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
OddlyEnough at 21 Jun 2006: 16:54


We have a duty of respect, which is to say that the moraly course of action is to treat others (or perhaps only persons?) in ways that they rationally and informedly agree to and respects their autonomy as persons  (this last part is debateable, it more has to do with people selling themselves into slavery than anything else, but I have included it for completeness).

That one does not pleasure an animal does not violate our duty of respect.  That its desire is not fufilled does it no harm, so we do not violate a duty of non-maleficence.  We might not be fully satisfying a duty of benificence in not sexually satisfying animals, but I believe that in this case, respect outweighs benificence, and so our actual duty does not include such activities.

As a side note, it seems to me that an animal has little justifiable claim to my agnecy in satisfying its sexual desires.

The ball is back in your court sir.  =)

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.