zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
dzjepp
Posts: 12839
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2001 8:00 am

zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Post by dzjepp »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3aRebr75fg

Do you think it should be unlawful to believe an animal can really consent to such behavior?
ForM
Posts: 3237
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:00 am

Post by ForM »

Why are you reposting this crap?
AmIdYfReAk
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:00 am

Post by AmIdYfReAk »

rofl @ the comments
User avatar
Captain
Posts: 20410
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:50 am

Post by Captain »

AmIdYfReAk wrote:rofl @ the comments
I guess the good thing about dating a horse is that you're guaranteed a ride home at the end of the night...
:olo:
ajerara
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu May 17, 2001 7:00 am

Post by ajerara »

this kind of thing really turns my stomach.
iambowelfish
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 2:53 pm

Re: zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Post by iambowelfish »

dzjepp wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3aRebr75fg

Do you think it should be unlawful to believe an animal can really consent to such behavior?
For serious? No. Do you think it should be illegal to believe anything?
[url=http://www.cafepress.com/stool][img]http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/1561/smallstool4td.jpg[/img][/url]
Fender
Posts: 5876
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Fender »

WE PREFER THE TERM INTER-SPECIES EROTICA, THANK YOU.
AmIdYfReAk
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:00 am

Post by AmIdYfReAk »

that was an awesome movie... Kevin hasent lost his touch.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Re: zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Post by [xeno]Julios »

dzjepp wrote:
Do you think it should be unlawful to believe an animal can really consent to such behavior?
looks fake, but even if it weren't, i don't see too much wrong with their behaviour.

No creature's being harmed here.

And yes, I strongly believe an animal can consent to such behaviour, especially when it's the one doing the fucking.

You don't need verbal articulation to understand certain things. When you interact with a dog or cat, say by providing it food, you don't need to hear it speak to understand that it's enjoying itself.

You'll find out very fast if the situation is non consensual.
User avatar
Foo
Posts: 13840
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 7:00 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Foo »

Juls is right.

Also, lol, we fucking kill them and eat their flesh.....
dzjepp
Posts: 12839
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2001 8:00 am

Re: zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Post by dzjepp »

iambowelfish wrote:
dzjepp wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3aRebr75fg

Do you think it should be unlawful to believe an animal can really consent to such behavior?
For serious? No. Do you think it should be illegal to believe anything?
rofl. do you think that type of thing doesn't happen in real life?
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

i suspect that our reaction to bestiality is fundamentally no different from historical reactions to h0m0sexuality.

It just was considered downright perverse, and irreducibly wrong.

But, assuming it was possible to regulate bestiality such that no creature was harmed, and diseases were not spread, I don't see a compelling reason to make it illegal.

Some people just need a big horse cock up their arses to get the most out of life. Let em be!
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Re: zoophiles have a good ol chit chat

Post by [xeno]Julios »

theoneandonly wrote:NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

the only right answer is that you should be strung up in a public venue if you ever want to have sex with an animal.
[xeno]Julios wrote:i suspect that our reaction to bestiality is fundamentally no different from historical reactions to h0m0sexuality.

It just was considered downright perverse, and irreducibly wrong.
User avatar
DooMer
Posts: 3068
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 1999 8:00 am

Post by DooMer »

The humans were the fuckees. Sounds like consent to me.
jayP.lq
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:33 pm

Post by jayP.lq »

[xeno]Julios wrote:
....Some people just need a big horse cock up their arses to get the most out of life. Let em be!
:olo:

thats gonna end up in someones sig I just know it :icon26:
User avatar
Foo
Posts: 13840
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 7:00 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Foo »

theoneandonly wrote:how about nobody sticks gets penetrated/sticks their pensises into anything that's not human. Is that too old fashioned for you?
You're against the use of condoms?
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

theoneandonly wrote:how about nobody sticks gets penetrated/sticks their pensises into anything that's not human. Is that too old fashioned for you?
how is this different from:

"how about nobody sticks/gets penetrated into/by anything that's not of the opposite sex"

You're invoking taboo without any reasoning.
Doombrain
Posts: 23227
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 7:00 am

Post by Doombrain »

Foo wrote:
theoneandonly wrote:how about nobody sticks gets penetrated/sticks their pensises into anything that's not human. Is that too old fashioned for you?
You're against the use of condoms?
Beats never being in a situation where you need a condom, eh fool?
User avatar
Foo
Posts: 13840
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 7:00 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Foo »

BRING BACK SIGS MURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
User avatar
Foo
Posts: 13840
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 7:00 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Foo »

sigs it?
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
User avatar
MKJ
Posts: 32582
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:00 am

Post by MKJ »

playing devil's advocate here, but you still havent answered his question. replace animals with "men" and its no different than southern christians' logic :icon32:
User avatar
MKJ
Posts: 32582
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:00 am

Post by MKJ »

ah, now you tap into the mental state and/or mental inferiority of said animals. which indeed is a valid point, imo
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

theoneandonly wrote: The fact is, anyone who wants to have sex with an animal has something very wrong happening in their head and I do not what to interact with a person like that. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUCKING ANIMALS...don't spin this into close-mindedness of a new era like the 70s and 80s for faggots.

I don't give a shit about fags, I'm not talking about them.

edit: sexual liberation can go too far. Fucking and getting fucked by animals is too far. Anyone sexually attracted to animals should be gutted.
you may be on to something, but you still need to articulate a clear argument why bestiality should be outlawed.

You have to say why it's going too far.

Comparing it to pedophilia is different - there are very good arguments to be made that the child involved in the relationship will incur psychological damage.

I don't think that is the case with a fully grown male stallion or a frisky dolphin.
User avatar
Captain
Posts: 20410
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:50 am

Post by Captain »

AIDS should be reason enough, as well as violating the sacred line that distinguishes between a homosapien and a horse-jerking neanderthal.
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Massive Quasars »

Image
[url=http://www.marxists.org/][img]http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3050/avatarmy7.gif[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/1736/leninzbp5.gif[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/1076/modulestalinat6.jpg[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/9239/cheds1.jpg[/img][/url]
Post Reply