If we can all (minus gbaji and alma) accept that drunkenness negates consent, and that drunkenness is somewhere between "tipsy" and "passed out," I think that's all that's necessary to further a discussion.
Given that there is no law supporting your claim, obviously there are more people than myself and Gbaji who believe that simply being drunk (especially self intoxicated) doesn't negate your actions. Until you can explain why *** should be treated differently when drunk, you have no reason to support your claim.
Well, your time with Big Ed is going to hurt a lot less after a fifth of Jack. Just some friendly advice.