@theRightizright The Gomorrahian is you oppressor. I lie not. Jesus is not stone thrower, and yet you want to test your throwing arm taking Christs name? Hypocrite. You want to believe devils who made translations based on lies. Those lies destroy your neighber with your mouth. Proverbs 4 24,Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
@theRightizrightKLJV, Pro, 11,9An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered. The humans you persecute are godly, and just 2 Tim, 3:12 >12Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.You persecute being an ungodly liar.1 John 4 ,12,
If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. The gay, zoo,and Pedo are one another too. Names are used like a militarily weapon.
Wow. You're real lying scum. There is nothing hyporcritical about what I've posted. God hates sodomy and lesbianism, because they are sin. He hates what harms His creatures. What are you, just another Islamic fool blathering Scripture that you know nothing about? Or a heretic? Or a fool? "the FOOL has said in his heart, 'there is no God'." Psalm 14:1 You have no clue what love is if you believe sodomy is acceptable. You're just another pervert. BOOM. lol.
@theRightizright A hypocrite want love, but does not give it. Give love to the zoo,and hug tghem when you see them, and not harm them or their lover non human animals or incarcerate them like john the baptist. God draws all to him in love Satan.John 12:32; 32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. All is all inclusive. Love draws, and what you have is hate, and hate repels. You are the compulsive liar. I will tell you what love is in the next post.
There are no 'gay'. There are sodomites and lesbians. Homosexuals. Sinners that God loves, but will not tolerate their filthy lifestyles forever. They have a choice, just like their homosexuality is a choice: Repent and turn from their sins, leave their homosexuality behind, and turn to the living God, and Jesus Christ, for forgiveness. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and all He has done, and you will be saved. Reject Him, and be lost forever. You are the liar.
@theRightizright All that have God in them have truth loving whoever. Hating is not a good work of Jesus, right? Therefore how could any truth be in you? Oppressing sodomites have no truth. Abundantly clear theRightizright is an oppressor. Isaiah 1. KJV. Die be a sinner. Hate kills your soul. Be like Jesus saving your soul. God gives us a choice to live giving good. Give bad, get bad. That's the truth. Hug,and get a hug, that's the truth. You hug no one, that is the truth.
@theRightizright You worship God with your mouth, but your heart is far from God. That is the truth. Give good,and thorns, and thistles will not be given. @theRightizright gives thorns, and Thistle. @theRightizright does not give love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: You don't give the gay, whoever joy, Proverbs 12;20,Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellers of peace is joy. Give joy, not evil deceit.
You're pretty much clueless as to God's word and will. Love is honest and tells people the truth. Love from God offers forgiveness if one will repent of their sins, be honest with themselves, and admit they cannot save themselves, and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior. I realize you don't like hearing this truth. Your posts show where your heart is. You hate the truth. Give up your sin and turn to the Savior. Experience REAL love.
@theRightizright Isaiah 1;16;Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;17Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Oppressing the gay etc is bad being the Sodom, and Gomorrah sin, your sin.
18Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Good advice. Why don't you stop reading the koran, googling up Bible verses, twisting them out of context, and take your own advice. Give your sins to God and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. He wants to forgive you.
@theRightizright KJV,Philippians 2:3;1If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. theRightizright thinks he is Superior to the gay, zoo, etc acting like the egotistical devil.
@theRightizright Real love loves all as one KJV. 1 John 4 ,12, If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.The humans you think you are better than are one another, your brother, and the least of these your breteren.1 Corinthians 13;4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, You don't seek others.Charity is love. You are puffed up.
@theRightizright Pro, 11,9An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered. I can't say you are not trying to destroy your neighber with your mouth. A human trying to destroy his neighber with his mouth most assuredly does not have love, and that makes you a hypocrite, Pro 17 :23A wicked man taketh a gift out of the bosom to pervert the ways of judgment. You are perverted, abominable, and wicked. gay, and zoo are the just.
Mmhmmm. You forgot to quote Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26,27, where God condemns sodomy and lesbianism, and John 3:16, where He offers forgiveness for sin. As if that was your purpose in posting comments. lol. Whose sock puppet are you, anyway?
@theRightizright Do what you think those verses say, and you might as well burn the rest of the bible. John 3:16, don't forget 17, It goes contrary to your condemning ways. Read below Romans 1; Those against gay are maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, You debate for the killing = murder of humans thinking God wants it, malignity; whisperers. Unmerciful: Murderers have no natural affection, describes you to a tee. Without understanding. Your evil fruits condemn you.
@theRightizright Gods light is hell to the wicked. Bet no one taught you that. Those that say otherwise have no truth in them. Hebrews 12:29; 28Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: 29For our God is a consuming fire. Gods light is fire to the wicked. Devils who fear that light have been your teachers. God is the father of lights. James 1:17 K,J,V, only.
@theRightizright love seeks peace, is longsuffering, kind, thoughtful, forgives, believes, hopes, endures, bears all things, is meek, not seeking evil, rejoices in truth, seeks truth, is wise, harmless, honest, says edifying words. Does not war to save his skin saving his soul, is not boastful not giving guilt, compassionate, long suffering, slow to anger, merciful, not accusing or condemning, not giving evil for evil does not persecute, sets humans free, drys tears gives joy.
@theRightizright Based on,1 Corinthians, 13:4 KJV, Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity is love because love gives many things. Have this in you,and heavy arms will lift to hug the zoo.
@theRightizright Your use of abominable is misused like it was misused by the devil. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: not any kind of sex. Proverbs 3, 32For the froward is abomination to the LORD: but his secret is with the righteous ,K J B< Proverbs 11 A false balance [is] abomination to the LORD: but a just weight [is] his delight, and Proverbs 20 :10, KJV, Sex is not an abomination. You are sinning with a perverted, abominable mouth killing your soul.
