You are right this thread is amusing. People who fuck animals are sick bastards. No debate necessary. Ranks up there with dudes that amputate their penis for youtube. Hopefully the true practitioners weed themselves out of the gene pool. Should beast lovers be thrown in jail, no. Should the welfare of animal be checked out and the perps name plastered in every news outlet known, hell yell.
'Course not. But I like to see bestiality as a fetish. Many porn fans say 'I don't know WHY I like it, but I do' about fetishes, so being judgemental has little or no effect. This whole 'save the animals' rant is BS imo, if you cared about animals, really cared, you wouldn't be cooking them for dinner... they're way better off just being fucked by us. And we shouldn't fool ourselves that biology is man-made and that we in any way can control it, sure, we've created society, rules, norms and laws, but evolution takes much longer.
When this thread started everyone knew the horse would be beaten to death... but... beating a horse to death is still the most fun we've had in a long time...
That we sometimes think we're above biology or genes or nature. Typical human behaviour, being the center of the world.
[Link]
Dither Persona non grata
I love America 650 Posts 8/05
Posted - Apr 2 2008 : 12:03PM
If you take the "each man is an island" approach to human conscience it quickly leads into something akin to anarcho-nihilism yes, but that is IMO also too easy of a conclusion. Each man isn't an island, common ethics have evolved through co-existence and social coherence, and has formed even our instinctive reaction patterns (ewww, that's gross) and our relation to knowns and unknowns. So a molestation victim is probably victimised regardless (even if he isn't hurt physically or emotionally), but it's questionable whether he is victimised by the act itself or by society and how it views the act. The moment everyone finds out, is that when he's actually hurt? Regardless of reason, the risk of suffering is so high it's obvious child abuse must be prosecuted. But it's not necessarily derived from a "consent"-argument as I see it. The question in the last part of the previous post still stands. Is consent an absolute or a sliding scale?I'm not in the pro-bestiality crowd, I've never seen an animal porn film and would never seek one out. And you won't see me in any protest march if bestiality is banned, I'd actually be completely fine with that. I'm just trying out some new angles on an argument the type of which just seems to repeat for any kind of weird kink/fetish/perversion being discussed. typos Edited by - Dither on 4/2/2008 12:07:57 PM
When I've watched Stray-X all I can think is 'She's fuckin a dog... and here I am jerking off...', and that makes me feel so pathetic I can't even watch it...
I did a research about this girl with a so strange stage name I didn't know anything before ,apparently she did a tape in which she was mounted by 8 dogs of different breed in a row , according to the informations I collected all of them did actually mount and hump and one or maybe more even tied her in all fours position I can't confirm but if this is true than all of them were more than willing , I don't think it could be possible to force a dog to perform such actions less of all if she's waiting for them to mount on all fours EDIT just a curiosity is she a professional? did she performed on any porn movie? I mean a regular porn EDIT 2 Further researches showed that the one mentioned wasn't a tape but a clip available online, though I've been told that the site who sold it isn't online anymore
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 4/3/2008 11:27:19 AM
I’m always amazed at the irrational hysteria that people angrily shout in any discussion of sex. In no other discussions in our society do we allow irrational ignorance to dominate the discussion. In any discussion of bestiality, animals are compared to children and the mentally disabled. When we do not treat children or the mentally disabled as animals. Opponents of bestiality have to bring in children, because without it. They have no argument. The fact that it’s disgusting and repulsive is a valid argument for not doing it or watching it. But is not a valid reason for laws making it illegal. All these laws on sex will one day be stuck down. There is not a provision in the U S Constitution that allows laws based on morality. In fact the U S Constitution gives individuals the right to set their own moral standards they live by.
It doesn't lol It's common speak for people to use the word "give" in referring to the Constitution. The America people will not buy the Constitution is optional. It's been a long slow progress but the direction is to expand rights.
I don't think its true. "Rights" are a human invention. They are not part of the fabric of the universe that lies there waiting to be "recognized". The rights declared in the US constitution are the opinions of the people who wrote that constitution. I happen to think they are pretty damn good, a great idea of some very civilized people, but they did not exist in the USA until those people made the effort to codify them.
I don't know about that. In a vacuum, a person would be born free and remain that way unless he/she chose to restrict his/her own lifestyle. So in that way, restrictions on a person's life are a human invention. Freedom is natural. Whatever interferes with that is what isn't. I do think the constitution is merely a recognition of certain rights (although some would argue that it doesn't go far enough and some would argue that it goes too far). You can say that it's an opinion but without laws, people would be free to do anything they wished. That isn't an opinion. Otherwise, we wouldn't need laws. I think the founders said as much when they said this - "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."
