Post: #26

(07-05-2013 10:53 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 11:01 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  By linking gay marriage to bestiality, sex with children and incest you're implying that it is somehow wrong/bad/unacceptable/disgusting. Yeah, gay is all the rage and in your face nowadays and that is annoying enough, but I don't find anything wrong with a gay couple having the same rights under the law as a straight couple. I'm glad society changed enough in that regard.

I have no problem with incest either if both parties do it freely.

Gentlemen, behold the attitude that is dooming the West. It's not the advocacy of the extreme left wing/cultural Marxists that's led us here, it's the apathy of men like Teutatis.

Men who would rather sit back and yawn than stand up and shout down behavior that is obviously disgusting and anti-social.

Too many people have been brainwashed with this notion that tolerance is itself a virtue. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is nothing inherently virtuous about tolerance. Why should we tolerate things that have absolutely no redeeming social value? Advocating for the right of people to fuck animals or their siblings does not make you enlightened, it makes you a reprobate and a facilitator of the degenerate scum of society.

You are nothing less than a moral coward.

Moral coward? Really? So we have a different opinion about something and that makes it ok for you to insult me? And what are you? A dictator that wants to impose on others your own sense of morality.

I never said I like incestuous couplings or that I'd want to see society go to down that path, but I don't want the state to legislate what free and grown people can and can't do. I don't think it should be illegal, if they want to do it let them be free to do it, it doesn't mean I approve of it, but I don't have the right to tell them they can't.

I really don't understand why so many of you guys are getting so worked up about this, it's not like if this is legal you're going to see a bunch of people marrying their brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, etc., humans are not like that. The number of people that engage in these relationships are so absurdly small that it will never be an issue for society. Why are you guys so bent on legislating morality?

Post: #27

I think one of the nastiest pictures I've ever seen was a girl's pussy with a snake head and body deep in it

Post: #28

(07-05-2013 05:51 PM)Samseau Wrote:  False dichotomy. I can both be for a free society and be against people having sex with animals, or men having sex with men.

Step one, we can abolish all marriage laws. This is for freedom.

Step two, people can publicly shame (and political leaders should do this in their speeches) faggots and animal fuckers. People shamed this way will become outcasts and not a single arrest will be made.

Thus the problem is solved - people can do as they please, yet they will still face consequences for their behavior.

This is what I was saying, just because it's legal it doesn't mean you have to like or approve it, but you shouldn't make it illegal just because you don't like it.

I feel some of you think that if you make something legal then society is doomed. Just because something is legal you won't see the masses changing their behaviors in droves. Basically things would simply keep on being the same, life would go on the same way.

Post: #29

(07-05-2013 11:47 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 03:13 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  For a lot of women, dogs have replaced both children and a husband as their primary relationship partners. Women sleep with dogs, cuddle with them, kiss them, clothe them and give them Valentine's Day gifts.

While this might not fall under the category of bestiality per se, it is a form of animal love and would have been unheard of to this degree in past generations.

Here is an article on getting sick from sleeping with your pets:
http://www.livescience.com/10444-sharing...-sick.html

Here is an article titled "If Only My Dog Were a Man:"
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/11221051/ns/he...dZ9iqyE6So

Pets top sex in making women happy:
http://blog.timesunion.com/mydogbandit/s...appy/2461/

Considering how the importance of pets has grown for women, I don't think you need "bestiality" to catch on. It already has in a way. A lot of women are in love with animals, not people. Dunno how old you guys are, but you'll see this more and more as you head to 40.

Pets don't care if you get fat, hit the wall, have no personality and they don't have their own lives so it's no wonder a lot of women would prefer that to a human companion. A chick doesn't have to worry about Fido going off to have a pint at the pub. Pets pretty much exists to give these chicks attention 24/7.

I think you guys are right, but this is so disturbing and disgusting in so many levels.

Post: #30

(07-05-2013 10:54 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  Moral coward? Really? So we have a different opinion about something and that makes it ok for you to insult me? And what are you? A dictator that wants to impose on others your own sense of morality.

I never said I like incestuous couplings or that I'd want to see society go to down that path, but I don't want the state to legislate what free and grown people can and can't do. I don't think it should be illegal, if they want to do it let them be free to do it, it doesn't mean I approve of it, but I don't have the right to tell them they can't.

I really don't understand why so many of you guys are getting so worked up about this, it's not like if this is legal you're going to see a bunch of people marrying their brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, etc., humans are not like that. The number of people that engage in these relationships are so absurdly small that it will never be an issue for society. Why are you guys so bent on legislating morality?

Yes. This is the very definition of moral cowardice. You admittedly find bestiality and incest disgusting and anti-social behaviors, but cannot bring yourself to condemn them based on some misguided notion of "tolerance". You are prepared to jettison your morality and bite your tongue simply for fear of offending the feelings of sexual degenerates and those who enable them.

