Bestiality

[Rozalia]

Something illegal and scorned but... why? Yes I know, Christianity in the west is the reason here but logically why? With animals we do far worse. We test things on them, force them to do sport, kill/eat them... why are such things morally correct but Bestiality isn't? Additionally the animal belongs to the person, a possession so should they not do with their position as they wish? If you brought a fruit you could for example use it for sexual gratification, why not an animal? There is the essence of "animal rape" of course due to their being no consent (though the law will recognize no method to consent even if a dog for example legitimately wants to hump somebody), but... that is a worse thing then killing and eating an animal? 
 
Of course there is still an element of rape if you do it to somebody else's possession, diseases would need checking, and some other things but... what exactly logically makes us constrain people's freedom to do with their possession as they like? Some might say something like, "It's weird", but some people get sexual gratification from poop too so... whatever fetish you use to get your jollies off doesn't seem to be any of our business. 
 

Beastality confirmed to get page hits. I was merely trying to have a discussion nothing more, many have been quick to assume other things of course which I suppose is expected on such a thing.
 
Well if this is the level the discussion goes to then it seems clear to me no one here has an actual argument against it beyond what I already addressed in the OP and took apart. It was I thought an interesting discussion on a subject that does not often come up and nobody having anything worthwhile to say saves me some effort.
 
What contemplation it further triggers in me is if the slippery slope is indeed real. They point at interracial, homosexuality, then polygamy (which I did a previous thread on), then beastality, then incest and pedophila. Polygamy is I think something that will very much get allowed in future so that means they will be correct there also but then will it move on to bestality? Then will it go further. Even someone who supports personal freedoms as much as I do balks at pedophila and incest (this one less so then pedophilia) but in future will people be more open to it? Ummm... no amount of conservatism and killings stopped homosexuality though so could it all be inevitable? I mean we balk at pedophilia now but imagine a future with far more people where the individual is degraded heavily, in such a future such things could well be a norm. 
Are those who support homosexuality a vanguard for beastality like the critics say is the question and perhaps they are right, but is this worth cutting back on personal freedoms? Ummm...

Well yes I mentioned that in the OP. Talk of "consent" is mentioned however this seems to me to be a false point for the law puts forward no method for the animal to actually content, it could very well do so but it has been determined to be impossible. The law might as well say, "it's not allowed because it ain't" for all it matters when it comes to animals. Ultimately though children are not animals, there are very large differences between the two. Animals are possessions and many such animals experience mass killing on an industrial scale, in human terms it'd be referred to as genocide. 
 
Animals are not on our level and no one outside those who oppose such things wholesale believe that. If they were they'd never accept the genocide that goes on year in and year out. As such what exactly matters when it comes to animal consent, I mean the chicken didn't consent to being killed, it didn't consent to being drugged up, nor being jailed for it's whole life. It's a weird morality to me where such horrific things done to animals is perfectly fine but sex is just, well the reactions people have of even being asked to discuss the matter is telling enough. Ultimately if it is wrong to have sex with them, then it is wrong to imprison them wrongfully, to drug them, to kill them, to eat them. Sex cannot be morally wrong logically if unjustified death is seen as morally correct. Likewise if murder and even genocide is correct then what harm ultimately does sex do? 
 
To be clear I'm more putting this to any who will actually step past their prejudices to actually discuss the matter instead of just showing some buzzword like "SICK" and think they've made some intellectual statement. Not to you specifically Hereno though if you want to talk to me on the matter that'd be dandy.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Rozalia

[Dimitri Valko]

First off, people typically don't find animals attractive.

Second off, who would do that to an animal?

Third off, human-animal hybrids... ugh.

[Rozalia]

First off, people typically don't find animals attractive.

Second off, who would do that to an animal?

Third off, human-animal hybrids... ugh.

 

You'll find some people do. 

There are such people.

Human-animal hybrids can't be born. 

[fistofdoom]

This is the retardation that is becoming more common place in modern times.

[Spite]

Your views are becoming more insane every day.

[Stormrideron]

Bestiality is immoral because why the !@#$ would anyone !@#$ with animals? Those people who do bestiality are much likely to have a mental illness condition because clearly there is something wrong with them attracting to animal as a fetish object.

[Rozalia]

This is the retardation that is becoming more common place in modern times.

 

Having a discussion on religious morality limiting personal choice is retardation? By definition of the word it ain't but yes I'm aware you using it as slang.

 

Your views are becoming more insane every day.

