A Rebellious People

[The Architect Of Fate]

i see you went with the odd cases of walruses having sex with penguins, preferring the extraordinary cases to the ordinary, indeed you will find I don't deny that these things happen, just that it is by and large in the animal kingdom the norm for sex to be purely an act of procreation.

What's ordinary is not prescriptive and the fact there are exceptions blows your whole point away. There are animals that have sex for pleasure not procreation...Therefore even in your own fallacy, you are wrong. 

However having said that, in your pursuit to look up the extraordinary cases and compile them in a list to try to debunk my post,

Its mere existence debunks your post. Your post debunks your post as your post is built on a fallacy. 

you also willfully departed from any intention in countering the rest of the post, so now all you've done is try to disprove one thing to disprove everything,

Nope, the mere existence of that one thing debunks. Your whole argument is invalid to begin with because again it's built on a fallacy. 

which an admirable attempt I must say, but you still disregarded the main fact here. 

Nope, the main fact here is Animals have sex for a reason procreation but even if they did you can't draw an ought from that. This is a critical failure of your whole argument. 

Sex is meant to be an act of procreation,

Nope, plenty of animals have sex for pleasure so sex depends on species and nothing binds humans to this rule as it's clear humans have sex for pleasure so this point alone blows your whole fallacious argument out the window. 

 trying to deny such is like trying to deny your own humanity.

Nope, it's embracing the fact humans are not confined to our basic instincts and can utilize sex for other purposes and do. This isn't a denial of humanity it's part of humanity. Your attempts to confine humanity by the naturalistic fallacy that's denying humanity. 

 So you haven't disproven anything,

Actually, he proved all he needed to prove all you do is engage in a fallacious line of reasoning 

 all you've made abundantly clear is that some animals prefer homosexual behavior,

No, what he made clear is not all sex is procreational. That alone blows your argument away and the fact your argument is a fallacy just blows it further.

 which I'm glad you're so open-minded about the right for giraffes to love who they want to and that you support their 'sexual freedom'

Yup 

but you can not seem to offer any empathy at all for the human infant that still dwells within the womb.

There is again no reason the fetus's mere existence overrides a woman's autonomy or sexual freedom.

 Your love for animals over humans is detestable, to say the least.

Nope, his love for sexual freedom and the autonomy of women is awesome it's your beliefs that are detestable. 


Just because other animals have sex to reproduce does not mean sex ought only to be about reproduction and that having sex ought to be regarded as an invitation to be pregnant and that she ought not to be allowed to remove the fetus. Appealing to the behavior of other animals will not get you prescriptions on any of these issues.