Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

View Poll Results: is screwing animals ok?
yes 5 20.00%
no 12 48.00%
maybe 8 32.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-25-2014, 12:56 AM   #21 (permalink)
GuD
Dude... What?
 
GuD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth View Post
i'm not asking cause i want to screw animals (promise). i was just thinking... what is the reason it's not ok to screw animals again? i have heard that it is wrong because sex requires consent.. but that only applies to humans. sex with a doll for example doesn't require consent.
Dolls are inanimate objects with no concept of existence whatsover. Why even bring that up?

Sex with animals is wrong because they can't consent and even if they did... I mean come on dude. It's like tryna pick up on a really drunk girl too blitzed to know left from blue, you just don't do that ****. You call her a cab and get her a glass of water or you're a piece of ****.

Quote:
so if sex with animals requires consent then you are extending human rights to animals. in which case we probably shouldn't be slaughtering them cause we like the way they taste, or doing experiments on them that we think it would be unethical to do to humans.
Yep. Pretty much exactly this. It's sick what is done to intelligent, sentient, living beings.
Quote:
the way i look at it either animals' lives aren't worth that much so we do what we please with them or they are worthy of rights in which case we are way out of line with how we currently treat them across the board.


Quote:
i'm having trouble finding the middle ground where slaughtering them is fine, keeping them in captivity for entertainment is fine, injecting them with **** to see what happens is fine, but screwing them is over the line.

None of those things are fine
. Most people just don't give a ****.

Quote:
another possible objection i thought of is maybe we consider exploitation of animals ok depending on the objective. so we consider food (farming), sport (hunting, rodeos, etc), science (experimentation), and education (zoos and ****) to be worthy causes for animal exploitation.

thoughts?
I wouldn't ever do it unless I had to but the way I see it if you're gonna eat an animal, have the stones to kill it yourself. Hunting for sport? Sub-human. Industrialized meat-farming is sick but we've all seen the videos and heard the stories. Buying meats locally is a good way to not contribute to that if you're, you know, one of those people- but I find eating meat objectionable simply because it's highly, highly, highly unnecessary. Eating meat is basically just vanity. I like the way it tastes so I'll conveniently not think or pretend to care about it's whereabouts. Only a gigantic pussy would think like that. Rodeos are stupid, The End. Science... it depends on what's being done. I find it very saddening but stuff like cancer research and disease control and all that... kind of important. In the end I do think human lives, for the most part, are more important than "animal's". But that's very, very, very far from any sort of justification for how they are treated in almost all cases.

Zoos can be cool. Some of them are basically wild-life rescues, the animals held in captivity wouldn't survive in the wild because whatever circumstances made it so. Others... not so much. Pretty lame to put a bunch of critters in cages so toddlers and their parents can gawk and then later forget about them.

Quote:
but exploiting them for sex is wrong for whatever reason. as for what that reason is i'm not quite sure.
because they can't consent and because if they could it'd still be just lame and gross.
__________________
I spit bullets in my feet
Every time I speak
So I write instead
And still people want me dead
~msc

Last edited by GuD; 08-25-2014 at 01:01 AM.
GuD is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 01:40 AM   #22 (permalink)
Who wants this dick?
 
Dharma & Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 36,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhateverDude View Post
Dolls are inanimate objects with no concept of existence whatsover. Why even bring that up?

Sex with animals is wrong because they can't consent and even if they did... I mean come on dude. It's like tryna pick up on a really drunk girl too blitzed to know left from blue, you just don't do that ****. You call her a cab and get her a glass of water or you're a piece of ****.
You own your dog without her consent. You give her medical care, and possibly invasive procedures that may endanger her life, without her consent. You choose what food she eats. How much she eats. When she goes to the bathroom. Just about every part of your dog's existence is decided without her consent. No matter how benevolent, if you treated a human in the same way you would be a monster. And yet only in the case of sex do you apply human ethics?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvin & Hobbes
To evaluate my character my immediate pleasure is being pitted against my future greed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Pepe Kalle View Post
The Batlord is amazing man. He loves some fine woman and he gets horny easily. What is better than that.
Dharma & Greg is online now  
Old 08-25-2014, 02:29 AM   #23 (permalink)
#notmymoderator
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,596
Default

