Apparently there are women out there that are training their dogs to have secks with them...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,3885 01,00.html
Notice the key phrase used in this article "Crimes Against Nature". Exactly what constitutes a crime against nature?
-Studmuffin7
I suppose it's considered a crime against nature because it's inter-species intercourse. Bestiality is a very underground fetish, and the general public obviously don't approve.
Now, when it comes to my personal opinion, hell. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. The media just likes making unimportant shitty small town stories seem like a big deal. We're in a war and on the brink of a recession, and they're seriously publishing stories about two middle aged women who like to fuck dogs?
Good job, Fox.
On a logical level everything the human race does is a crime against nature. Or is it, is it in our nature to change said nature?
This broad statement I think is finally relevant to the topic I'm posting in haha.
At 7/23/08 02:37 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: On a logical level everything the human race does is a crime against nature. Or is it, is it in our nature to change said nature?
This broad statement I think is finally relevant to the topic I'm posting in haha.
Well if we're manipulating nature in a way that would advance our species as a whole I say it's A okay. But Fucking dogs seems like a backwards step to me so I'd consider it a crime against nature personally.
"Communism is the very definition of failure." - Liberty Prime.
It appears my ignorance is showing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_again st_nature
A "crime against nature" is a LEGAL term, ranging from masturbation to, well, dog fucking. The article now seems a lot less judgmental knowing that, although it's still obviously biased.
At 7/23/08 02:43 PM, animehater wrote:
Well if we're manipulating nature in a way that would advance our species as a whole I say it's A okay.
Well have we run this definition by the other species? :P
But Fucking dogs seems like a backwards step to me so I'd consider it a crime against nature personally.
Well from the dog's perspective it's just "this person is dominate over me."
It's when you do something a hippy thinks you shouldn't do.
At 7/23/08 03:04 PM, poxpower wrote: It's when you do something a hippy thinks you shouldn't do.
That's like EVERYTHING maaaan.
At 7/23/08 02:46 PM, Oranzoval wrote: A "crime against nature" is a LEGAL term, ranging from masturbation to, well, dog fucking. The article now seems a lot less judgmental knowing that, although it's still obviously biased.
Crimes against morality ( or what is accepted as morality) would be a better term rather than nature me thinks. There is nothing unnatural about masturbation, likewise interspecies sex ( whislt weird from a human standpoint) occurs in nature. How else do you end up with Stuff like Ligers. And I've heard ( anecodotally though) of dogs having theri way with cats and the like on occasion as well. If it is appears in nature then it can't exactly be a crime against nature.
At 7/23/08 02:31 PM, Oranzoval wrote: Now, when it comes to my personal opinion, hell. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
Well, bestiality is fine in theory, but once you start actually doing it, that's when it gets wrong. There's no way to know if the animal consents.
The media just likes making unimportant shitty small town stories seem like a big deal. We're in a war and on the brink of a recession, and they're seriously publishing stories about two middle aged women who like to fuck dogs?
Understand that news sites cover any news they find. It's just one article. That doesn't mean that it's going to be on national television. Don't just bash a story just because it's being reported by Fox or some other news station. Even though Fox definitely spews a lot of bullshit, I thought the article was rather unbiased.
At 7/23/08 06:30 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:At 7/23/08 02:31 PM, Oranzoval wrote: Now, when it comes to my personal opinion, hell. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.Well, bestiality is fine in theory, but once you start actually doing it, that's when it gets wrong. There's no way to know if the animal consents.
By your logic regarding animal consent, shouldn't owning pets be against nature as well because we don't know if the animal approves of us putting it in a home or on a leash?
The media just likes making unimportant shitty small town stories seem like a big deal. We're in a war and on the brink of a recession, and they're seriously publishing stories about two middle aged women who like to fuck dogs?Understand that news sites cover any news they find. It's just one article. That doesn't mean that it's going to be on national television. Don't just bash a story just because it's being reported by Fox or some other news station. Even though Fox definitely spews a lot of bullshit, I thought the article was rather unbiased.