 

That implies I've not been big on personal choice for a long time. I've told you this several times already and I'm sure you're still going to call me a gay hating conservative somewhere down the line because I oppose multiculturalism.  

 

Bestiality is immoral because why the !@#$ would anyone !@#$ with animals? Those people who do bestiality are much likely to have a mental illness condition because clearly there is something wrong with them attracting to animal as a fetish object.

 

Sexual gratification? Experimentation? Attraction/love? 

How is that different to saying those who are attracted to and who have sex with e.g Black people have a mental illness? That those who do or receive anal have a mental illness? In regards to morality we force animals to shag each other, do sport, hunt, keep them imprisoned, test products on them, kill and eat them... why is all that morale and okay but not sex? Why are animals so inferior in so many things to the point their mass killing is perfectly acceptable, but having sex isn't?

[Spite]

Bestiality isn't illegal for religious reasons. It's because it's sick.

[Dimitri Valko]

Of course there is still an element of rape if you do it to somebody else's possession... [cut] but... what exactly logically makes us constrain people's freedom to do with their possession as they like?

 

What the f**k is wrong with you, mate?

[Rozalia]

Bestiality isn't illegal for religious reasons. It's because it's sick.

 

Some definitely were due to religion directly, others because of cultural effects of religion. 

As for being sick refer to my previous post. You could say the same about so many things. 

 

Guys, discussing bestiality is banned.

Chek  teh forum rulz

 

No it isn't. I'm not showing any such material nor promoting it. In fact I myself have a distaste for it, animals and me don't mix, however in regards to personal choice and peoples business why is this such a taboo? Homosexuality is mental apparently. Anal is mental. BDSM is mental. Scat is mental. So on and so forth. I support all such things, they may not be my thing but I don't judge and it's their business. 

 

What the f**k is wrong with you, mate?

 

Wow. People are so restrictive on the matter of personal choice that even a discussion is cause to call someone insane. I support legalising cocain too, don't see a huge difference between the two. 

[Spite]

You ever done anything with an animal Rozalia?

[Dimitri Valko]

There is the essence of "animal rape" of course due to their being no consent, but... that is a worse thing then killing and eating an animal?

 

Does that mean pedophilia is justified because is it's better than infanticide?

 

Some might say something like, "It's weird", but some people get sexual gratification from poop too so... whatever fetish you use to get your jollies off doesn't seem to be any of our business. 

 

And necrophilia, too?

 

Let me guess, we're going to see him condoning cannibalism, next?

[Franz Von Dietrich]

I don't see anything productive from having sexual intercourse with an animal, doesn't even produce a offspring. We shouldn't encourage such acts, mainly with wild animals, but if you love that risk, go ahead and take it.

 

It's pointless and in my opinion; gross.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Comrade Enver Hoxha

[Hereno]

he really does have a point though. if you can raise something in a factory, pump it full of drugs that make its body too heavy for its bones to support, and then beat it half to death before finally killing and eating it, why not !@#$ it? i'd much rather be !@#$ed, although i wouldn't support the rape of animals. but i mean if the animal wants it who gives a !@#$? sure it's gross but so what? i think people who shower twice a week are gross. i think managers are gross. are we gonna outlaw them?

[Rozalia]

You ever done anything with an animal Rozalia?

 

I am embarrassingly scared/uneasy of animals both big and small. Couldn't even if I wanted to which I don't no. 

 

Does that mean pedophilia is justified because is it's better than infanticide?

 

 

And necrophilia, too?

 

Let me guess, we're going to see him condoning cannibalism, next?

 

To that I'll refer to the homosexual defense of them not being the same thing. That and that has a human being, a minor involved, far different than an animal which is ultimately a possession, and like I said people have no issues doing horrible things to. Is on a mass scale children killed and eaten like animals are for example? No.

 

Well in regards to Necrophilia there is a matter of disturbing a grave which belongs to someone else if talking grave digging. Bodies when they die need to go to a morgue and be prepared for funeral/burning so not a whole lot of time for such deeds, and withholding a body to get your jollies off would obviously be wrong. I suppose a scenario where the person in life consents to it is possible but I honestly don't know enough about the nature of such things to give a definite answer.