@theRightizright Gods love is his righteousness,You see Gods righteousness even as you see mans legal system that condemns humans. Jesus does not condemn.Don't you know the well known John 3, 16, and 17 KJV? When you get your inflated Luciferian ego out of the way God will manifest to you that you are a beast Ecc 18-20 .k. 18I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
@theRightizright Perversion a plenty, and Satan has planted many. What you plant is what you will reap. Plant condemning seeds, and your harvest will condemn you. Get what you want to give. God gives love to get love. Get the picture condemn whoever, and condemn yourself. Not a wise thing to do. KJV only.
@theRightizright I lie not theRightizright is not righteous. Had you be righteous you would have hugging forgiving love, and your words would not sound like a battle cry for blood. You would seek peace, but as it turns out you are seeking the opposite to peace. Devils don't like peace being self destructive.
@theRightizright An evil oppressive Antichrist spirit is in you like that of the Oppressive, sacrificing stiff necked Sodom,and Gomorrah humans. Every single word that comes out of your oppressive mouth is defiling you perfectly emulating the religious scribes, pharisees,and Sadducee intent on finding fault in Jesus. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD. Proverbs 3, 32For the froward is abomination to the LORD: but his secret is with the righteous.
@theRightizright Gods word is not a weapon warmonger. Warmongers are liars. Satan is the one who began war, and He is in you.Therefore how can any truth be in you?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "Can you tell me what risk my dog needs to be informed about when he has sex with me?" how about giving his owner an STD? While there are not really any STD's than can be transmitted from humans to animals, there are ones that can be transmitted from animals to humans.
Is that supposed to be some kind of justification for the filth of sodomy and lesbianism? Because God never condemns what He brings to pass, and He made mankind heterosexual. Eve for Adam. The truth about sodomy is that it is abominable in His eyes. It is sin. And Jesus Christ died to pay the price for the sins of sodomites, and every other sinner.
@theRightizright Do you realize in action you are a door rushing sodomite wanting to break down the door of the gay, zoosexual, Pedo,etc using a name as a weapon trying to make your corruptible body worse than another corruptible body that dies? You have to know that is imposable. Why then do you do that? Be godly and no one will persecute anyone. 2 Timothy 3:12,Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. Take wild guess who is being persecuted?
@theRightizright Demonic religions have spoken only lies to you. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD. You have the chronic liar Satan in you, I lie not. K J V<Proverbs 11,20They that are of a froward heart are abomination to the LORD: but such as are upright in their way are his delight. Proverbs 20 :10Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the LORD.You give the gay, zoosexual,and whoever an unfair balance being abominable.
@theRightizright because your body dies is filled with sin. You cannot pay that debt because death is certain. Wish ill will on humans persecuting like you are, and the soul will die along with the body when Gods light shines. That light is hell to humans like you. Repent, and you will see Gods light as comforting. It is your choice choose wisely. Don't, and when God purifies the universe wicked will literally be no more body, and soul.
well they are the same in the sense that to most people like me think all gays, bestiality, pedophilia are all disgusting, but there are still others continue to do that short of thing and will fight to have the rights to do that kind of thing. so they're the same because they are very disliked by many but there are still some who practice it. what you have mentioned that they're not the same because kids and animals don't have consent. well from what i saw from google, apparently they do. O_O
FACT: homosexuality, pedophilia, and zoophilia are all the SAME THING. you gays can deny and distance yourself from it all you want but all the pedos and horsefuckers agree that they should have the same rights as gays because just like gays, "they were born that way". Notice bestiality is on the rise. Animal fuckers have been coming out of the closet left and right ever since the gay rights movement passed. I don't have any positive or negative opinon. All im staing are FACTS i have observed.
Yes, I believe God, and I believe IN God. He is God of your life too, whether you believe in Him or not. He gives you air to breathe, keeps your heart beating, and as long as you're alive, He offers you forgiveness for your sins through the blood that Jesus shed on the cross to pay for them. Don't be a fool; read His words in John's Gospel, and believe on Jesus Christ. Receive Him as your Savior today, while you still have time.
@theRightizright The truth sets humans free. lies kept humans in bondage. lies try to make one body that dies worse than another body that dies, and that is imposable. That mreans lies are in you coddled, and pampered as if they are truth holding you in bondage too. All kinds of sex on a planet of sex. Don't judge lest ye be judged.
@Theasshole85 The truth sets humans free. The lies kept all that you mentioned in bondage. The lies tried to make one body that dies worse than another body that dies, and that is imposable.
from an srticle by the vermont animal cruelty task force: "In his 1993 article, Dr. Frank Ascione stated that “bestiality may be considered cruel even in cases when
physical harm to an animal does not occur (this is similar to the case of adult sexual activity with a child where
consent is presumed to be impossible).” This is because animals are unable to be fully informed, communicate
@Trustisaliability saying gay sex is wrong doesn't make it so. Sure if logical if you goal is reproduction but since when was reproduction the only purpose of sex?
"There is huge difference between 2 consenting adults having sex and somebody having sex with an animal."←There is no difference if the animals are also fully sexually mature consenting adults animals.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I can't even begin to describe the ignorance of that statement but i'll try. It is illegal to have sex with children because children do not have the decision-making ability that adults do. Animals typically have even less decision-making ability than those children. Animals do not know how to properly assess situations and they're consequences like adult humans do. To stay there's no difference is i'm sorry but it's just fucking stupid.
There is no difference between 2 fully mature aniamls (of the human specie) having sex and two fully mature aniamls (one human one non-human having sex) they both are:
1- Mature.
2-Consenting.
3-Animals.
I was not comparing the mentality, I agree humans are less intelligent, though that doesn't affect them much in making decisions like what to eat or with who to have sex.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo No, I didn't misunderstand. It DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER if they're both mature and consenting because animals, even when fully matured. do not have the ability to make informed decisions that human adults do. Therefore, it is still considered abuse.
"Animals do not have the ability to make informed decisions that human adults do. Therefore, it is still considered abuse."←By your logic, if I pet my dog in the head it is abuse because he can't consent to that? Or you believe a dog can make an informed decision about letting a human pet him in the head?
