Zoophillia

[My Winter Storm]

For those who don't know what this is, it basically means...sex with animals.

For the past few weeks I've been debating with a guy who claims there is nothing wrong with having sex with animals. He himself claims to have sex with his dogs, which are Great Danes, I'm told. He seems quite proud of himself, and claims there is nothing wrong with what he is doing.

(I can provide a link to the site if people like OCA don't believe me)

Basically, he says that his dogs 'want sex' when they hump his leg. He takes this to mean the dog is seeking sex with him.
He believes no harm is being done and that the animal is actually 'consenting' to what he is doing. He also claims that no damage, eithor physical or emotional is caused, and also claims he'd be happy to tell the vet that he screws his dogs.

Actually, I will post the link. I'd like to know what you all think of his points.

Here it is (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=14297)

[diuretic]

I'll check the link a bit later but first thoughts.

1. He's mentally unwell.
2. Dogs aren't moral agents so they can"t "consent" to anything, let alone sex with a human.
3. He's trying to blame his own perversion on his dogs instinctive behaviour. That's unethical, a moral agent (himself) shifting the "blame" for the activity to a non-moral agent (dog).
4. See 1. (above)

As I said, I'll check the link later but those are first thoughts.

[My Winter Storm]

My first thoughts exactly - apparently this guy recently got in big shit with the authorities so he is no longer defending his case.

[Sitarro]

I bet he is a Obamessiah supporter and Obamessiah would be happy to get his vote, Hillary is no doubt trying to sway him by saying she understands completely and to each his own. The ACLU will gladly defend his right to seek pleasure with whatever he wants.:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

I bet he is a Obamessiah supporter and Obamessiah would be happy to get his vote, Hillary is no doubt trying to sway him by saying she understands completely and to each his own. The ACLU will gladly defend his right to seek pleasure with whatever he wants.:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

You're an extremist and you don't have a realistic grip on reality.

[hjmick]

The guy is a sick fuck. No need for further discussion or debate.

[theHawk]

Deviants, no different than homosexuals. In fact I'll take a wild guess and say this 'guy' friend of yours is a homo or a closet homo.

[Hagbard Celine]

Deviants, no different than homosexuals. In fact I'll take a wild guess and say this 'guy' friend of yours is a homo or a closet homo.

I think "Animo" is more appropriate.

[OCA]

For those who don't know what this is, it basically means...sex with animals.

For the past few weeks I've been debating with a guy who claims there is nothing wrong with having sex with animals. He himself claims to have sex with his dogs, which are Great Danes, I'm told. He seems quite proud of himself, and claims there is nothing wrong with what he is doing.

(I can provide a link to the site if people like OCA don't believe me)

Basically, he says that his dogs 'want sex' when they hump his leg. He takes this to mean the dog is seeking sex with him.
He believes no harm is being done and that the animal is actually 'consenting' to what he is doing. He also claims that no damage, eithor physical or emotional is caused, and also claims he'd be happy to tell the vet that he screws his dogs.

Actually, I will post the link. I'd like to know what you all think of his points.

Here it is (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=14297)

He's a sick fuck on the same par with queers.

[Hagbard Celine]

He's a sick fuck on the same par with queers.

Atleast they do it with their own species

[manu1959]

oral sex between straights was once seen and is still seen by many as deviant behaviour......

[Hagbard Celine]

oral sex between straights was once seen and is still seen by many as deviant behaviour......

How could anything so good be deviant? I mean, it even fights cancer.

[OCA]

oral sex between straights was once seen and is still seen by many as deviant behaviour......


Lord now were gonna compare a blowjob from a lady to two guys or two chicks screwing?

*SHAKES HEAD*

[diuretic]

I had a read of his defence of his position. He gave no defence, well no defence that made any sense. He's either a troll or just very sick.

[glockmail]

:lol: I bet it's that guy I knew in Junior High. Back then we use to call him "Skippy Dick".

[Said1]

Deviants, no different than homosexuals. In fact I'll take a wild guess and say this 'guy' friend of yours is a homo or a closet homo.

:lol: That is so lame. He likes to stick to his dog, so he's a closet homo. He prefers animals, but is probably really gay and just won't admit it. I bet I'm really gay too. What do you think? And please use lots of exclaimation points, I love it when you do that. It's not GAY at all. :laugh2:

[midcan5]

I can't remember the source, it may have been a novel, but there is a wonderful observation that each person sees the world through the mirror which is them. Diuretic applies reason to the question. X cannot get out the narrow frame that somehow Obama is present in this issue. Y can only close his/her eyes and compare it to something else she/he doesn't understand.

