Juberu#3LrT5NRVks at 2 Jun 2006: 12:46
>>684
But I'm not talking about animals and there lack of ability to make moral judgments. My ultimate point was that "informed consent" may not even be relivant to animals in the first place. If it isn't appart of there world, why should we care? Because it's a part of our world.
Forcing somebody (or some thing) to have sex with you against there will. No. It's sex without consent. Force need not necessarily be involved.
But I thought rape had to be forced? Nope. There is such a thing as rape by coercion.(sp)
Since when did animals have the same status as children? Wait, you're contradicting your hypothetical opponent's argument.
Okay, fair enough, but that still doesn't explain how sex with minors mirrors sex with animals. Because neither are considered intelligent enough to have an idea what 'consent' is, nor to give it. We've been over this, and I wish you would stop misrepresenting your opponent.
Sex with minors causes real psycological harm with negative long term effects including behavioral problems, sexual disfuction, and social ineptitude. What evidence can you give to show me that having sex with an animal will cause them harm? We don't have to. We just have to show that it's rape. The 'harm' part is secondary.
>>686
Hey Juberu, I'm gonna hop to the other side for a second for a quick question. Now, some (not many, but some) animals have shown IQ levels that are comparable to extremely low IQ humans. Washu the Chimp for instance. In those cases, are animals able to consent in your opinion? That depends on whether it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they understand consent, on an individual basis. IQ is no real guarantee of understanding.
|