Yes, the one of very few articles that are unbiased from Fox News turns out to be about beastiality. Oh well, can't have everything.
At 7/23/08 02:25 PM, studmuffin7 wrote: Apparently there are women out there that are training their dogs to have secks with them...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,3885 01,00.html
Notice the key phrase used in this article "Crimes Against Nature". Exactly what constitutes a crime against nature?
-Studmuffin7
Ideologies differ. There are simply too many ways to interpret the word "nature" and its context.
At 7/23/08 09:44 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: By your logic regarding animal consent, shouldn't owning pets be against nature as well because we don't know if the animal approves of us putting it in a home or on a leash?
No. You can clearly tell if an animal doesn't want to be put on a leash or kept in a house. It will leave or bite. However, having sex with it is totally different. An animal will submit to you if you assert your dominance, regardless of whether or not it wants to be treated that way.
And besides, even if an animal doesn't want to be kept on a leash or what not, it's not like it's cruel. I should most dogs would rather run free in a field than be on a leash with its owner, but it's not being hurt in any way. In other words, it doesn't mind being on the leash. Having sex with the animal is abuse whereas keeping it as a pet is often in the animal's benefit.
At 7/23/08 11:04 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:At 7/23/08 09:44 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: By your logic regarding animal consent, shouldn't owning pets be against nature as well because we don't know if the animal approves of us putting it in a home or on a leash?No. You can clearly tell if an animal doesn't want to be put on a leash or kept in a house. It will leave or bite. However, having sex with it is totally different. An animal will submit to you if you assert your dominance, regardless of whether or not it wants to be treated that way.
And besides, even if an animal doesn't want to be kept on a leash or what not, it's not like it's cruel. I should most dogs would rather run free in a field than be on a leash with its owner, but it's not being hurt in any way. In other words, it doesn't mind being on the leash. Having sex with the animal is abuse whereas keeping it as a pet is often in the animal's benefit.
And how is having sex with it hurting it? It's sometimes hard to tell if an animal likes it or not. With dogs and women, the dog is in a dominant position over the woman, so who's really dominant?
At 7/23/08 11:12 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: And how is having sex with it hurting it? It's sometimes hard to tell if an animal likes it or not. With dogs and women, the dog is in a dominant position over the woman, so who's really dominant?
The woman was still the dominant, seeing as she's the one who taught the dog the behavior. It's only doing what its owner is telling it to, fearing punishment.
At 7/23/08 11:26 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:
The woman was still the dominant, seeing as she's the one who taught the dog the behavior. It's only doing what its owner is telling it to, fearing punishment.
Only if the owner has ever punished it.
Also wow, tell me something else, do dogs dream? You seem to be all of a sudden inside their heads for some reason.
At 7/23/08 11:41 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: Only if the owner has ever punished it.
Well, how else would she teach the dog to have sex with her? A system of punishment and reward is the only way to get it to follow a command.
Also wow, tell me something else, do dogs dream? You seem to be all of a sudden inside their heads for some reason.
I understand dominance theories and I vaguely understand animal behavior. I fill in the holes with logic and personal experience with animals.
At 7/23/08 11:51 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:
Well, how else would she teach the dog to have sex with her? A system of punishment and reward is the only way to get it to follow a command.
You gotta take imitation into account as well. If you're lazy, your dog will be lazy, etc.
I understand dominance theories and I vaguely understand animal behavior. I fill in the holes with logic and personal experience with animals.
Good good.
At 7/24/08 12:30 AM, JackPhantasm wrote: You gotta take imitation into account as well. If you're lazy, your dog will be lazy, etc.
I'm not quite sure what you're implying. Are you saying that if he saw someone else - another of his owners, for instance - having sex with the woman that he would too? I suppose that's plausible.
But the article did say that the woman taught the dog to have sex with her with the intent of actions of bestiality.
At 7/24/08 12:44 AM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:
I'm not quite sure what you're implying. Are you saying that if he saw someone else - another of his owners, for instance - having sex with the woman that he would too? I suppose that's plausible.