Allow me to play devil's advocate. Suppose I like sex hanging from the ceiling, wife in red, eating jellybeans while stars and stripes forever plays in the background. That's kinda weird for some but why would you care. Or suppose I like to eating Frito's while I listen to Rush Limbaugh dressed in my old army fatigues standing at attention while my wife pole dances nude. My point is why do I care what this nut does? Who does he hurt, is he hetero and has female dogs, is he gay, who cares. For me kissing dogs is kinda weird but I know lots who do that. So why do we need to enter this person's individual life as weird as it seems and make moral judgments. If we honor an individual privacy who cares. If we could pry open your heads lots of weird stuff would pop out.

[Sitarro]

I can't remember the source, it may have been a novel, but there is a wonderful observation that each person sees the world through the mirror which is them. Diuretic applies reason to the question. X cannot get out the narrow frame that somehow Obama is present in this issue. Y can only close his/her eyes and compare it to something else she/he doesn't understand.

Allow me to play devil's advocate. Suppose I like sex hanging from the ceiling, wife in red, eating jellybeans while stars and stripes forever plays in the background. That's kinda weird for some but why would you care. Or suppose I like to eating Frito's while I listen to Rush Limbaugh dressed in my old army fatigues standing at attention while my wife pole dances nude. My point is why do I care what this nut does? Who does he hurt, is he hetero and has female dogs, is he gay, who cares. For me kissing dogs is kinda weird but I know lots who do that. So why do we need to enter this person's individual life as weird as it seems and make moral judgments. If we honor an individual privacy who cares. If we could pry open your heads lots of weird stuff would pop out.

You pretty much define the Democrat party.:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[OCA]

I can't remember the source, it may have been a novel, but there is a wonderful observation that each person sees the world through the mirror which is them. Diuretic applies reason to the question. X cannot get out the narrow frame that somehow Obama is present in this issue. Y can only close his/her eyes and compare it to something else she/he doesn't understand.

Allow me to play devil's advocate. Suppose I like sex hanging from the ceiling, wife in red, eating jellybeans while stars and stripes forever plays in the background. That's kinda weird for some but why would you care. Or suppose I like to eating Frito's while I listen to Rush Limbaugh dressed in my old army fatigues standing at attention while my wife pole dances nude. My point is why do I care what this nut does? Who does he hurt, is he hetero and has female dogs, is he gay, who cares. For me kissing dogs is kinda weird but I know lots who do that. So why do we need to enter this person's individual life as weird as it seems and make moral judgments. If we honor an individual privacy who cares. If we could pry open your heads lots of weird stuff would pop out.

I don't care until....................you ask for special rights based upon your perversion.....like queers do.

[diuretic]

What "special" rights? Rights are rights, you don't have to ask for them.

So do you mean gays are asking for preferential treatment and extra privileges or something?

Oh wait, are you cranky because they might be asking for *gasp* - equality?

How incredibly bad of them.

[My Winter Storm]

He's a sick fuck on the same par with queers.

A question - which action is worse? Homosexual sex or sex with animals?

[stephanie]

my friends from Austraila.........who see this

I am ........blown away.......:bye1:

[stephanie]

A question - which action is worse? Homosexual sex or sex with animals?

are you serious???

you would stand behind a person...all the people you met...........How lovely.....:cheers2:

[My Winter Storm]

are you serious???

you would stand behind a person...all the people you met...........How lovely.....:cheers2:

I am asking OCA, he seems to say that sex with animals and homosexual sex are just as bad as each other, I am curious as to whether he thinks one is worse than the other...:)

[manu1959]

Lord now were gonna compare a blowjob from a lady to two guys or two chicks screwing?

*SHAKES HEAD*

sin is sin....there is no sliding scale.....or sex is sex......or perversion is perversion.....who are you to judge.....

[midcan5]

I don't care until....................you ask for special rights based upon your perversion.....like queers do.

I beg to differ, republicans want very much to control what a person does in the privacy of their life.

[midcan5]

sin is sin....there is no sliding scale.....or sex is sex......or perversion is perversion.....who are you to judge.....

You'll need to extend the 10 commandments quite a bit.

[OCA]

A question - which action is worse? Homosexual sex or sex with animals?

Bot are equally reprehensible.

[OCA]

I beg to differ, republicans want very much to control what a person does in the privacy of their life.

No, actually they don't but its very convenient to classify it that way so you don't have to get beat down on details.

[theHawk]

I beg to differ, republicans want very much to control what a person does in the privacy of their life.

How so? Can you back up your claims?

[glockmail]

How so? Can you back up your claims?:popcorn:

[Hagbard Celine]

How so? Can you back up your claims?

The fact that you're arguing fervently against homosexuality is proof of the pudding. You need look no further. :slap:

[theHawk]

The fact that you're arguing fervently against homosexuality is proof of the pudding. You need look no further. :slap:

So any topic people argue against means they want to 'control' the opposition.

That must mean you want to control people who argue againt Darwinism.