And what about giving a handjob? Would it be abuse if I give my dog one? You know people that do artificial insemination of dogs masturbate males and females, is that abuse too?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Wow you honestly think that petting something on the head and having sex with it are even close to similar? Petting something on the head What a stupid fucking argument. People who artificially inseminate dogs don't do it for their own personal sexual pleasure, nor do they do it for the sake of the animals being pleasured. So no, it isn't abuse. It's a professional procedure used by breeders and farmers so they can have more animals to sell or use for food.
"Wow you honestly think that petting something on the head and having sex with it are even close to similar?"←I do believe it, I pet my dog because he enjoys it, same reason I give him handjobs, he enjoys them. I like to do things that my dog enjoys, it makes me happy. :)
"Petting something on the head What a stupid fucking argument"←Ad hominem. Calling my argument stupid doesn't disprove it.
So, him masturbating a dog is not abuse, but if I do the exactly the same it is abuse? Why?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo. It's abuse because you'd be doing it for your own sexual gratification. Since you are doing it for sexual pleasure and dog's cannot make informed decisions about sex it is classified as sexual abuse of an animal. Artificial insemination is not done for sexual pleasure at all. the purpose of artificial insemination is not making the animal feel pleasure but to produce more offspring.
►Definition of animal abuse: the crime of inflicting physical pain, suffering or death to an animal.◄
"It's abuse because you'd be doing it for your own sexual gratification."←Where I'm inflicting physical pain, suffering or death on an animal?
"dog's cannot make informed decisions about sex it is classified as sexual abuse of an animal"←That is also true when is a vet masturbate dogs, by your logic that would also be animal abuse. But, by the real animal abuse laws, it is NOT abuse.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo lolwut where did you get that animal abuse only include pain suffering or death? I already told you why mastrubation of dogs for artifical insemination in not abuse because sexual gratification is not the goal at all. in many places in the U.S. beastiality constitutes the sexual assault of an animal so to say it's not legally considered abuse is just flat out wrong. Way to get your facts from wikipedia
"already told you why mastrubation of dogs for artifical insemination in not abuse because sexual gratification is not the goal at all."←I'm informing you that obtaining sexual gratification from doing A.I. is not considered animal abuse because it does not cause pain, suffering or death to the animal, that is a FACT (it actually causes pleasure) you can Google the definition of what constitutes animal abuse. Giving pleasure to an animal DOES NOT constitute animal abuse.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo so what? If somebody sexually molests a child is that not sexual abuse? yes, it is. Whether they feel pain or not it is still considered sexual abuse this really isn't that hard. Also in many places in the u.s. it is still considered animal cruelty.
"so what? If somebody sexually molests a child is that not sexual abuse? yes, it is."←Sex with immature creatures harms them physically and mentally, zoosexuals normally only have consensual sex with fully sexually mature animals, this doesn't result in any harm for them.
All USA has animal cruelty laws, they still let non-abusive consensual sex with animals to be legal (in those 19 states I mention) as if the sex is consensual and harmless, it is not abusive at all.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo my point was, even if the children aren't harmed at all by the act, it is still considered abuse because they cannot give informed consent. By the way, having sex with animals can be harmful to the animal too such as rectal tearing and some animals can even be killed from penetration. like children since they do not have advanced decision-making abilities and since you control every aspect of their well-being it cannot truly be considered consensual.
"still considered abuse because they cannot give informed consent."←Wrong, it is abuse because it is harmful and it is harmful because they can't consent to sex and that leads to mental or physical harm.
Yes, I know some sexual activities with animals can be harmful, I don't support those activities and animals do not consent to those activities. I only support consensual sex, where the animal is not harmed and is a willingly participant or at least neutral of the activity.
"since you control every aspect of their well-being it cannot truly be considered consensual."←It is consensual, I don't force him to have sex with me, I do control some aspect of his life but I don't control him when it comes to sex (that would be rape) he is the one making every single decision and I respect them. He decides when he doesn't want any more oral sex, he decides when and where he wants to fuck me, he decides if he wants to give me oral sex or not. Understand?
by your logic i guess molesting a child even if they consent is not sexual abuse because they are not being harmed. The problem is. it IS sexual abuse. The same goes for animals.
"by your logic i guess molesting a child even if they consent is not sexual abuse because they are not being harmed"←Where in my comments I have supported sex with immature creatures? There is plenty of evidence that sex with children, even if they consent it is mentally harmful for them. Maybe you didn't knew about this fact?
"The problem is. it'S sexual abuse. The same goes for animals"←We have sex with consenting adult that don't get harmed from sex, it is not the same.
Bestiality is legal in 19 USA states, the places where bestiality is illegal they use illogical laws like sodomy and crimes against (PS: they also use those laws to make homosexual sex illegal) those laws are unconstitutional. If you care about educating yourself about bestiality and the law, you can read these 4 Bitly links:
bit(dot)ly/iR95tf
bit(dot)ly/kE75PC
bit(dot)ly/iIT2KQ
bit(dot)ly/lcseDW
Just replace (dot) for an actual dot "." and copy paste it in the address bar.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Some places might have those reasons but in many places, someone who has sex with animals can be charged with animal cruelty. It doesn't matter if the animal is sexually mature or not. Having sex with children even if they consent isn't wrong simply because they aren't sexually mature. It's also wrong because it would be taking advantage of the fact that they don't have a decision making ability on par with a human adult. This is the same reason why bestiality is wrong.
"It doesn't matter if the animal is sexually mature or not"←It does matter, having sex with sexually immature creatures (animals or humans) harm them mentally or physically, having consensual sex with adults is harmless.
Sex with children is wrong because it's harmful. "taking advantage" of them has nothing to do with the reason it is illegal, parent can take advantage of their kids and make decision for them, as long as it is not harmful to the child, it is legal to do so.
