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

[QUOTE=MisterMooth;39067714]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[/QUOTE] They can't give consent in anyway that can be explicitly proven in a legal sense (that's an entirely different thing though, and one reason why bestiality should be illegal) However, consent is basically agreement. If an animal does not consciously agree to something, it will try to avoid it or will get stressed. If an animal isn't avoiding something or showing signs of stress, ect. it is agreeing. It's not all that difficult to get your head around.

[QUOTE=RobL;39067825] If an animal does not consciously agree to something, it will try to avoid it or will get stressed. If an animal isn't avoiding something or showing signs of stress, ect. it is agreeing.[/QUOTE] an animal has even less capacity to consent to sex than a child does

[QUOTE=Turnips5;39067732]yeah, but then you said this [/QUOTE] It cuts down on animal suffering as people would take advantage of legal bestiality to get away with animal cruelty. An animal cannot give information or prove anything themselves [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Dori;39067840]an animal has even less capacity to consent to sex than a child does[/QUOTE] A tree has less ability to consent to being hit at with an axe than a human does, your point is?

trees don't consent to being cut down therefore raping children and animals is pretty much ok you heard it here first guys [editline]1[/editline] [quote]11:55 - MisterMooth: the passed out drunk girl I had sex wasn't showing signs of stress, so she must have been fine with it [/quote]

[QUOTE=RobL;39067848]A tree has less ability to consent to being hit at with an axe than a human does, your point is?[/QUOTE] are you having a stroke or something

[QUOTE=Dori;39067871]trees don't consent to being cut down therefore raping children and animals is pretty much ok you heard it here first guys [editline]1[/editline][/QUOTE] Way to miss what i'm trying to say completely

[QUOTE=RobL;39067905]Way to miss what i'm trying to say completely[/QUOTE] are you okay

[QUOTE=RobL;39067825]They can't give consent in anyway that can be explicitly proven in a legal sense (that's an entirely different thing though, and one reason why bestiality should be illegal) However, consent is basically agreement. If an animal does not consciously agree to something, it will try to avoid it or will get stressed. If an animal isn't avoiding something or showing signs of stress, ect. it is agreeing. It's not all that difficult to get your head around.[/QUOTE] How do you prove the difference between agreeing and submitting?

[QUOTE=person11;39062881]ok so guys wait what if fucking an animal is bad, but letting them be the ones to initiate it isnt?[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure it already isn't illegal if you're just hanging out and a dog decides your leg looks hot. Unless when that happens you decide to whip your pants off but I'm pretty sure the dog isn't "initiating" that considering, you know, dog.

Let me explain everything in a logical way for you Rape is sex without consent. In a legal sense, consent is a subjective human construct Rape is deemed bad from a human point of view for reasons including the following: It causes psychological harm for the victim and people with a social connection to the victim, even if the effects are not instant It causes physical harm as in unwanted pregnancies, stds, ect. Having sex with minors even when they agree is deemed bad for the above reasons and this below: They in general do not understand or are not aware of the implications of it and those with a connection to the child, especially family members would be psychologically harmed. It would also cause psychological harm to the child when they reach an age which they can understand these things Moral objections to rape and statutory rape stemmed from these objective truths in one way or another. People experience the affects of something then communicate them across to others. This is how morals and ideals come about. Moving on to animals. We know animals can’t legally consent to sex with humans. However a person could have sex with an animal and it would not try to avoid it or become stressed, and wouldn’t suffer any longer term psychological or physical harm. In a case like this the animal would experience no harm in the short term or the long term (I have to note that animals aren’t aware of things like stds though, but unknowingly receiving an std has nothing to do with the definition of rape) In a current legal (subjective) sense this is still sex without consent, but objectively it isn’t as within the animal’s sphere of consciousness it had no objection, and animals never move beyond this sphere of consciousness unlike a child growing into an adult Sex with animals is very different to sex with minors for reasons including the following: A minor is the same individual who will later be an adult. An animal obviously won’t turn into an adult human Because a minor is unaware of the implications of sex then this awareness falls to people with a connection to the child, especially family members. This causes psychological harm to these people also. Likewise, having sex with an animal that belongs that someone is a different matter and can be considered an act without consent on the owner's part The idea of rape is a subjective human construct, it leads to negative implications which aren’t though. Something like murder isn’t however, as it always implies death which is an actual physical thing that happens and is a negative implication in itself A big logical problem with your points of view is this: A superior consciousness could be watching over us right now. This being is negatively affected by things (and so deems these things immoral and against his ideals) in a way that we have no concept of and are unable to comprehend. This being sees the same things happening to us all over the world every day and decides to stop it from happening to us. However, from our points of view this doesn’t reduce any negative experiences in any way we can perceive. For all we know there could be a million immoral things happening to us all the time, but this is from the point of view of a different conciousness, not ours, and therefore is completely irrelevant anyway. As long as something doesn't cause empirical harm it doesn't matter You need to draw the line between subjective human ideals/morals and reality + the actual experiences of individuals and how they affect them (human and animal) I think this is the most philosophical post I’ve ever made, fair play

Dolphins are conscious and have been known to attempt to have sex with humans.

[QUOTE]11:55 - MisterMooth: the passed out drunk girl I had sex wasn't showing signs of stress, so she must have been fine with it [/QUOTE] Having sex with a passed out girl would lead to negative implications which i've explained. It is rape because her unconscious state is not permanent, she will be aware of what has happened some point after she wakes up [QUOTE=Boxbot219;39068065]How do you prove the difference between agreeing and submitting?[/QUOTE] Generally submission would show some signs of stress and avoidance though And if it didn't, how do you know when anyone has sex that one of them isn't just submitting? [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ECrownofFire;39068873]Dolphins are conscious and have been known to attempt to have sex with humans.[/QUOTE] Whether something is concious or not has nothing to do with what I was saying

I would say RobL is winning this one here, guys

RobL just came in and posted exactly what I was going to post One problem with bestiality is that it's extremely unsanitary, and the vast majority of animals have parasites which can be transmitted through sexual activity.

[QUOTE=RobL;39068961] Generally submission would show some signs of stress and avoidance though [B]And if it didn't, how do you know when anyone has sex that one of them isn't just submitting?[/B] [/QUOTE] That's exactly what I just asked you except reworded. Not being able to know if they are actually consenting or not is the reason why having sex with animals shouldn't be considered ok.

[QUOTE=DanTehMan;39069051]I would say RobL is winning this one here, guys[/QUOTE] Btw, in case you got the wrong end of the stick i'm not trying to justify bestiality being legal. Imo the reason it should be illegal is because a court cannot find out whether an animal agreed to a sexual act or not and so people can take advantage of this and get away with actual animal rape and cruelty (not to mention disease and everything). Not because 'morals' or that animals cannot consent and that's rape and it's harmful [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Boxbot219;39069146]That's exactly what I just asked you except reworded. Not being able to know if they are actually consenting or not is the reason why having sex with animals shouldn't be considered ok.[/QUOTE] Whoops should have been more specific, I mean people having sex with eachother

I've heard people argue that animals have no consent into being killed, no consent in being subjects of experiment, transport and many others. Almost all have some sort of legal or moral discrimination when confronted with the same rights. Does arguing on the basis of consent set a bad example on the animal industry generally?

Some gay people are disgusting, but I'd assume most are cool, so it should be legal because some straight people are also disgusting. [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] But bestiality? that shit's undeniably disgusting.