 

Well Cannibalism is a tricky one. If you kill someone and eat them then obviously you just committed the act of murder. Desecrating a corpse with no permission is also wrong. However what does ultimately make the act so terrible really I ponder. I mean lets say for example in addition to burning your body you also had a meat grinder option to... feed the starving in africa lets say, the charity option you could say, in fact I've played something that had such a scenario (though the people were often alive naturally) and were put in factories to be put in cans. However with organ harvesters already being a thing, expanding their business would be unwise. Heavy government overseeing would be required but black markets do develop. 

[fistofdoom]

I like my steak and I don't want you looking at it funny, so shove off.

[Dimitri Valko]

I am embarrassingly scared/uneasy of animals both big and small.

 

[Spite]

 

Hey Rozalia, how's it going?

[Rozalia]

 

Hey Rozalia, how's it going?

 

Cute but it's not at the level a picture worries me. I can cope well enough with something like that though I detest touching animals because I then feel my hands are dirty and I wash my hands often enough already. We all have our quirks, it's not a huge deal. 

[Seryozha Nikanor]

Calm down Hitler, lets just keep bestiality in Skyrim mods ok? We dont need to go farther than that.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Seryozha Nikanor

[Belisarius]

 

Welp, this is mildly amusing

[Avruch]

I don't know how I got here. This thread is part of the reason why I stay out of non-game related areas of forums, because I'm always disappointed by how stupid some people are who otherwise I don't mind from game-only interactions. 

[Rozalia]

I don't know how I got here. This thread is part of the reason why I stay out of non-game related areas of forums, because I'm always disappointed by how stupid some people are who otherwise I don't mind from game-only interactions.

 

Beastality confirmed to get page hits. I was merely trying to have a discussion nothing more, many have been quick to assume other things of course which I suppose is expected on such a thing.

 

Calm down Hitler, lets just keep bestiality mods in Skyrim ok? We dont need to go farther than that.

 

Hitler? 

 

Well if this is the level the discussion goes to then it seems clear to me no one here has an actual argument against it beyond what I already addressed in the OP and took apart. It was I thought an interesting discussion on a subject that does not often come up and nobody having anything worthwhile to say saves me some effort.

 

What contemplation it further triggers in me is if the slippery slope is indeed real. They point at interracial, homosexuality, then polygamy (which I did a previous thread on), then beastality, then incest and pedophila. Polygamy is I think something that will very much get allowed in future so that means they will be correct there also but then will it move on to bestality? Then will it go further. Even someone who supports personal freedoms as much as I do balks at pedophila and incest (this one less so then pedophilia) but in future will people be more open to it? Ummm... no amount of conservatism and killings stopped homosexuality though so could it all be inevitable? I mean we balk at pedophilia now but imagine a future with far more people where the individual is degraded heavily, in such a future such things could well be a norm. 

Are those who support homosexuality a vanguard for beastality like the critics say is the question and perhaps they are right, but is this worth cutting back on personal freedoms? Ummm...

[Hereno]

the main argument against it would be the main argument against pedophilia and a lot of other paraphilias in that it's hard for a fish to give consent

[Rozalia]

the main argument against it would be the main argument against pedophilia and a lot of other paraphilias in that it's hard for a fish to give consent

 

Well yes I mentioned that in the OP. Talk of "consent" is mentioned however this seems to me to be a false point for the law puts forward no method for the animal to actually content, it could very well do so but it has been determined to be impossible. The law might as well say, "it's not allowed because it ain't" for all it matters when it comes to animals. Ultimately though children are not animals, there are very large differences between the two. Animals are possessions and many such animals experience mass killing on an industrial scale, in human terms it'd be referred to as genocide. 

 

Animals are not on our level and no one outside those who oppose such things wholesale believe that. If they were they'd never accept the genocide that goes on year in and year out. As such what exactly matters when it comes to animal consent, I mean the chicken didn't consent to being killed, it didn't consent to being drugged up, nor being jailed for it's whole life. It's a weird morality to me where such horrific things done to animals is perfectly fine but sex is just, well the reactions people have of even being asked to discuss the matter is telling enough. Ultimately if it is wrong to have sex with them, then it is wrong to imprison them wrongfully, to drug them, to kill them, to eat them. Sex cannot be morally wrong logically if unjustified death is seen as morally correct. Likewise if murder and even genocide is correct then what harm ultimately does sex do? 

 

To be clear I'm more putting this to any who will actually step past their prejudices to actually discuss the matter instead of just showing some buzzword like "SICK" and think they've made some intellectual statement. Not to you specifically Hereno though if you want to talk to me on the matter that'd be dandy. 

Edited March 25, 2016 by Rozalia