Crossing species is pretty gross and we all know that what's gross is not cool. I'll stick my round peg into the trademarked and appropriate hole thank you very much. I remember talking to a goat ****er though, he was from Palestine and his uncle showed him the ropes. Yeah. Goat raping aside the kid was totally normal apart from his accent. I thought it was too creepy how he looked like he he didn't show remorse for it at all but seemed almost proud of it.

Maybe society's taboos are too ingrained in my skull but I see banging different species as one of those fetishes to fulfill by banging people like The Batlord and using their imagination. Or maybe it's objectively wrong and you should stop screwing your poodle.
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 08:01 AM   #24 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skyline View Post
It is, and it's thanks to that that many products can be made affordable. Our realiance on cows for products other than meat is a byproduct of our diet, but that doesn't make it any less of a reliance. That entire industry built on butchering cows began as a necessity, before globalisation people didn't have the choices we do now.
not sure what you mean about globalization. but regardless of how it started it's not a necessity anymore. in fact it's pretty wasteful compared to farming veggies. can't you just admit people have no problem killing cows cause they taste good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
I'm one of "those" people. I'm okay with hunting/fishing for your food though.

Idk where I stand on the ****ing(probably somewhere in the middle). I'm generally open-minded about letting people do whatever the **** they please as long as it's not harmful to others but without knowing the affects it would have on an animal I can not answer.

I love animals but I'm even on the fence about keeping them as pets. I think we impose to much of our **** on nature. I guess it's a little late for dogs since the species as a whole has become so dependent on humans to survive.
i'm not one of 'those' people, but at least it's an internally consistent position. i'm one of the amoral people who are willing to let animals suffer because i like to eat them and use the other products and advances that we derive from their general exploitation.

i sorta agree with you about pets though. seems useless to me. i hate it when people have exotic pets especially that sit in a cage all day. what a waste of a life. but once again i don't condemn people for it cause i would be a hypocrite if i did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoxyRollah View Post


John is not ok because it's nasty, NASTY.


When was the last time you saw a bovine and said, "mmmm look at those utters"
i think giving rimjobs is nasty. like batlord said... icky != immoral
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhateverDude View Post
Dolls are inanimate objects with no concept of existence whatsover. Why even bring that up?

Sex with animals is wrong because they can't consent and even if they did... I mean come on dude. It's like tryna pick up on a really drunk girl too blitzed to know left from blue, you just don't do that ****. You call her a cab and get her a glass of water or you're a piece of ****.
i bring it up because in making the consent argument there is the presumption that animals have rights. and it seems like if they do have rights they have very strange rights which allow their wholesale exploitation in almost every possible way imaginable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
I remember talking to a goat ****er though, he was from Palestine and his uncle showed him the ropes. Yeah. Goat raping aside the kid was totally normal apart from his accent. I thought it was too creepy how he looked like he he didn't show remorse for it at all but seemed almost proud of it.
John Wilkes Booth is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 08:04 AM   #25 (permalink)
Oracle
 
RoxyRollah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Closer then you think.....
Posts: 4,004
Default

Aint no body asked you for a rimjob!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuitarBizarre View Post
Roxy is unable to perpetrate violence. It always somehow turns into BDSM between two consenting adults.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
I just want to say your tits are lovely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grindy View Post
Roxy is the William S. Burroughs of our time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
I like Roxy, she's awesome and her taste in music far exceeds yours. Roxy is in the Major League bro, and you're like a sad clown in a two bit rodeo.
RoxyRollah is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 08:10 AM   #26 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

you don't know that.
John Wilkes Booth is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 08:55 AM   #27 (permalink)
The Big Dog
 
14232949's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,949
Default

I see what you're saying Wilkes Booth. I actually do. Surprisingly it's not something I'd given much thought to before reading through this post.
It's another one of those things people are just going to offer the view of 'no that is wrong' without really questioning why they stand to be so morally objecting.

