• ‘Marriage equality could lead to bestiality’ senator falls further into the shit
    227 replies, posted
Yeah once we have beastiality then animals will want marriages to each other then animals wil want different species and then my horse will get married to me hamster
[QUOTE=deathgod;37789153]Huh? What i'm trying to say doesn't seem to be getting through. A happy interspecies relationship is perfectly possible. If you don't believe me look at the experiences of zoophiles themselves.[/QUOTE] It's possible, but it's fucking wrong in so many ways.
[QUOTE=deathgod;37789153]Huh? What i'm trying to say doesn't seem to be getting through. A happy interspecies relationship is perfectly possible. If you don't believe me look at the experiences of zoophiles themselves.[/QUOTE] Uh no, just no, you can't even communicate with it first of all, it probably wouldn't even know what the hell you're trying to do, and it's just plain fucked up, stop trying to justify what is essentially animal rape.
How would you even know if an animal is "consenting" with you in the first place? Does one just shove their dick in and then find out if it's rape or not? Implying that someone who would have sex with animals would even care.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;37786498]because it's an power issue and animals do not communicate in the same capacity that we do[/QUOTE] cmon guys, by implying animals are raped is stupid. how many gifs have you seen where a pet dog mounts someone's leg or behind and starts humping them? people just laugh it off (oh teehee its just asserting dominance when the fact is the dog is fucking horny and will fuck your hole if it gets one) . this not consent enough for you? the fact of the matter is rape/mental torture on the animal is the only argument people against bestiality (and for homos) can come up with. because anything like, "ew because its disgusting and degrading" and they will be in a conflicting position. zoophiliacs will use the same arguments used to by homosexuals at the end of the day.
[QUOTE=C47;37791669] this not consent enough for you? .[/QUOTE] No
first gays get married then horses then cars
[QUOTE=C47;37791669]cmon guys, by implying animals are raped is stupid. how many gifs have you seen where a pet dog mounts someone's leg or behind and starts humping them? people just laugh it off (oh teehee its just asserting dominance when the fact is the dog is fucking horny and will fuck your hole if it gets one) . this not consent enough for you? the fact of the matter is rape/mental torture on the animal is the only argument people against bestiality (and for homos) can come up with. because anything like, "ew because its disgusting and degrading" and they will be in a conflicting position. zoophiliacs will use the same arguments used to by homosexuals at the end of the day.[/QUOTE] It's easy to notice sexual behaviors in animals, we aren't denying that. We are saying that it's difficult to comprehend that they're having a sexual behavior towards you. The pet dog could be attempting an act of masturbating.
[QUOTE=C47;37791669]cmon guys, by implying animals are raped is stupid. how many gifs have you seen where a pet dog mounts someone's leg or behind and starts humping them? people just laugh it off (oh teehee its just asserting dominance when the fact is the dog is fucking horny and will fuck your hole if it gets one) .[/QUOTE] Considering I've had spayed & neutered dogs mount either me, each other, or other items, I'd doubt it was done out of horniess.
[QUOTE=C47;37791669]cmon guys, by implying animals are raped is stupid. how many gifs have you seen where a pet dog mounts someone's leg or behind and starts humping them? people just laugh it off (oh teehee its just asserting dominance when the fact is the dog is fucking horny and will fuck your hole if it gets one) . this not consent enough for you? the fact of the matter is rape/mental torture on the animal is the only argument people against bestiality (and for homos) can come up with. because anything like, "ew because its disgusting and degrading" and they will be in a conflicting position. zoophiliacs will use the same arguments used to by homosexuals at the end of the day.[/QUOTE] why are you associating a fetish with a sexuality?
Yeah! After this gay rights fad ends, the next group to roll up will be the goddamn beastofiles! GUDDERN BEASTOPHILES, THE BIBLE STATES MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN NOT A MAN AND A DUCK.
[QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;37791991]Considering I've had spayed & neutered dogs mount either me, each other, or other items, I'd doubt it was done out of horniess.[/QUOTE] Well, idk about that. I tried to search some articles that suggest they do it out of stress etc, but also that dog testosterone is not completely gone from their system after neutering. Its well known that even after neutering pets, they still exhibit "in heat" behavior (had a cat) So yeah its going to go down into whether that humping is done purely for sexual or other reasons, and I suppose the discussion will end up whether the dog's dick is erect or not (as some articles talk about it). which frankly i think is where i stop, coz it grosses me out lol.
what the fuck why are you guys trying to justify animal rape
[QUOTE=C47;37791669]how many gifs have you seen where a pet dog mounts someone's leg or behind and starts humping them? [/QUOTE] Your addiction to dog cock is hindering the part of your brain that forms good arguments. Thats a dog's way of saying "hello". I've read about a tribe in Africa that shakes eachother's penises as a way of saying hello, and claims it's not sexual.
