't want to respond)
A very simple real life example:
If you studied karate with me then you would know I am perfectly okay with you kicking me in the leg, however your buddy might forbid the exact same behavior.

To me, getting kicked in the leg is beneficial and therefore I allow others to kick me in the leg on a regular basis.
To your buddy, getting kicked in the leg is harmful and therefore he would forbid others from kicking him in the leg.

Stranger still, I could consider getting kicked in the leg beneficial for the exact same reason he would consider it harmful...because it causes pain.

Naturally, your buddy forbids the harmful behavior. No legislature needed.

Where society is composed of individuals coexisting with one another in order to benefit themselves, the act of harming another is antithetical to society, and is naturally forbidden.