I don't think homosexual relationships are equal to zoosexual relationships, they are SIMILAR, equal means the same and there are some difference so they can't be equal. If you talk about zoosexual rights and homosexual rights, yes they are equal, we both have the same rights to have sex and relationships with consenting adult (humans or animals)
Yes, a dog intelligence is comparable to a mind of a 3 to 5 year old, but dogs are sexually mature and they can consent to sex.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo no they are not because consent from an adult human and consent from adult animals are not the same thing. Homsoexual relationships are fundamentally equal between each party. The same is not so for zoosexual ones. Since animals do not the advanced capacity for decision-making that adult humans do it is more akin to taking advantage of a child than having sex with another adult. It doesn't matter if they are sexually mature or not.
"consent from an adult human and consent from adult animals are not the same thing."←Definition of CONSENT: Agree to let some one do something to you. •► If I consent to be petted by you, it is the SAME as if my dog consent to be petted by you.
"Homosexual relationships are fundamentally equal between each party. The same is not so for zoosexual ones."←Explain how is my relationship unequal with my K9 boyfriend?
•But is not akin to a child, they are fully mature adults.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo It is fundamentally unequal because A. They are unable to be as fully informed of the situation as you are and B. You are in almost absolute control over every matter of their well-being. You have all the control in the relationship. To even mildly suggest that it's an equal relationship is moronic. It is akin to a child as you are the one who is in complete control of them and they do not have the ability to give informed consent to sex. Therefore it is more like a child.
"They are unable to be as fully informed of the situation as you are"←OK, lets assume that is true, what does my K9 boyfriend needs to be fully informed about before engaging in sexual activities with me?
"You are in almost absolute control over every matter of their well-being."←I only control him when it is necessary to protect him, I don't control him when it comes to sex, he makes his own decisions, he can consent to things he likes or denied consent to things he dislike.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo That's not what i'm talking about I mean you are in control of his water and food, where he goes and when, what kind of medical treatment he gets. That's what I mean by ALL aspects of his well-being.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo No you see, it isn't because do the the limited brain capacity of animals. they can never be as fully aware of the situation as humans therefore their consent cannot be treated in the same way as a human consenting. This is why we have different justice systems for adults and children, because during youth ones ability to make decisions based on the situation is not as well-developed as an adult's. This is why consent from a human and an animal are different.
"therefore their consent cannot be treated in the same way as a human consenting."←I'm not saying that their consent should be treated in the same way human consent is treated, they consent in a more simple way.But it is still consent, and it is still important to respect animals consent to avoid harming them mentally or physically, not only when it comes to sex, but for any other non-sexual activities. Ignoring the consent of the animal for any kind of activities is harmful.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo it's not "more simple" they can consent but due to their nature, it is impossible for them to give informed consent. quoting a fact sheet from the VACTF "Piers Beirne, Professor of Criminology at the USM, says “for genuine consent to sexual relations to be present both participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires.
"they can consent, but can't give informed consent."←What does my dog has to be informed about before fucking my ass?
"for genuine consent to sex both participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires"←He is referring to HUMAN consent. Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?
"ALL aspects of his well-being."←Controlling all that doesn't affect his ability to give consent to sex. So what is the problem?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Again, it's not a matter of "what they need to be informed about" more than it is that they are never fully aware of the situation. Animals cannot legally give consent to anything as their language is often general and ambiguous. If a dog does one thing it might be interpreted as something else as there is no real way to know. Ultimately it is the taking advantage of your control over their lives and their limited awareness of what is going on that makes it wrong.
"Again, it's not a matter of "what they need to be informed about"←You are saying they can't give informed consent. So it is a matter of what they need to be informed about. Stop avoiding the question and answer, what does my dog needs to be informed about before fucking my ass?
"they are never fully aware of the situation"←Untrue, my dog is fully aware that fucking my ass feels good, he is aware that he has to be on top of me and hump, how can you say he is not aware of it?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I'm not talking about fully aware of the feeling i'm talking about being fully aware of the situation, same with children, a child might know that sex feels good but they do not have the capacity to think that their parents might be arrested because of it. Just as animals don't have the capacity to think about if their masters might be arrested because of it probably not.
"Animals cannot legally give consent to anything as their language is often general and ambiguous."←I agree, but why would animals need to give legal consent to have sex with a human? All they need is to give non-legal consent. You can kill animals, make them your slaves (also know as pets) do experiments on them, all this without the animal legal consent. So, why my dog needs legal consent for sex? When I could legally eutanize him him and eat him without his legal consent?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Because sex always requires legal consent from both parties or else it qualifies as rape or molestation. You can't legally euthanize a dog just because you feel like it nor can you eat your dog. The only reason we do animal testing is so we don't risk human lives. However sex ALWAYS requires legal consent from both parties.
"If a dog does one thing it might be interpreted as something else, no real way to know"←That is not true, First non-human animals can't lie, if they say NO it means NO, if they say YES, it means YES. On the other hand, humans can lie, they can say YES during sex but at the same time be thinking "NO STOP"
Second, if a human misinterpreted the animal language, only HE should be punished, same as we punish individual humans that rape because they misinterpreted human consent.
"Ultimately it is the taking advantage of your control over their lives and their limited awareness of what is going on that makes it wrong."←Taking advantage of animals limited awareness of what is going is L.E.G.A.L. you can own pets (that is taking advantage of them) you can eat meat (that is taking advantage of them) you can use them to pull objects, guide blind people, etc (that is taking advantage of them) if you think all that is wrong, are you a VEGAN with no PETs?
No he's not referring to human consent alone he's talking about genuine sexual consent and the full quote shows that that's his position on bestiality as well. "Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?" That's irrelevant as we're talking about domesticated pets not livestock or game animals.
"Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?" That's irrelevant as we're talking about domesticated pets not livestock or game animals."←In India Cows are pets, in china dogs are food. So don't avoid the question and answer it.