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;37796413]what the fuck why are you guys trying to justify animal rape[/QUOTE] nobody is trying to justify animal rape, that is a fallacy also im still waiting on that title
[QUOTE=Bobie;37796791]nobody is trying to justify animal rape, that is a fallacy also im still waiting on that title[/QUOTE] I'm still waiting on my own new title bought a new one garry god damnit what are you doing
[QUOTE=Bobie;37796791]nobody is trying to justify animal rape, that is a fallacy also im still waiting on that title[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Bobie;37784098]zoophiles are a very extreme minority of a population, meaning that you either regulate/treat them (which is difficult, time consuming, expensive and rarely works), you throw them into prison like the other philes and lock away the key, or you give them legal access to regulated animal consent. it's not perfect, but it's something to work towards[/QUOTE] don't mean to kill your boner but animals will never be able to consent sorry babe [editline]26th September 2012[/editline] hey guys since pedophiles all have needs that ABSOLUTELY MUST be fulfilled we should give them legal access to children to have sex with. it's really the only way. children are even smarter than animals so they can consent EVEN MORE
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;37797891]don't mean to kill your boner but animals will never be able to consent sorry babe [editline]26th September 2012[/editline] hey guys since since pedophiles all have needs that ABSOLUTELY MUST be fulfilled we should give them legal access to children to have sex with. it's really the only way. children are even smarter than animals so they can consent EVEN MORE[/QUOTE] wow it looks like you've missed out on 99% of the thread congratulations
what a joker
[QUOTE=Bobie;37798233]wow it looks like you've missed out on 99% of the thread congratulations[/QUOTE] I went back over the thread and I didn't see you typing anything sane or logical so I don't think I missed anything heck, one of your last posts was this giant heap of shit: [QUOTE=Bobie;37785314]inter species mating happens in nature, in fact it's suggested in research that humans are the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexual_behaviour#Other_evidence_of_interspecies_sexual_activity"]product of inter-species mating[/URL], and that one simple google search of 'interspecies mating' will bring you up alot of results (dont do this at work though) i'm not defending animal abuse. i think animal abuse is a terrible, terrible thing that should never have to exist. on the other hand however, i believe that there are pre-sexual mechanisms for consent that animals give to other animals; and on the basis of this we can create a system in which humans and animals have a consensual, sexual relation on the basis that zoophiles do not 'rape' animals on this. the major argument against this theory from all of you however is that, animals cannot give consent. but i am yet to see a source on this, because i've never heard of such at thing, and i'm still yet to see solid evidence that this does not happen. i would also like to see evidence that rehabilitative services for any form of sexuality can prevent people from ever performing the act again. [editline]edit[/editline] lol 4 dumbs and nobody's challenged it. maturity at it's finest[/QUOTE] Ignoring the stupid "lol i'm way more mature than everyone else" comment at the end, the entire post reeks of putrid ignorance. Do you really, honestly think an animal could have the mental capacity to both understand how a human has sex and also [i]want[/i] it? It's not up to everyone else to prove that animals [i]can't[/i] consent, it's up to you to prove that animals [i]can[/i]. The burden of proof lies on you. You don't have sex with someone until you're absolutely fucking sure the other person consents to it, so until you find me a species of animal that's intelligent enough to write me a fucking essay on sex then you can't assume they can consent. A human child is far more intelligent, [i]and even then[/i] it's illegal because they [I]still[/I] can't possibly have the maturity and understanding to consent to sex (and rightfully so). There's no possible way for an animal to prove it both understands human sex and wants it, and until you can prove otherwise (you can't), you need to stop trying to be ~edgy~ by defending people who want to stick their dicks in animals.
To me the main argument seems to be that if gay marriage is passed, then people of other sexual orientations (bestiality people, polygamy, objectophiles*, pedophiles, etc) will start to complain that they deserve the same rights to what they are doing as well because they are "in love" with whatever they are attracted to. So in a sense it is like the saying "opening a whole new can of worms". Granted I am all for equality so don't take what I say the wrong way. *May have spelled wrong but people who are attracted to objects and believe that they are in love with them
[QUOTE=Potus;37798875]To me the main argument seems to be that if gay marriage is passed, then people of other sexual orientations (bestiality people, polygamy, objectophiles*, pedophiles, etc) will start to complain that they deserve the same rights to what they are doing as well because they are "in love" with whatever they are attracted to. So in a sense it is like the saying "opening a whole new can of worms". Granted I am all for equality so don't take what I say the wrong way. *May have spelled wrong but people who are attracted to objects and believe that they are in love with them[/QUOTE] Homosexual adults can consent. Children, animals and objects cannot.
Furries do it all the time.
Newsflash: People fuck dogs despite gay marriage being illegal. Ban on straight marriage proposed to close slippery slope.
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;37799327]Homosexual people can consent. Children, animals and objects cannot.[/QUOTE]In before discussion on blow-up sex doll rape.
[QUOTE=Praetastic;37782770]How can you have a consensual relationship with an animal anyway? Animals can't give consent, unlike humans. He doesn't have a leg to stand on here.[/QUOTE] They can't? Tell Mr. Hands that.
Mr. Hands died from brutal anal rape from a horse. This actually proves that bestiality is a disorder.
Honestly, animal rights have never made any sense. We live in a society that tells us it's okay to raise animals in crowded pens where they can't stand up, kill and eat them "because they taste good". But it's not okay to hit your dog with a newspaper.
[QUOTE=Potus;37798875]To me the main argument seems to be that if gay marriage is passed, then people of other sexual orientations (bestiality people, polygamy, objectophiles*, pedophiles, etc) will start to complain that they deserve the same rights to what they are doing as well because they are "in love" with whatever they are attracted to. So in a sense it is like the saying "opening a whole new can of worms". Granted I am all for equality so don't take what I say the wrong way.[/QUOTE] yeah pretty much that. [QUOTE=MisterMooth;37799327]Homosexual adults can consent. Children, animals and objects cannot.[/QUOTE] well the sad reality is that in some countries (Denmark, Hungary, Germany, Japan heck list is [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law#Laws_against_zoophilia"]here[/URL]) they can tell if the animal is consenting or not (yea im concluding that since obviously they wouldnt allow animal torture). it's just an indicator that governments are willing to go that low. so yeah, that aussie guy has a valid point for his country, unless austrailia clearly has something like the US saying animals do not have the capacity to consent.
If Australian Liberals are American Conservatives, I'd hate to see how uptight your Conservatives must be.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.