I see animal testing as a form of torture. No animal is consented to being tested, to being made subject of scientific (and plenty not so 'scientific') experiments. No animal has signed a waiver or receives an incentive for being forced to partake. Is this really any more acceptable than bending a sheep over and shoving your cock on? Surely they've got to be on the same level. Surely nobody would think torture is a lesser crime than rape. Both are horrific obviously, but if we look at the sentencing each crime brings by law, torture is considered more severe in the eyes of the law. So surely, in the rules that uphold how we behave, what is marked as more severe there, surely should apply to our moral ranking of its severity also?

As Batlord said, we breed animals to breed with one another. It's playing God as much as cloning a sheep in a laboratory. We're manipulating the lives of creatures we rear for purpose. The only reason cattle have a life in the first place is to be raised for slaughter. For their meat. Without the demand for meat, these animals would not have life in the first place. It's all well and good saying 'Don't eat meat, spare the animals' but these animals would not exist without being bred for the purpose of being slaughtered.
So I see what JWB is saying. Why is it so much more wrong that you could breed animals for the purpose of shagging them?

You don't really want to create infertile or hybrid offspring, but why would it be so much different to breed animals, wear contraceptive and f*ck them. The only difference is that it's not already happening so as a society we haven't come to accept it. We see it as abnormal because it doesn't happen (at least that we're aware of)
If it did, we'd all be at it. We just say it's morally wrong because that's what society expects us to say, and nobody wants to be looked as the outcast that wants to f*ck animals, through fear of being shunned or worse.
14232949 is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 09:15 AM   #28 (permalink)
Who wants this dick?
 
Dharma & Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 36,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankycaaant View Post
Surely nobody would think torture is a lesser crime than rape.
I imagine torture has the same traumatic effect on an animal as it does a person. I don't know that I've ever heard that nonconsensual sex with an animal has the same traumatic effect that it would on a person. So comparing rape to torture in the case of animals may not be relevant.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvin & Hobbes
To evaluate my character my immediate pleasure is being pitted against my future greed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Pepe Kalle View Post
The Batlord is amazing man. He loves some fine woman and he gets horny easily. What is better than that.
Dharma & Greg is online now  
Old 08-25-2014, 09:27 AM   #29 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

to me the real point is we are willing to inflict said traumatic effect on animals in other ways so even if screwing them has the same effect that isn't an argument for it being wrong unless you are willing to equally condemn all the other ways we inflict that sort of pain on them. and so this requires that you not only be a vegetarian but that you push to ban the practices that are currently hurting animals, or else you should also be willing to let people screw them.
John Wilkes Booth is offline  
Old 08-25-2014, 09:52 AM   #30 (permalink)
Who wants this dick?
 
Dharma & Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 36,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth View Post
to me the real point is we are willing to inflict said traumatic effect on animals in other ways so even if screwing them has the same effect that isn't an argument for it being wrong unless you are willing to equally condemn all the other ways we inflict that sort of pain on them. and so this requires that you not only be a vegetarian but that you push to ban the practices that are currently hurting animals, or else you should also be willing to let people screw them.
Reasonable, but while the issue of whether or not sex with an animal is actually cruel may not be relevant to your question, in the world of "real life" morality, where it's okay to eat an animal but not to hit one, it still matters.

But yeah, logically, if it's okay to eat an animal, it's irrational to then say you can't **** one, and I don't see much of an argument to say otherwise.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvin & Hobbes
To evaluate my character my immediate pleasure is being pitted against my future greed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Pepe Kalle View Post
The Batlord is amazing man. He loves some fine woman and he gets horny easily. What is better than that.
Dharma & Greg is online now  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.