If informed consent is so important, why is OK to murder animals but not OK to let a male dog fuck a human? A Dog would enjoy fucking a human, dog would not enjoy being murdered and eaten by a Chinese guy.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I didn't avoid the question. I just pointed out that it's irrelevant we're not on the subject of whether or not we should be able to kill animals. You are the one dodging the question by going to an irrelevant subject. We're talking about consent for sex, nothing else.
"No he's not referring to human consent alone he's talking about genuine sexual consent and the full quote shows that that's his position on bestiality as well."←ALL COMES DOWN TO INFORMED CONSENT, that is why I ask you, What does my dog needs to be fully informed about before having sex with me?
►Answer my questions like I answer yours, stop avoiding them◄
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo If you control all aspects of their well being you don't know whether they are consenting because it's something they want or because it's something they feel they have to. Rather like women in ancient times would often submit to their husbands because If they didn't something bad might happen. For genuine sexual consent to be present both parties must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires. Dogs cannot be fully informed therefore it is not true consent
"If you control all aspects of their well being you don't know whether they are consenting because it's something they want or because it's something they feel they have to."←Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks? Also, dogs live in the present or past, they can't plan ahead. "something they feel they have to" ←That requires planing about the future, dogs can't think about that.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks" Hmm maybe because they might think that if they did something to upset you it might risk their own well-being as you are in full control of theirs.
"Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks" Hmm maybe because they might think that if they did something to upset you it might risk their own well-being as you are in full control of theirs."←Do you have evidence that dogs are smart as a human with the capacity to rationalize ahead in the future and reach the conclusion that if they don't obey their owner they may get punished?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Do I have evidence that they can do it as well as humans, no and i never said they did, but do I have evidence that they can think they can think about things in advance in general terms of sensation, sure I do, it's what pavlov's work was based around. If someone scolds his dog for not having sex with him repeatedly and then afterwards, the dog does it voluntarily is it still considered true consent from the dog or are they doing what they have been conditioned to do?
Can an animal testify about normal animal abuse? What's your point? Make all animal ownership illegal to protect animals because they can't testify if their owners are abusive to them?
Yes, you are avoiding the question, you say animals must give legal informed consent, so I ask: Why it is OK to murder a cow without her legal informed consent but it is BAD to give her oral sex? Why the cow only needs to give legal informed consent for sex but not for being murdered for food?
"Yet again, we are talking about consent for sex here, that is a very different issue from consent for other things."←So I don't need legal consent from a human to eutanize him? Last time I check you do need the human legal consent, same as if you want to have sex with a human. To have sex with a human or to kill them you need legal informed consent, to murder animals, make them work, have sex with them, experiment with them, you don't need legal informed consent.
Legal informed consent is defined in the law books as something only humans can give, that is why you don't need legal informed consent from animals. Also, my dog has fully informed consent when he has sex with me.
"Because sex always requires legal consent from both parties or else it qualifies as rape or molestation. "←That applies only to 2 or more humans having sex, would you say that 2 dogs having sex is rape or molestation because they can't give legal consent?
"You can't legally euthanize a dog just because you feel like it nor can you eat your dog."←Legally you can and eat the dog, countries like Canada, Korea, China and others, is 100% legal. And to my knowledge only in USA Carolina has a law making illegal to eating domestic animals, by the way, cows, pigs, chickens are domestic animals too, stupid contradictory law if you ask me.
"Just as animals don't have the capacity to think about if their masters might be arrested because of it probably not."←Arrested for what? It is legal to have consensual sex with animals where I live, it is legal in 19 USA states and legal in many other countries.
Can you tell me what else my dog needs to be fully aware that is relevant before fucking me? Because problems with the law is not a problem, at least not where I live.
You can only train dogs that consents to be trained and no dog will consent to be trained into doing something that is painful, you can't train a dog to consent to be fucked if he/she feels pain from being fucked, no matter how many nice threats or kicks you give to that dog, he/she will always feel pain during penetration and she/he will never say yes to sex, he/she will always show signs of not consenting, you can't train a dog to do something NEGATIVE. (to be continued...)
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo " You can only train dogs that consent to be trained. lolwut. conditioning is an observed effect that happens whether the dog consents or not. I didn't say you could condition them to do something harmful to themselves, I said that you could condition a dog to consent to sex. Even if the dog doesn't want sex VIA conditioning the dog's master could make it consent to him.
"I said that you could condition a dog to consent to sex."←Yes you can but only to things that are neutral to the dog.
In cases where the dog doesn't want to do something because he/she has an illogical reaction,what you can d, is desensitize a dog, once the dog is desensitized, he will do it by himself (if the action is positive) or he can be trained if the actions is neutral.
I don't see anything unethical with training a dog to do a sexual trick, he still consented to be trained.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Dog's don't consent to be trained. Training dogs by definition consists of making them do something they don't normally want to do by forcing them to associate it with either reward or punishment.
(continuation...) You can train something that is neutral by making it positive. For example, if a dog doesn't lick your genitals because it is a neutral activity, you can spread food over them to make the activity positive. You can make neutral activities into positive, but you can't make NEGATIVE activities into positive. For example, you can't train a dog to lick razor blades, no mater if you spread something tasty over the blades, the dog will feel pain and say NO thanks.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Yet you can also punish them and scold them for not doing it. You can make a dog consent to sex via conditioning even if it really didn't want to, it might just do so to avoid punishment.
"you can also punish them and scold them for not doing it"←First, that would be animal abuse. Second, punishment works to train dogs to stop a behabior, it doesn't work to make dogs do a behabior. If some one is looking to train his dog to do something, using punishment will not work, using a reward will work.
"Dog's don't consent to be trained."←If that is true, how do you train a chihuahua to eat burning charcoal or to walk over broken glass or to let a human penetrate him?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Exactly if you try to have sex with the dog and the dog resists one can condition them to consent by punishing them if they resist. Where exactly do you draw the the connection between a dog not consenting to be trained and the ability to train dogs to do things that will hurt themselves. I already said you cannot train a dog hurt itself but that doesn't mean a dog consents to training.
