fchan

discussion

Morality of bestiality (Was: End bestiality on Fchan!)

Pages:1 41 81 121 161 201 241 281 321 361 401 441 481 521 561 601 641 681 721 761 801 841 881 921 961 1001
664Report
at 1 Jun 2006: 00:50

Why eating meat became part of the debate:

Firstly, I want to say that I am a vegitarian and not a vegan.  I do eat dary and eggs.  For personal reasons, I abstain from eating meat, however, I do not think that it is wrong for anybody to eat meat.  In fact, it can be quite nessesary in order to survive given certain situations.  I view humans as a form of life higher than that of any other living thing on Earth.  Because of our supiriority of mind (yes, humans really are smarter than animals), all wild beasts are literaly fair game.  That's the way nature works.  Those who can kill and eat do, and those who can run fast and suvive do also.

So, how did meat become part of this issue?  Looking back, we will find a number of anti-zoo post about how fucking an animal causes them harm, thus, making sex with animals immoral.

Since the key to this anti-zoo argument is the fact that animals are harmed universialy harmed by beastiality, the pro-zoos used meat as a counter argument.  If zoophilia is wrong because it hurts animals, then meat must also be wrong because it ends an animal's life and likely results in psycological trauma to some degree or another.

This pro-zoo argument should have continued by saying that if eating meat is okay, then causing animals a degree of harm is okay.  How high that degree may get before it is not okay anymore is open for debate, however.  If causing animals a degree of harm is okay, then zoophilia is probably okay, too, since any degree of harm seems to be quite minimal, if any.

The goal was to derail the anti-zoo harm = immoral argument without having to undertake the difficult task of proving fucking an animal does not nessesarily cause harm.

Many pro-zoos seem to think that, when done properly, the animal being fucked (or the animal doing the fucking), is caused no harm and may in fact benifit from the sexual release. 

In truth, it is just as difficult to prove that zoophilia causes harm to animals as it is to prove that it doesn't.  Both sides will obviously disagree with that statment.  This isn't suprising because both sides are so biased.

Unfortunatly, the point of meat consumption got way.  It is almost as if it got hijacked by vegan nitwits from PeTA.  BTW, I highly recomend seeing the Pen and Teller: Bullshit episode that exposes PeTA's true intentions.

This never should have become about meat being murder.  The conclusion should have been "If meat is generaly okay, fucking animals should generaly be okay, too."  Note that I say "generaly", because neither case can be said absolutly. 

BTW, I've got a news flash for you vegans out there.  It's only murder when it is a human killing another human for reasons other than self defence. Oh, and I be sure to take your calcium.  Vegans are at risk for Osteoperosis at all ages because so few vegitables are rich in the element.  Drink your milk, to your good health!

1003Add Reply This thread is threadstopped. You can't reply anymore.

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage