US Supreme Court Justice Scalia: homosexuality is similar to bestiality - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Dori;39062216]fucking animals is ok[/QUOTE] ...and you're all stupid because i'm gay and i say so

Jesus fuck look at that disgusting rich white frog man.

I can see tiny craters in his face. Strange how a guy like him can make it all the way to Supreme Court.

I think it's more than likely than an animal can want to have sex with a human through an animal paraphilia that involves being attracted to humans, or different sexual instincts alltogether, the only thing is we don't know how to determine if those conditions are met. Regardless, whether somebody gets a boner over the same sex, kids, animals, dead bodies or doorknobs, they're all things that one can't physically reproduce with, and as long as they don't act on their urges if the other party does not or can not give consent, then there is nothing wrong with them. Saying all zoophiles rape animals is like saying that somebody ugly and unlikeable is going to go out and rape everybody, because nobody would want to have sex with them.

ok so guys wait what if fucking an animal is bad, but letting them be the ones to initiate it isnt? im sure someone else already mentioned that it seems basic anyway this is the best thread in a while [editline]1st January 2013[/editline] doesnt really matter anyway the point of this thread is that Scalia is wrong

[QUOTE=J!NX;39062207]I am so confused right now, what is this guy even SAYING? Can someone explain?[/QUOTE] "Starting upon the premise that I myself am homosexual I believe that I can speak for every homosexual in the world when I say that not only is any show of support you may display unwelcome, it is hypocritical. Indeed you only show support for homosexuals in an attempt to fit in with the crowd, your opinion would be the polar opposite if you were born but a hundred years ago when homosexuality was seen as a sin! Having proved you all as hypocrites I can now easily affirm that this man's opinion is correct and that you have no way of proving that something is right or wrong because your sense of right and wrong is literally "whatever the popular opinion of today is" - an everchanging guideline." Or simpler: "I'm gay so all gays think like me and hate the likes of you. You're sheep following popular opinions on homosexuality. One day popular opinion may say that bestiality is ok therefore you're hypocrites. " At least that's what I understood. Box-worthy points of his argument: Every gay thinking like him. Scalia being right. You being a hypocrite because you don't hate gays.

[QUOTE=01271;39063250]Box-worthy points of his argument: Every gay thinking like him. Scalia being right. You being a hypocrite because you don't hate gays.[/QUOTE] Also animal rape

[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;39056998]I always thought Supreme Court Justices were supposed to be the least corrupt and stupid people in the government.[/QUOTE] In a sense the argument has a solid background. The fact that you disagree with it doesn't invalidate it on a certain level. It was standard to be immoral to A as well as to B, as such we should uphold both our view of immorality of both A and B. On top of that, supreme court judges in the US tend to fall into liberal and conservative camps. Then there's one more thing to consider - he merely disented. A lot of times, on a panel of judges you get a number of dissenting opinions on a number of highly politicised issues, or issues were multiple morality angles have to upheld. It's very often done semi-intentionally by the court in order to maintain a more cosmopolitan view from the public.

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;39062117]The difference between pets and livestock are really in the eyes of the beholder. (That is to say they are arbitrary or conform to the needs/desires/situation of a culture) To one person, a rodent might be a pet or live food for their snake. To someone in parts of Asia a dog or a cat can be food. Some people keep animals often used as live stock as pets, such as chickens.[/QUOTE] I don't know what you're arguing here because in every culture ever, fucking your pet dog is not okay Sure in Asia some people eat cats and dogs but that has nothing to do with goddamn bestiality (or "zoophilia" as people like to call it)

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39063649]I don't know what you're arguing here because in every culture ever, fucking your pet dog is not okay Sure in Asia some people eat cats and dogs but that has nothing to do with goddamn bestiality (or "zoophilia" as people like to call it)[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.vice.com/the-vice-guide-to-sex/asses-of-the-caribbean[/url] (Nsfw, contains a scene of bestiality with a donkey and descriptions of the act in a culture that is wholly accepting) I'm not even arguing pro-bestiality, you're just wrong. The Egyptians are commonly believed to have practiced bestiality with quite a variety of the local fauna, and the Greek Colosseums featured scenes of animal raping women as an attraction (in a depiction of the coming of the God Zeus). In Europe it is believed that bestiality in rural areas was common and not frowned upon until a hundred years or so before the Dark Ages. Even today in some Middle Eastern countries and in parts of non-Christianized Africa bestiality is used as part of the trial to achieve manhood, aside from being found more comical and worthy of ridicule than damning. It's depicted in many modern and ancient cultures as the actions of a particular deity, You should at least do research before making such strong assertions.

[QUOTE=person11;39062881]ok so guys wait what if fucking an animal is bad, but letting them be the ones to initiate it isnt? im sure someone else already mentioned that it seems basic anyway this is the best thread in a while [editline]1st January 2013[/editline] doesnt really matter anyway the point of this thread is that Scalia is wrong[/QUOTE] try explaining "its ok officer my dog was asking for it" to a cop please

[QUOTE=J!NX;39065710]try explaining "its ok officer my dog was asking for it" to a cop please[/QUOTE] just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong

[QUOTE=Judas;39065724]just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong[/QUOTE] pretty sure our laws about not raping animals are pretty fucking right

I'm probably gonna get a barrage of boxes here but if the reasoning that bestiality should be illegal because it is always rape as animals don't have the ability give consent to us for sex then logic dictates that using animals for work must be forced slavery, keeping pets is forced imprisonment, or to sum it up anything you do to them is against their will and hence illegal. Hell, killing pests and stepping on bugs is murder because they can't consent to it. The difference with minors is that they become adults and have the ability to consent, whereas animals never break out of that sphere Making bestiality illegal to cut down on actual animal abuse and harm is more the proper reason, as it is proven to work, but outlawing it just because it's apparently always rape doesn't make much sense [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] I probably could have worded that a bit better but nvm

