898Report |
GrapeTang#90uMe5dJAk at 22 Jun 2006: 19:39
>>894
WTF? You're bringing law into this again? Bestiality is either illegal, or taboo, EVERYWHERE! At best, it's a disgusting, if not illegal thing to do.
In a court of law, animal fuckers usually go to prison. This is a morality argument here, not a legal argument. And the whole "lack of dissent equals consent" thing is sexual predator talk. Give your head a shake. Lack of dissent is lack of dissent, dissent is dissent, and consent is consent. It's common sense on this one. Jesus.
>>889 You missed the point dude. What I mean is, in a disscussion about the morality of something, comparing it to something else doesn't get you anywhere unless you're saying "Since this is okay, that is okay", but then you have to go on and show WHY that follows. You keep misdirecting people by pointing out irrelevant shit, and it's not getting anything anywhere.
Here, I'll do it to you: If caring for animals is so important to you, why are you using a computer? Computers are made of plastic and metal, and use electricity to run. Incredible ammounts of habitat have been destroyed in order to produce and ship that computer out to you. By using that computer, you're effectively saying it's okay to slaughter animals just so you can have a flashy box to look at. If you really cared about animals and their well being, you wouldn't use something like that, thus contributing to the industry, etc.
You see how, while all of that is technically true, that it has NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN THIS DISCUSSION!? See how I trap you and attack your character by bringing something into the argument that has nothing to do with fucking animals? Annoying isn't it?
|