To train a dog you need to repeat a neutral action many times and give a reward to make it a positive action.
For example, to train my dog to give the paw, I grab his paw and place it in my hand, then reward him with food. I was able to train that behabior because he consent to let me grab his paw with my hand and move it over my other hand. If he didn't consented to let me grab his paw, I would have never succeed in train him to give the paw. Are you understanding?
I know a dog that was hit by a car and his front paws broke, after healing, he got traumatized, he will bite anyone who touches his paws. Tell me, how can I train that dog to give the paw, when I can't even touch his paw to start the training? That dog will not consent to be trained to give the paw.
You could desensitize him to be touched in the paws and then train him to give the paw after he is not aggressive when touched, takes a couple of weeks to archive.
"Exactly if you try to have sex with the dog and the dog resists one can condition them to consent by punishing them if they resist"←You can punish and condition a dog to not bite or run when he/she is being raped (in case the punishment is more painful than the actual rape) still... the dog will show signs of fear, submission and pain, all those signs translate in "I don't consent to this" so... a person training his dog that way is doing double the animal abuse.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo And as i said before, dog's animal language, unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations so one could interpret their signs of submission as consent. The analogy you used before was a false one as humans language is readily understandable by humans you can't interpret "yes" as "no" yes, means yes and no means no. Vague animal body language is not the same.
"unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations"←You evidence that is true?
Do you really believe a that a dog who growls, shows the fangs, barks and bites while having goosebumps hairs all over his back has no clear direct translation?
Do you really believe a that a dog that humps your leg while shooting precum all over it has no direct translation?
Do you really believe a that a dog that jumps around while wagging his tail has no direct translation?
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations" the fact that by the nature of the language themselves there physically cannot be a direct translation. Body language is vague and does not directly translate into human speech whether it be dogs or not. Those actions you described are general indications of emotion. General indications of emotion don't have direct translations into human language as they can be expressed a variety of ways.
"General indications of emotion don't have direct translations into human language as they can be expressed a variety of ways."←You gota be kidding me. Seriously, if you try to do something to a dog and he gets angry and moves aways from you and bites you and barks and growls, that means NO, it can't be anymore clear than that. Any dog behaviorists, ethologies, trainer or dog owner will tell you the same I'm telling to you.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo either way we've gotten so off topic. We should get back to even if a dog consents is it still okay. And I say no, In a relationship where you hold all the power it is wrong because dogs having a very small capacity to rationalize and never be fully aware of the situations they are in, cannot legally consent to anything let alone sex. I don't see why you think that animals' consent to sex should be legally recognized when animal consent for anything else is not.
You don't seem to have a clue about dogs and you keep talking like if you where an "expert" why don't you go an do a research first about dog body language, and come back to me when you have more information, after you realize of your errors.
"cannot legally consent "←Irrelevant, we don't even ask animals for legal consent when e kill them there is no reason to as for that to pleasure them. Period, next topic please.
"fully aware of the situations they are in"←I have asked you, what they have to be fully aware and you mention that they need to know that they actions can send to jail the owner (not true as bestiality is illegal over here) so what else they need to be really aware of? Answer me‼
The issue is Sex which requires legal consent from both parties. If legally recognized from both parties is not present it is classified as molestation or rape.
"If legally recognized from both parties is not present it is classified as molestation or rape."←A veterinarian doing an artificial insemination (where he manually masturbate both animals till orgasm) is that is molestation? Is owning a dog slavery? Is killing a cow and eating her murder? By your logic, since animals can't give legal consent to all that, the veterinarian is doing rape, a dog owner should be guilty of slavery and a butcher should be given death penalty... ಠ_ಠ
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo It's not irrelevant as legal consent is the entire issue. Alluding to whether or not we have the right to kill them is the irrelevant thing. Killing something does not require their consent. Sex does legal consent from both parties or else it is rape or molestation. Stop dodging the issue and answer my question. If dogs' consent is not legally recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception?
"Killing something does not require their consent."←So I can go kill you and that would be OK? Last time I check, it is legal to kill some one if that person consent, it is called euthanasia (or assisted suicide) but it is illegal to do it without the other person consent, it is called murder.
Legal consent can't be applied to animals, the laws says so, it is only to be applied to HUMANS.
If you apply it to animals, you could be guilty of murder for killing a roach...
"Sex does legal consent from both parties or else it is rape or molestation."←WRONG, A 17 year old can have sex with an 18 year old and it would not be rape or molestation, even that the 17 year old can't give legal consent till he/she is 18.
"If dogs' consent is not legally recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception?"←I just answer this in comment ♥Part 3♥. PS: I'm not dogging any of your questions, I have answer them all (unlike you)
"very small capacity to rationalize"←Why does a dog need to rationalize? They can have sex just fine with other dogs without that ability, why would they need to to fuck a human or a cat or an object? They don't need that, it is irrelevant to them. Next topic.
"I don't see why you think that animals consent to sex should be legally recognized"←It is already legally recognized in many countries. Respecting the animal consent is the only way to have non-abusive sex with them.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I didn't say that it wasn't i said that I see why you think it SHOULD be. Dog's consent isn't recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception.
"Dog's consent isn't recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception."←Consent is recognized in animal abuse laws, you can be punished for ignoring animal consent, as ignoring animal consent leads to mental or physical harm which is recognized as animal abuse. That is why in some countries consensual bestiality is legal, while if you rape animals, you are going to get punished under animal abuse laws if you get caught.
"And I say no, In a relationship where you hold all the power"←Having power is not a crime, using that power to force some one against his will is a crime, I don't use my power to force my dog to haver sex with me so there is nothing wrong with having more power than him.