No, children are used because most proponents of bestiality don't understand the concept of consent. Animals can not consent to sex just like a roofied woman can not consent to sex. Now if your argument is that animals have no rights, that a different discussion. I do agree with you that these type of laws are regional and more to do with community standards.
Where does it allow for blowjobs? Where does it allow for slaughtering animals for food? There are a lot of things it doesn't specifically permit or prohibit. Although we can assume that there are things the founders would have probably frowned upon. And it's probably safe to assume bestiality would be one of those things. But it would be interesting to know if they would make any changes if they could see the US today. I think it's quite possible that they would be aghast at a lot of things. Bestiality is prohibited in the US (rightly or wrongly) so they wouldn't even really see it so much if they could take a little tour of the US as it exists today. I think there are other things they would feel much more strongly about. Edited by - randomprecision on 4/4/2008 12:44:46 AM
Exactly. Thats why anti-bestiality laws are possible. There is no Constitutional protection. Therefore until the Supreme Court says otherwise, can't say bestiality is a right. The US Constitution guarantees only certain rights. Fyi... Constitution doesn't protect blowjobs either. Portions of the south still have anti-sodomy laws on the books.
Which is complete shit. As pointed out earlier, it should be self-evident that consenting adults have every right to fuck and suck. A woman shouldn't need the state's permission to give her BF or husband a BJ. A law against BJs or butt sex is plainly an abuse of state power. If they want to abuse their power, that's fine. I can't do anything about it. But if they're wrong (as they are with the "sodomy" thing) and most people know it, they should be ignored. Bestiality? Now that's a gray area with legitimate reasons for making it illegal and it's easy to understand why there's controversy. I kind of doubt it was common in those days to write something like - "Congress shall make no law forbidding people to give each other blowjobs or fuck each other in the asshole. However, this shall not be construed as permission to fuck donkeys"
Edited by - randomprecision on 4/4/2008 7:16:17 PM
Sodomy is one of those "kick in the teeth" charges. Example - If you are are accused of rape, they will throw in the sodomy for an extra year or two of incarceration. Other laws on the books in my state which the Constitution can't do shit about either... Cleveland It’s illegal to catch mice without a hunting license! Women are forbidden from wearing patent leather shoes, lest men see reflections of their underwear. Ironton Cross-dressing is illegal. North Canton It is against the law to roller skate without notifying the police. Oxford It’s illegal for a woman to strip off her clothing while standing in front of a man’s picture. Youngstown Running out of gas is illegal. Lima Any map that does not have Lima clearly stated on the map cannot be sold. Cincinnati Anal intercourse is banned. Canton Electric fences are banned. If one loses their pet tiger, they must notify the authorities within one hour.
[Link]
Dither Persona non grata
I love America 650 Posts 8/05
Posted - Apr 4 2008 : 9:49PM
That you have to notify the authorities if you lose your pet tiger makes sense. Most of the others don't.
[Link]
Blink Deactivated User
78 Posts 2/08
Posted - Apr 4 2008 : 11:32PM
Sodomy includes intercourse with animals in addition to anal intercourse. "Sexual intercourse that is not the union of the genital organs of a man and a woman. The term is most frequently applied to anal intercourse between two men or to sexual relations between people and animals." http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sodomy So, when you fight against sodomy laws, you're also fighting for bestiality. Just FYI. ;^P
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 5 2008 : 5:54AM
When it comes to torture of your fellow citizens many are willing to treat that as an option. I doubt they're going to take to the streets to defend dog fucking. Edited by - BlackSix on 4/5/2008 5:57:25 AM
Well, personally, I think it's a meaningless, made up word. Butt sex does not belong in the same category as bestiality and anyone who puts it there is an idiot.
On the other hand, how many people have a pet tiger? I doubt there are enough owners of pet tigers in five whole states to necessitate a bunch of laws overly regulating (down to specifics) the ownership of pet tigers.
At least the issue of consent shouldn't be too much of a question with a tiger. I don't think you're gonna fuck a tiger without it's consent unless you seriously sedate it or tie it up or something. Edited by - randomprecision on 4/5/2008 8:09:26 AM
Can you imagine that guy trying to explain to his wife where those gouges on his back came from? "Well, ya see honey. Ummmmm....I got raped in my butt by....ummmm, a tiger."
Introducing Lady LorReign
Posted - Apr 1 2008 : 7:08PM
