They should both carry equal penalties under the law.For example, video of children speaking ill of their own parents (or even parents in general) should be censored in the same manner and with the same urgency as bestiality.If you have read the book of Leviticus, you would know what a ridiculous statement that is - if you are seeking to apply consistent principles of textual interpretation of course.
Can you be slightly more specific ?
Can you be slightly more specific ?Why? Even if it did somehow require equal punishment under the law, that wouldn't change the fact that bestiality is immoral.
Well, there appear to be some subtle, yet rather important distinctions between degrees of "immoral" and I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page.
Well, there appear to be some subtle, yet rather important distinctions between degrees of "immoral" and I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page.The original question was question whether bestiality is immoral or not. If we agree that it can be categorized as "immoral," then the degree of immorality is irrelevant. We have already answered the original question.
Well, there appear to be some subtle, yet rather important distinctions between degrees of "immoral" and I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page.The original question was question whether bestiality is immoral or not. If we agree that it can be categorized as "immoral," then the degree of immorality is irrelevant. We have already answered the original question.
You're overlooking the foundation, the moral bedrock.
Does the holy scripture perhaps explain when and where it is appropriate to inflict pain and discomfort on other living creatures ?
You're overlooking the foundation, the moral bedrock.Determining if something is immoral is more foundational than determining how immoral something is.
Does the holy scripture perhaps explain when and where it is appropriate to inflict pain and discomfort on other living creatures ?How is this relevant to the clear command not to engage in bestiality?
Bestiality is not condemned because of the pain or discomfort caused to the animal.
Because it goes against the natural order. Sex is reserved for a married man and woman - a human man and woman.
2. Because it goes against the natural order. Sex is reserved for a married man and woman - a human man and woman.
Do you perhaps see them as wastes of time that amounts to nothing substantial or are you just openly homophobic, or what?
I mean, animals can't consent to human sex, just like why pedophilia is incorrect(Children can't consent).
Are you agreeing that the Bible considers bestiality an immoral act to some degree? Because the fundamental issue is if bestiality is immoral.
You do an excellent job at answering questions I don't ask while ignoring the questions I do ask.
Where did I agree that bestiality is exactly as bad as contempt for parents? I asked a specific question and you responded by making a false assertion that didn't actually answer the question.
Where did I agree that bestiality is exactly as bad as contempt for parents?
The exact same phrasing "cursed" is used to condemn bestiality and parental contempt.And by the way, "honor your mother and father" also appears to share equal gravity with "thou shalt not kill" in the decalogue.Your holy scripture seems to lack some fundamental precision.
My question:Where did I agree that bestiality is exactly as bad as contempt for parents?
You implicitly agreed when you delegated your sense-making to the holy scripture (deuteronomy twenty seven).Now you are locked into finding a distinction between the two admonitions in the same holy text.
We agree that you have no foundation to tell anyone not to engage in bestiality, pedophilia, or rape if they want to.