"animal consent for anything else is not"←Ignoring consent when you adopt a pet cause no harm, ignoring consent when you have sex with an animal does cause harm, consent is very important to respect during sex.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Yet they never consent to be euthanized and that DOES harm them therefore that argument is void. I'm asking you, why should animal consent be legally recognized in sex but not in anything else. I agree that it is something to respect but I'm talking about whether a dog's consent can be legally recognized or not. Animals never consent to animal testing and that DOES harm them, why should animal consent be legally binding only in sex?
"Yet they never consent to be euthanized and that DOES harm them therefore that argument is void."←Having consensual non-abusive sex doesn't harm them either, so your argument they need to give legal consent is void. :)
"I'm asking you, why should animal consent be legally recognized in sex but not in anything else."←Animal consent is already recognized in animal abuse laws. Animal consent is recognized in many activities (including sex)
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo oh? In what activities other than sex is animal consent legally recognized? Pray tell me, I want to hear. Show me one animal abuse law that recognizes animal consent. Please I would like to see that as well.
1-Animal abuse is anything that cause harm, death or torture to an animal.
2-Ignoring the consent of animals causes them harm, death or torture.
3-By logic: Animal abuse laws recognize that you should respect the consent of animals unless you want to be a criminal.
For example, you can't make animals over work, they reach a point where they don't consent to work any more, if you force them against their will, it will harm them, cause torture or kill the animal.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo That doesn't make their consent legally recognized it just means you can't harm them. Ignoring the consent of animals does not always cause them harm. If you put a dog in their crate even if they don't consent, does that cause them harm? If you take the dog to the vet even if they do not consent does that cause them harm? That argument doesn't hold up as it assumes that ignoring animal consent is always harmful.
"That doesn't make their consent legally recognized it just means you can't harm them."←It is legally recognized that you can't harm animals? Because the only way to not harm animals is respecting their consent.
"If you take the dog to the vet even if they do not consent does that cause them harm?"←Depends of the dog, depends how you force him to go inside, depends how long you leave him inside, etc.
PS: I never said it always cause harm, it depends of the situation it can be harmful.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo laws against harming them is not the same thing as legally recognizing their consent as not respecting their consent doesn't always result in harm.Whereas you claimed, "Animal abuse laws recognize that you should respect the consent of animals unless you want to be a criminal." whereas that just isn't true since ignoring it doesn't always result in harm. This shows that the argument that laws against harming animals is the same as legally recognizing consent is false
But harm is almost always the result of ignoring the animal consent, just because an exceptions exist, it doesn't mean that my theory is not true.
For example: Driving over the speed limit is illegal, if a cop car drives over the speed limits for a reasonable reason, does that means that driving over the speed is not illegal?
And exemption to the rule doesn't means that the rule is wrong, almost always a animal is harmed is the result of ignoring the animal consent. Minus exceptions.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Your theory was that animal abuse laws preventing harming animals is legally recognizing their consent. I showed you that since,often, when animal consent is not respected, i.e. taking them to the vet, putting them in an animal shelter while away, or getting them groomed, it results in no harm at all. Therefore, your conclusion that animal abuse laws preventing harm is the same as legally recognizing animal consent is a false one.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Your assertion was that animal cruelty laws preventing harm to animals = legally recognizing the consent of animals. for this to be true it would mean that not recognizing an animals' consent always harms them, which by your own admission isn't so. Therefore Animal cruelty laws preventing harm to animals does not equal legally recognizing the animals' consent as disregarding an animals' consent does not equal harming the animal
"for this to be true it would mean that not recognizing an animals' consent always harms them"←False. As I explained before and exceptions doesn't mean the rule is false. The example you sited is a clear exception, if you don't take animals to a vet they can die which is worse than not taking them to the vet against their will.
Animal cruelty is when some one intentionally harms an animal, almost always that happens when the animal consent is ignored. Minus some exceptions.
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo The problem is that there is no such rule that states that ignoring an animal's consent always harms them. You are re just making that up. I recognize that when someone harms an animal it is almost always against their consent, but that is not the same thing as saying that ignoring their consent always results in harm. That just isn't true.
His Dam Hair Line is illegal.u_u
Equality4ya 3 weeks ago
Slippery Slope argument (fallacious)
johnalton22 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright The Gomorrahian is you oppressor. I lie not. Jesus is not stone thrower, and yet you want to test your throwing arm taking Christs name? Hypocrite. You want to believe devils who made translations based on lies. Those lies destroy your neighber with your mouth. Proverbs 4 24,Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizrightKLJV, Pro, 11,9An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered. The humans you persecute are godly, and just 2 Tim, 3:12 >12Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.You persecute being an ungodly liar.1 John 4 ,12,
If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. The gay, zoo,and Pedo are one another too. Names are used like a militarily weapon.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
Wow. You're real lying scum. There is nothing hyporcritical about what I've posted. God hates sodomy and lesbianism, because they are sin. He hates what harms His creatures. What are you, just another Islamic fool blathering Scripture that you know nothing about? Or a heretic? Or a fool? "the FOOL has said in his heart, 'there is no God'." Psalm 14:1 You have no clue what love is if you believe sodomy is acceptable. You're just another pervert. BOOM. lol.
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright A hypocrite want love, but does not give it. Give love to the zoo,and hug tghem when you see them, and not harm them or their lover non human animals or incarcerate them like john the baptist. God draws all to him in love Satan.John 12:32; 32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. All is all inclusive. Love draws, and what you have is hate, and hate repels. You are the compulsive liar. I will tell you what love is in the next post.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
There are no 'gay'. There are sodomites and lesbians. Homosexuals. Sinners that God loves, but will not tolerate their filthy lifestyles forever. They have a choice, just like their homosexuality is a choice: Repent and turn from their sins, leave their homosexuality behind, and turn to the living God, and Jesus Christ, for forgiveness. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and all He has done, and you will be saved. Reject Him, and be lost forever. You are the liar.
