(September 2, 2015 at 8:02 pm)Yeauxleaux Wrote:(September 2, 2015 at 7:33 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I just don't understand why it's considered abusive to have a dog lick peanut butter off your privates, or to fondle their privates, while at the same time not abusive to put them in cages/crates/stables or kill them for food. People say it's wrong because they can't give consent. But they can't give consent for any of these other things we do to them.
People are saying stuff like this all the time.
I don't agree with keeping animals locked up in confined spaces, we can actually discuss how both beastiality and other forms of animal abuse are wrong. There's room for every discussion.
I do think (and this is why I can't with holier-than-thou vegetarians) that whatever we do, we're harming animals based just on the fact that we exist, even if we're not eating them. But I think there's a difference between survival (having to clear land that we can build homes on, and eating animals) and then just harming animals for fucked-up twisted "fun" (beastiality, hunting just for sport, etc).
Yes, I agree.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
