BEASTIALITY

[Catholic_Lady]

Well I think taking someone who is essentially brain dead off of a machine is not the same as euthanize a terminally ill mentally handicapped person without their consent... which is what we do to our pets. We are comparing apples to oranges here when we refer to a brain dead person who we pull the plug on, verses euthanize someone who can't give consent due to their handicap.   

I guess I don't really understand how it's ok to kill/eat an animal without their consent, but not ok to put peanut butter on your junk and have them lick it off without "consent." It isn't making much sense to me.   

Don't get me wrong, I do think doing the peanut butter thing is wrong, but wouldn't use "consent" as an argument for why it's wrong unless I can apply it to other scenarios.

But again, we're assuming in this case that the mentally handicapped person is incapable of giving consent.  Just as Terri Schiavo was incapable of giving consent.  If the mentally handicapped person is capable of consent, then you can't euthanize them without their consent.  Animals however aren't capable of giving consent.  They can't say "Yes, please put me out of my misery."

It's also a bit different if a guy uses peanutbutter to get a blowjob from his dog (desperation) and if he actually has sex with the dog (same with a woman).  When the animal initiates the action, then it's not really abuse.  But when a person initiates the action it's abuse.

To clarify, yes, I was talking about a mentally handicapped person who can't give consent, but objected to the example of Terri because I was not referring to a brain dead person who was only alive due to a machine.