CoryKS
Senior Master
Plus, they can be bred for their skills in magic. They're pretty much my favorite animal. Gosh!
He can't help it, he was born that way.
- Thread starter Big Don
- Start date
Plus, they can be bred for their skills in magic. They're pretty much my favorite animal. Gosh!
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
YEAH RIGHT…Sure…you expect me to believe that…if that is true then how do you explain a Chimera or a Jackalope
YEAH RIGHT Sure you expect me to believe that if that is true then how do you explain a Chimera or a Jackalope
(throwing hands up!) Xue! .... (hands over my eyes) sigh!
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
S'ok... c'mon back over here... it's ok.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
I'm sorry, this isn't true. Lions and tigers are definitely different species. Lions are the species Panthera leo, and tigers are Panthera tigris. Housecats are a different genus even, Felis domesticus. Lions and tigers do share some genetic similarity, which is why they can produce hybrids. Similar to horses and donkeys producing mules. However, they are still different species that do not normally reproduce together.
You also might want to rethink this logic a bit. It would imply that it would be just dandy for humans to get it on with chimps or gorillas. After all, we are all apes.
No one couldn't. Asians, Africans and aborigines all fit the basic definition of a species; "a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring."
No, the tautology is in reference to your statement "Why? Because it's wrong!". That is a classic tautology.
Also, producing viable offspring (a Cat-Dog as you say) is different from your original claim that different species never try to mate with each other. That is manifestly untrue. Even if it was true though, the "unnatural" argument doesn't fly for reasons I have already enumerated.
I'm not really sure what you are trying to say here, but it seems pretty far away from everyone knowing "deep down" that homosexuality is OK.
With respect, I'm not even sure you know what you mean by species. Different whales are different species. Different apes are different species. Chimps and humans are not in the same species because we are both apes.
Even if we were though, as I have stated repeatedly, it still doesn't hold water as a rational argument against beastiality.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Bonobos and dolphins have both been documented having sex for non-procreative reasons. In bonobos particularly, it seems to serve a function as both recreation and a tool for social cohesion.
Many male animals will also use "sex-lite" such as mounting positions as a tool of dominance against lower ranked males.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Oh please
Ok their the same genus Panthera that is made up from the species Leo and Tigris to name 2. The point I believe was, for example that a dog and a human a dog and a cat a fish and an aardvark are to different genetically to reproduce they are NOT the same genus
Panthera is a genus of chiefly large cats that includes the snow leopard, tiger, leopard, jaguar, and lion, most having the ability to roar
Empty Hands
Senior Master
What? They aren't the same species.
Actually Caver's point was difficult to determine, mostly I think due to a confused idea of what a species is. Not all whales are of the same species, and a blue whale and a sperm whale (for instance) cannot probably successfully produce offspring, but he seemed to be indicating that they could.
In any case, I have already acknowledged this point, and refuted it. The "naturalness" of an act has no bearing on the morality. If it did, then you are immoral for taking antibiotics to cure your diseases or wearing a nylon jacket. None of these things are natural, but (almost) nobody thinks they are wrong.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
If I am correct the supplied link, which I will not watch, was about Bestiality. Two COMPLETELY different genus as well as species and pretty much that is not considered natural by any authority on the subject of reproduction I know of.
And morality is something ENTIRELY different that I am not even talking about here. But I will go out on a limb here and state for all to read that from a morality standpoint I don't think bestiality is considered moral at all nor do I consider it moral
But to be completely honest about where this post appears to be going now all I have left to say is I'm terribly sorry but this is now getting a bit too silly for me to continue.
Have a nice day :asian:
Wow, there's a mental image I didn't need. I hope the monkey is the one on top.
I sense a BJJ joke here...
SageGhost83
Brown Belt
.....Ok, Empty Hands, you can bang the dog for crying out loud, now stop getting so mental on us :lol:!
Joking aside, and please don't pound my face in ..............:lol:. Seriously this time, I see what you are trying to say and I agree that there is a certain tautology in that case. I won't condemn it just becuase many say that it is an unquestionable wrong in their books. However, animals engage in many such activities including cannabalism of their own offspring. I would hope that humans have formed more developed social behaviors since leaving the wild. I personally don't approve of it because it just seems like an insane and a very heinous thing to do. It doesn't seem like the animals are against it though - did the dog try to fight back? How about the horse who was "pitching" (by the way, I heard about that one on Elliot in the morning - I think he said that the guy had a broken pelvis, too.) I still go with Caver on this one, though. ****ing animals? Suddenly *man's best friend* takes on a whole new meaning.
:lol:!Joking aside, and please don't pound my face in ..............:lol:. Seriously this time, I see what you are trying to say and I agree that there is a certain tautology in that case. I won't condemn it just becuase many say that it is an unquestionable wrong in their books. However, animals engage in many such activities including cannabalism of their own offspring. I would hope that humans have formed more developed social behaviors since leaving the wild. I personally don't approve of it because it just seems like an insane and a very heinous thing to do. It doesn't seem like the animals are against it though - did the dog try to fight back? How about the horse who was "pitching" (by the way, I heard about that one on Elliot in the morning - I think he said that the guy had a broken pelvis, too.) I still go with Caver on this one, though. ****ing animals? Suddenly *man's best friend* takes on a whole new meaning.
SageGhost83
Brown Belt
Ohhhh, so that is what UFC is all about :lfao::lfao::lfao:. Okay, I am done. Let me stop before I get in trouble.
SageGhost83
Brown Belt
Poor Karateka never stood a chance against those uber-horny Gracies :roflmao:. Okay, seriously, I am done :lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2:.
- Thread Starter
- #35
Its only gay if you make eye contact.
SageGhost83
Brown Belt
I apologize for the profanity gaffe in post #32 folks:duh::asian:.
Animals can't give consent.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Why is consent necessary for sex, but not necessary for killing and eating, working, or medical experimentation? For humans, informed consent is the cornerstone of any medical experimentation, so that issue is directly comparable.
As long as you use immature humans (kids) in the comparison, it follows quite closely.
Swift aside, there are ethical guidelines wrapped around animal use/abuse. It may be arbitrary, but then so are all our social rules if you insist on going down that road. Does having sex with an animal do it any favors? Probably not. So I figure that's reason enough to discourage the practice. (A reason that is not, "it's icky.") Not to mention the potential public health issues a beast of burden with two backs can give rise to.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Pretty close, really, considering that death doesn't do the animal any favors either. I'm just not satisfied with arbitrariness as a standard for law making and punishment.
The fully human version has far more disease related health risks, actually. Zoonotic diseases of any stripe are fairly rare and usually difficult to catch.
