Should zoosexuality be legal?

[© tweed]

No. Consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want with each other but if one of your interests in life is forcing yourself upon animals sexually, I do not want you to be a part of the same society as me.

moralist

[© tweed]

No. Consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want with each other but if one of your interests in life is forcing yourself upon animals sexually, I do not want you to be a part of the same society as me.

moralist

Yeah, I guess you got me there.

the infinitely greater animal rights concern in the US is the food industry.  Bob down the street who f.ucks his cat nightly is not something to waste our resources (on).  give up on the offense to the collective consciousness garbage while you still can.

[© tweed]

never in a million years will the people here convince me that they have a deep and intense concern that animals will get raped.  it is just adherence to the moral norm: you are not receptive to arguments in favor of having the law condone pig-f.ucking because you think it is gross.  stop feigning this great concern for an animal's right to consent to sex.  I don't see you crying about the sh**t that goes on with cows and chickens on corporate farms, on a huge scale.  (because that's 'food'.  necessary to survival.  yawn)

[© tweed]

debate here consists of recitation of things heard, not original analysis and postulation.

[© tweed]

No because it's not consensual. 

again all this is circular, the point is that the food industry is the furthest thing from consensual as it is, and a few thousand fckers a year fcking Chickens and Dogs would do far less harm than Purdue and Tyson and Burger King, so let them fck the Chickens.

[© tweed]

neither here nor there my man, unless you prove how it is here -- we are talking about the 'secular' position.

[© tweed]

assuming you do not believe the production of meat for the purposes of eating should be illegal your eating habits are irrelevant to this question, however much you parade them around.

[© tweed]

very, very difficult, this side of you arguing for the illegality of the meat industry at-present, (if not necessarily for the illegality of meat production per-se)

[© tweed]

I am not arguing for the illegality of meat (I don't live in some fantasyland).

well, then, go home with this.  unless you want to wage war on the production of animal meat for human-consumption, you cannot, in a neutral-liberal sense (which you are sure to self-identify), move to prohibit sexual use of animals on any grounds besides that it is "gross".  and again, that is not moral neutral.  liberals are not supposed to recognize things being 'gross', particularly since in the past 10 years they've made allies of the most powerful group of traditional sexual deviants -- the sodomites.

[© tweed]

no, the fact that you are a vegetarian (which you mentioned unprompted multiple times) doesn't matter, the rest of it all matters.

[© tweed]

the implication being, I have to  animals to care?

[© tweed]

I told my family about this thread