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
at 24 Jun 2006: 20:08

Before I say this, and it's going to be contridicting itself alot, but this is human nature, you all contridict each other plenty amongst yourselves. I've merely indulged in this contridiction in order to broaden my perspective, so no calling me crazy!!!

Now then, beastality is sex with animals. Humans... no, Homo-sapians, are animals too. So, is it better to say it's sex with another species. Now, Humans are anything that has humanity, and humanity is kindness and compasion. So, the crazed serial killer near your block doesn't apply for that position. Humanity is a egotistical view becuase homo-sapians instantly consider themselves human without the consideration of wether or not they are deserving of the title. Yet, it is also not possible to think only of others. So no one is truely human, but no one, side from the serial killer, is truely inhuman. So, is beastality immoral?

Well, since the furrs aren't the same species as us, no matter how homo-sapian like they are, it's beastality. How ever, it's clear they, for the most part, have humanity. This means they are human as well. So, those of you who think of them as being people, do you think beastality is wrong in this sence? If you had the chance, would you date such a creature despite the fact of what is implied? And if not, isn't it descrimination?

If someone out there hasn't contridicted themselves yet, they have got to be shallow... and if you have, hey, your only 'human.' LOL, sorry, couldn't resist the cheesy joke.

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.