The point is that society has no obligation to tolerate behaviors that the majority of people find abominable. That's how society works. We come to a rough consensus on the things we tolerate and the things we don't. These are called laws. We can all agree that something like murder is unacceptable, so we outlaw it and punish it. I don't see why there should be any disagreement that animal fucking and incest are behaviors that should similarly be outlawed. This should not be in any way controversial. It's a sign of how fucked up our culture has become that there are actually people who will defend this kind of shit based on some kind of perverted "live and let live" philosophy.

Where does tolerance stop for you? Should we just allow sexual perverts to run around in public fucking dogs and goats? Should we portray them sympathetically in television shows and movies? As long as they're not hurting anyone it's cool, right? Do you want some sexually degenerate animal fucking pervert to come into your kid's school and give a talk about how it's normal to love animals and have sex with them?

When society does not take a strong stand against this kind of degeneracy, you can expect it to start to spreading. It was only a few decades ago that homosexual activity was a crime and homosexuality itself considered a mental illness. Now it's completely permeated our culture, and children are being taught in school that traditional families are unimportant and that having two daddies or mommies is normal.

Post: #31

(07-06-2013 12:20 AM)scorpion Wrote:  Yes. This is the very definition of moral cowardice. You admittedly find bestiality and incest disgusting and anti-social behaviors, but cannot bring yourself to condemn them based on some misguided notion of "tolerance". You are prepared to jettison your morality and bite your tongue simply for fear of offending the feelings of sexual degenerates and those who enable them.

Ok Mr. Ayn Rand fan, we have different views on what morality is. Where did I say you can't condemn such behaviors? As a society you can and you should, but you shouldn't use the state to legislate on what is or isn't moral.

Quote:The point is that society has no obligation to tolerate behaviors that the majority of people find abominable. That's how society works. We come to a rough consensus on the things we tolerate and the things we don't. These are called laws. We can all agree that something like murder is unacceptable, so we outlaw it and punish it. I don't see why there should be any disagreement that animal fucking and incest are behaviors that should similarly be outlawed. This should not be in any way controversial. It's a sign of how fucked up our culture has become that there are actually people who will defend this kind of shit based on some kind of perverted "live and let live" philosophy.

Laws are made to protect us from harm, when no one is harmed the sate shouldn't intervene. Why do you feel the need to legislate it?

Quote:Where does tolerance stop for you? Should we just allow sexual perverts to run around in public fucking dogs and goats? Should we portray them sympathetically in television shows and movies? As long as they're not hurting anyone it's cool, right? Do you want some sexually degenerate animal fucking pervert to come into your kid's school and give a talk about how it's normal to love animals and have sex with them?

How did you jump from not making something illegal to this completely extreme and unrealistic example?

Quote:When society does not take a strong stand against this kind of degeneracy, you can expect it to start to spreading. It was only a few decades ago that homosexual activity was a crime and homosexuality itself considered a mental illness. Now it's completely permeated our culture, and children are being taught in school that traditional families are unimportant and that having two daddies or mommies is normal.

So homosexuality is a degeneracy that should be banned, ok, good luck with that, it has always existed and it always will, deal with it.

You can definitely argue that nowadays the whole gay issue is being way overplayed, I don't like it either, but you can't have the state make it illegal, under the law they should and must have the same rights, I have no issue at all with that.

I'm sorry but I just get the feeling you're one of those "angry with the world" guys that would like to be living in the 1950's. You also seem to think that if we don't have laws on every moral issue than society would suddenly crumble into degeneracy; I simply don't agree with you, I think it's a very paternalistic view of society, that you need to protect everyone from the things you consider wrong or else things would fall apart. It' basically saying we're little kids that can't take care of themselves and we need the moral police to tell us what's right or wrong.

I don't think that because homosexuality is accepted you will have more homosexuals, I don't think because a drug is legal society would turn into a bunch of junkies, I don't think not penalizing incest would make everyone marry their relatives.

And I surely don't think humans need the daddy state to tell them what they can or can't do.

Jeez, I thought you were the libertarian here.

Post: #32

Post: #33

You're a complete fool if you don't understand how tolerating bestiality and incest is harmful to society. Your laissez faire tolerance of outright degeneracy appalls all right-thinking men.

Honestly, I could sit here and deconstruct your post and continue to debate you on this, but what's the point? I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who sees no problem with people fucking goats and dogs.

As far as I'm concerned, you're part of the problem, and I will be ignoring all of your future posts, as I find your morality disgusting and your arguments little more than third-rate rehashes of the supposed virtues of utopian libertarian tolerance.