Posts

Total: 169
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,841
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
They can't complain if they're left outside in the cold without food either. Still people are allowed to keep dogs as pets because the possibility of abuse doesn't give you the right to prevent all relationships.
Relevance?
It is considered abuse if you leave your pet outside in the cold.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,833
3
3
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
3
2
-->
@Shila
Alright, I'm ignoring you for now. Don't know if you're having a bad day, you're a troll, or you're a bot but this isn't going anywhere.
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,841
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Alright, I'm ignoring you for now. Don't know if you're having a bad day, you're a troll, or you're a bot but this isn't going anywhere.
Your profile list personal information all unknown. Are you a stranger to yourself or blanked out when signing on?

182 days later

ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,833
3
3
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
3
2
-->
@yachilviveyachali
I would say an animal may not be able to consent to sex with a human.
There is a joke among libertarians "but who will pay for the roads", it mocks the incessant naive argument they often encounter. As if they had not seen and defeated the argument ten thousand times.

"but what about consent" is the same for zoosexual apologists.

 If you want to do this properly start with a definition of consent.


It is true some male dogs get carried away with human legs, arms, soft toys, and so on.
If you call it getting carried away does that make it less their choice?

They also get carried away when sticks are thrown, but fetch is not torture or slavery.

They want what they want and nothing is more straightforward than inferring that a creature consents to their own actions when no fear of pain or punishment was ever used to motivate those actions.


Does this mean they want to be the ones on the receiving end?
No, they would have to do something else to demonstrate that.


They all say animals cannot talk.
I have been greatly amused over the years by the number of people I've backed into a corner while debating bestiality whom chose to assert the existence of a secret language of animals that they use with each other but that humans could never learn or perceive.

In short they choose an Disney fantasy over admitting that their moral theory was incoherent.


yachilviveyachali
yachilviveyachali's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 267
0
2
4
yachilviveyachali's avatar
yachilviveyachali
0
2
4
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
It seems unnatural to me. When I see dogs, cats, and other animals I do not think sexual thoughts.

The degenerate behaviors between humans are very bad too. 
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,833
3
3
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
3
2
-->
@yachilviveyachali
When I see dogs, cats, and other animals I do not think sexual thoughts.
... Ok ...


The degenerate behaviors between humans are very bad too. 
Sex is not degenerate.

Addiction is degenerate.

Lying is degenerate.

Apathy is degenerate.

Parasitism is degenerate.
yachilviveyachali
yachilviveyachali's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 267
0
2
4
yachilviveyachali's avatar
yachilviveyachali
0
2
4
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Sex is not degenerate.
It can be. 

Addiction is degenerate.
It is degenerate when you are addicted to a harmful substance. Most commonly this is alcohol, cigarettes, or illicit substances. Sex addiction is also degenerate.

Lying is degenerate.
Yes.

Apathy is degenerate.
It is often a way to shield oneself.

Parasitism is degenerate.
Yes.
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 1,355
3
4
7
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
3
4
7
-->
@yachilviveyachali
When I see dogs, cats, and other animals I do not think sexual thoughts.
Plenty of women do fuck with horses and dogs.
yachilviveyachali
yachilviveyachali's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 267
0
2
4
yachilviveyachali's avatar
yachilviveyachali
0
2
4
-->
@LucyStarfire
They may. I am not one of them.
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 1,355
3
4
7
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
3
4
7
-->
@yachilviveyachali
They may. I am not one of them.
People like different things.

yachilviveyachali
yachilviveyachali's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 267
0
2
4
yachilviveyachali's avatar
yachilviveyachali
0
2
4
-->
@LucyStarfire
Sure...
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,832
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@yachilviveyachali
@LucyStarfire
Degeneration is an unavoidable condition, whereas morality is as morality does.


Plenty of women do fuck with horses and dogs.

Yep, fucking about with horses and dogs is popular.

As is fucking about with hens or golf clubs.

Though I doubt that BK actually  knows any woman in a meaningful equine or canine relationship, nor any person that self penetrates with a sand wedge.

I expect his research is fantasy online porn based.

In fact, I think that BK is fantasy online porn based.
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 1,355
3
4
7
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Though I doubt that BK actually  knows any woman in a meaningful equine or canine relationship, nor any person that self penetrates with a sand wedge.

I expect his research is fantasy online porn based.

In fact, I think that BK is fantasy online porn based.
Not sure why my sex life interests you so very much.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,832
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@LucyStarfire
My chief interest was in the extensive numbers of women you are associate with...The "plenty" who fuck horses and dogs.

In order to know this fact, you must therefore know them.


Other than that I have no interest in your fantasy based masturbation. 
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 1,355
3
4
7
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Other than that I have no interest in your fantasy based masturbation.
Yet you keep talking about it always.

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,832
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@LucyStarfire
Only because you do.

Though "always" is a bit of an exaggeration.
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 1,355
3
4
7
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Only because you do.
No. You mention it even in unrelated topics.

FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,378
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@LucyStarfire

You're up next on the women's side of our club.

14 days later

ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,833
3
3
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
3
2
Previously I have said that there are zoosexuals who identify as christian. I consider this part of the enduring pattern of religion, the capacity for twisting anything  or cherry picking out a preferred interpretation.

Since it is not based in reason or the real agenda of a real god there is nothing to keep it coherent and consistent; nothing but the culture of followers which (as I am pointing out) is nearly as unreliable as the average individual.


Since it seems many of the people currently active on DART are going through some kind of phase where they think blind orthodoxy is cool (even 'masculine' I fear), and wish to cast everything in the light of 'strict dogma', I thought I would repost a selected exchange I found on a zoosexual forum recently. These are not my words:

[Fragcat] I know that the old testament does forbid bestiality, which even then bestiality is far different then me loving my dogs and sex simply being a part of that but the new testament doesn't mention it specifically and I have been told that as having sex with dogs is a form of love, that it is completely natural, ethical and allowed as far as Christianity goes since your just loving gods creations (animals).

Is this true?

[dogluver101] My little look up (may be with Venice AI) shows it doesn't mention nothing about the New Testament. Just adultery, men on men, theives, etc will not inherit the kingdom of God.

[Soapguy] I know 99.9% of Christians would think beastiality a terrible sin, and they would be disgusted by it. But as I've gotten older, I just think of it as appreciating God's creation. I'm not really a practicing Christian but I was raised that way, so it's still ingrained in me to an extent.

But when I see a beautiful dog or horse that's attractive to me, I don't have a problem thinking "look at this beautiful creature God made." And I'm glad he did make them.

As far as the actual scripture in the old testament, Leviticus if I recall, I think that was put there by men just as a way to punish people they thought were sick. Like "while we're writing this down, we might as well throw this in too." I mean there are other things it calls abominations, like eating shrimp, and pork I think?

[Soapguy] As far as the actual scripture in the old testament, Leviticus if I recall, I think that was put there by men just as a way to punish people they thought were sick. Like "while we're writing this down, we might as well throw this in too." I mean there are other things it calls abominations, like eating shrimp, and pork I think?
[bc161] Yeah, these are some of the parts that get me. Like, some of those parts seem almost definitely in there because they're trying to protect people from getting sick, so I sense that there are other things in the bible like that. Maybe they're just thinking like, hey, maybe don't bang your sheep because people are gonna think you're a weirdo and it's nice to have friends homie.

Again, I have no idea what I'm talking about so this is all from the gut.

My words:
Do I consider people who believe jesus is god and the savior of mankind to be real christians even if they think bestiality is fine?

Absolutely, because if cherry picking, deflecting, making excuses for, and ultimately ignoring scripture precluded one from being a christian, there would be no real christians.