Well basically the "who's walking who" concept. LIke your dog will take on your characteristics naturally. Just like human couples do.
But the article did say that the woman taught the dog to have sex with her with the intent of actions of bestiality.
A pet is property though isn't it? Would a person who was teaching the dog to fuck cats be treated the same way?
I don't know
At 7/24/08 12:51 AM, JackPhantasm wrote: Well basically the "who's walking who" concept. LIke your dog will take on your characteristics naturally. Just like human couples do.
I don't know if it would go as far as actually having sex with it's owner, though.
A pet is property though isn't it? Would a person who was teaching the dog to fuck cats be treated the same way?
I don't know. That's a tough question, especially at one in the morning. :I
I would say the person should be punished at least somewhat because they are forcing two animals to do something outrageous and against their nature.
At 7/23/08 11:51 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:
Well, how else would she teach the dog to have sex with her? A system of punishment and reward is the only way to get it to follow a command.
Or, get this; maybe the dog did it on it's own because it wanted to fuck?Do you have to punish and reward your dog to get it to hump the shit out of your leg? No. They do that, constantly, on their own. A logical extension of that is that, should your dog start a-humping and you present yourself sexually, it WILL have sex with you.
Although please, explain to me how sexual reproduction is a myth and dogs secretly hate sex.
I understand dominance theories and I vaguely understand animal behavior. I fill in the holes with logic and personal experience with animals
Your personal experience is that you have to punish animals for them to have basic survival instincts? You had to beat your dog to keep it from dehydrating? It you don't scream at it, your dog won't eat?
Hahahahahaha, LiveCorpse is dead. Good Riddance.
At 7/24/08 01:40 AM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: Your personal experience is that you have to punish animals for them to have basic survival instincts? You had to beat your dog to keep it from dehydrating? It you don't scream at it, your dog won't eat?
You do have a point. I think I got a little carried away with that "they forced the animal to have sex" thing.
I still do not, however, believe that bestiality is something that we should be allowed to do. Think about it this way. A 12 year old boy can chose to have sex with a 25 year old woman. That doesn't mean the child has the mental capability to make that choice.
At 7/24/08 01:57 AM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:At 7/24/08 01:40 AM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: Your personal experience is that you have to punish animals for them to have basic survival instincts? You had to beat your dog to keep it from dehydrating? It you don't scream at it, your dog won't eat?You do have a point. I think I got a little carried away with that "they forced the animal to have sex" thing.
I still do not, however, believe that bestiality is something that we should be allowed to do. Think about it this way. A 12 year old boy can chose to have sex with a 25 year old woman. That doesn't mean the child has the mental capability to make that choice.
So now you're attempting to compare an animal with a child? An animal will never have the mental capability; a child EVENTUALLY will.
At 7/24/08 02:55 AM, MultiCanimefan wrote: So now you're attempting to compare an animal with a child? An animal will never have the mental capability; a child EVENTUALLY will.
Ugh, I'm not saying that a child will forever not be able to have the capacity, I'm just making the connection to farther explain my point.
Just like we shouldn't let people have sex with children, we shouldn't let them have sex with animals.
At 7/24/08 02:57 AM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:At 7/24/08 02:55 AM, MultiCanimefan wrote:
Ugh, I'm not saying that a child will forever not be able to have the capacity, I'm just making the connection to farther explain my point.
Just like we shouldn't let people have sex with children, we shouldn't let them have sex with animals.
I understand the connection, but why should sex with animals be wrong? Surely it can't be for the same reasons as not having sex with a child.
At 7/24/08 03:08 AM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Surely it can't be for the same reasons as not having sex with a child.
Because they don't have the capability to understand and give informed consent.
Having a furry fetish is bad enough as it is.
But you have something seriously wrong with you if you actually want to fuck a animal, let alone actually do it.
Make war, not love.
At 7/24/08 04:01 AM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:
Because they don't have the capability to understand and give informed consent.
Who defines this? People.
Who commits the "crime?" People.
See the connection?
See the thought that screams, "you'll never know?"