[QUOTE=Judas;39065724]just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong[/QUOTE] shitpedophilessay

and dori yet again rates but doesn't reply, nice one

[QUOTE=Judas;39065724]just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong[/QUOTE] yeah, but there's a rationale behind this law which makes sense: animals cannot consent. not even parrots, any potential parrotfuckers out there

I also find it weird how keeping animals locked up in bad conditions and killing them (even if it is for food) is legal while having sex with them isn't

it's a form of animal abuse [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=RobL;39067485]I also find it weird how keeping animals locked up in bad conditions and killing them (even if it is for food) is legal while having sex with them isn't[/QUOTE] keeping animals locked up in terrible conditions shouldn't be legal either tbf

[QUOTE=RobL;39067485]I also find it weird how keeping animals locked up in bad conditions and killing them (even if it is for food) is legal while having sex with them isn't[/QUOTE] keep trying to rationalize raping animals dude, you're the hero zoophiles need

[QUOTE=Turnips5;39067462]yeah, but there's a rationale behind this law which makes sense: animals cannot consent. not even parrots, any potential parrotfuckers out there[/QUOTE] Like I said, that would also mean animals can't consent to anything else either. Anything done to animals beyond letting them live in their natural habitat should be a crime by that logic [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Dori;39067501]keep trying to rationalize raping animals dude, you're the hero zoophiles need[/QUOTE] Keeping bestiality illegal because it reduces animal abuse and harm is great, but stating that the apparent fact that having sex with animals is always rape and that it's "icky" is the basis for the law is just narrow-minded and dumb

[QUOTE=RobL;39067506]Like I said, that would also mean animals can't consent to anything else either. Anything done to animals beyond letting them live in their natural habitat should be a crime by that logic[/QUOTE] except literally no-one here is defending animal cruelty, besides the guys who want to rape animals the only way your posts could be relevant is if you're implying that raping them should be fine because they're already in bad conditions [editline]3rd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=RobL;39067506]Keeping bestiality illegal because it reduces animal abuse and harm is great, but stating that the apparent fact that having sex with animals is always rape and that it's "icky" is the basis for the law is just narrow-minded and dumb[/QUOTE] no, the basis for those laws is that animals [i]can't fucking consent[/i]. That's it.

[QUOTE=MisterMooth;39067560]except literally no-one here is defending animal cruelty, besides the guys who want to rape animals the only way your posts could be relevant is if you're implying that raping them should be fine because they're already in bad conditions[/QUOTE] You say that sex with animals must always be rape and therefore always harms them, but you have yet to explain why. Obviously i'm just assuming you reckon it should be illegal be it's yucky, not because outlawing it reduces animal suffering If you give me empirical proof that having sex with animals when they make no concious decision to avoid it still actually causes stress or other problems then I may side with you [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] I do support bestiality being illegal btw, but for objective empirical reasons, not dumb subjective moral and ideological reasons like you

[quote]Anything done to animals beyond letting them live in their natural habitat should be a crime by that logic[/quote] perhaps, but maybe that's what we should actually try to work towards [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=RobL;39067609]I do support bestiality being illegal btw, but for objective empirical reasons, not dumb subjective moral and ideological reasons like you[/QUOTE] would you like to share these reasons

[QUOTE=Turnips5;39067639]perhaps, but maybe that's what we should actually try to work towards[/QUOTE] Maybe, that's what i'm saying in that thinking sex with animals is always harmful because it's rape also implies you should share this view too

[QUOTE=RobL;39067609]You say that sex with animals must always be rape and therefore always harms them, but you have yet to explain why. Obviously i'm just assuming you reckon it should be illegal be it's yucky, not because outlawing it reduces animal suffering If you give me empirical proof that having sex with animals when they make no concious decision to avoid it still actually causes stress or other problems then I may side with you [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] I do support bestiality being illegal btw, but for objective empirical reasons, not dumb subjective moral and ideological reasons like you[/QUOTE] maybe you should read the thread

[QUOTE=Turnips5;39067639] would you like to share these reasons[/QUOTE] Outlawing bestiality cuts down on animal suffering, i've already said that [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MisterMooth;39067672]maybe you should read the thread[/QUOTE] Maybe you should just reply to me properly

sex isn't a default "yes" it's up to you to prove that animals can consent, not for us to prove that they can't but since animals don't exist that have the mental capacity and understanding to explicitly express consent then they very obviously can't as I said before, find me an animal that can write down on paper what sex is, what sex with a human would entail, what consent is, and whether or not they do consent to sex, and then maybe it'd be fine. But until then you can't just assume they can consent because some zoophile whackjobs think they can "connect" with their pets. this point has been repeated constantly throughout the thread

[QUOTE=RobL;39067676]Outlawing bestiality cuts down on animal suffering, i've already said that[/QUOTE] yeah, but then you said this [quote]If you give me empirical proof that having sex with animals when they make no concious decision to avoid it still actually causes stress or other problems then I may side with you[/quote] which kind of implies that you don't already have this empirical proof. anyway, I wanna see it let's just hope this empirical proof exists somewhere so we don't have to continue this conversation about dogfucking unnecessarily

Why would a supreme court member, let alone a [I]person[/I] compare homosexuality to zoophilia? There's a difference between having a relationship with another man and raping your dog.