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright All that have God in them have truth loving whoever. Hating is not a good work of Jesus, right? Therefore how could any truth be in you? Oppressing sodomites have no truth. Abundantly clear theRightizright is an oppressor. Isaiah 1. KJV. Die be a sinner. Hate kills your soul. Be like Jesus saving your soul. God gives us a choice to live giving good. Give bad, get bad. That's the truth. Hug,and get a hug, that's the truth. You hug no one, that is the truth.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright You worship God with your mouth, but your heart is far from God. That is the truth. Give good,and thorns, and thistles will not be given. @theRightizright gives thorns, and Thistle. @theRightizright does not give love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: You don't give the gay, whoever joy, Proverbs 12;20,Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellers of peace is joy. Give joy, not evil deceit.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
You're pretty much clueless as to God's word and will. Love is honest and tells people the truth. Love from God offers forgiveness if one will repent of their sins, be honest with themselves, and admit they cannot save themselves, and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior. I realize you don't like hearing this truth. Your posts show where your heart is. You hate the truth. Give up your sin and turn to the Savior. Experience REAL love.
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Isaiah 1;16;Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;17Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Oppressing the gay etc is bad being the Sodom, and Gomorrah sin, your sin.
18Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
Good advice. Why don't you stop reading the koran, googling up Bible verses, twisting them out of context, and take your own advice. Give your sins to God and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. He wants to forgive you.
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright KJV,Philippians 2:3;1If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. theRightizright thinks he is Superior to the gay, zoo, etc acting like the egotistical devil.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright Real love loves all as one KJV. 1 John 4 ,12, If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.The humans you think you are better than are one another, your brother, and the least of these your breteren.1 Corinthians 13;4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, You don't seek others.Charity is love. You are puffed up.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Pro, 11,9An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered. I can't say you are not trying to destroy your neighber with your mouth. A human trying to destroy his neighber with his mouth most assuredly does not have love, and that makes you a hypocrite, Pro 17 :23A wicked man taketh a gift out of the bosom to pervert the ways of judgment. You are perverted, abominable, and wicked. gay, and zoo are the just.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
Mmhmmm. You forgot to quote Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26,27, where God condemns sodomy and lesbianism, and John 3:16, where He offers forgiveness for sin. As if that was your purpose in posting comments. lol. Whose sock puppet are you, anyway?
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Do what you think those verses say, and you might as well burn the rest of the bible. John 3:16, don't forget 17, It goes contrary to your condemning ways. Read below Romans 1; Those against gay are maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, You debate for the killing = murder of humans thinking God wants it, malignity; whisperers. Unmerciful: Murderers have no natural affection, describes you to a tee. Without understanding. Your evil fruits condemn you.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Gods light is hell to the wicked. Bet no one taught you that. Those that say otherwise have no truth in them. Hebrews 12:29; 28Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: 29For our God is a consuming fire. Gods light is fire to the wicked. Devils who fear that light have been your teachers. God is the father of lights. James 1:17 K,J,V, only.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright All that I told you is the truth.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright love seeks peace, is longsuffering, kind, thoughtful, forgives, believes, hopes, endures, bears all things, is meek, not seeking evil, rejoices in truth, seeks truth, is wise, harmless, honest, says edifying words. Does not war to save his skin saving his soul, is not boastful not giving guilt, compassionate, long suffering, slow to anger, merciful, not accusing or condemning, not giving evil for evil does not persecute, sets humans free, drys tears gives joy.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright Based on,1 Corinthians, 13:4 KJV, Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity is love because love gives many things. Have this in you,and heavy arms will lift to hug the zoo.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright love will love the gay too.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright Your use of abominable is misused like it was misused by the devil. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: not any kind of sex. Proverbs 3, 32For the froward is abomination to the LORD: but his secret is with the righteous ,K J B< Proverbs 11 A false balance [is] abomination to the LORD: but a just weight [is] his delight, and Proverbs 20 :10, KJV, Sex is not an abomination. You are sinning with a perverted, abominable mouth killing your soul.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Gods love is his righteousness,You see Gods righteousness even as you see mans legal system that condemns humans. Jesus does not condemn.Don't you know the well known John 3, 16, and 17 KJV? When you get your inflated Luciferian ego out of the way God will manifest to you that you are a beast Ecc 18-20 .k. 18I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Perversion a plenty, and Satan has planted many. What you plant is what you will reap. Plant condemning seeds, and your harvest will condemn you. Get what you want to give. God gives love to get love. Get the picture condemn whoever, and condemn yourself. Not a wise thing to do. KJV only.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright I lie not theRightizright is not righteous. Had you be righteous you would have hugging forgiving love, and your words would not sound like a battle cry for blood. You would seek peace, but as it turns out you are seeking the opposite to peace. Devils don't like peace being self destructive.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright An evil oppressive Antichrist spirit is in you like that of the Oppressive, sacrificing stiff necked Sodom,and Gomorrah humans. Every single word that comes out of your oppressive mouth is defiling you perfectly emulating the religious scribes, pharisees,and Sadducee intent on finding fault in Jesus. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD. Proverbs 3, 32For the froward is abomination to the LORD: but his secret is with the righteous.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@theRightizright Gods word is not a weapon warmonger. Warmongers are liars. Satan is the one who began war, and He is in you.Therefore how can any truth be in you?
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "Can you tell me what risk my dog needs to be informed about when he has sex with me?" how about giving his owner an STD? While there are not really any STD's than can be transmitted from humans to animals, there are ones that can be transmitted from animals to humans.
sunset261
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
@kobidobidog
Is that supposed to be some kind of justification for the filth of sodomy and lesbianism? Because God never condemns what He brings to pass, and He made mankind heterosexual. Eve for Adam. The truth about sodomy is that it is abominable in His eyes. It is sin. And Jesus Christ died to pay the price for the sins of sodomites, and every other sinner.
theRightizright 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright Do you realize in action you are a door rushing sodomite wanting to break down the door of the gay, zoosexual, Pedo,etc using a name as a weapon trying to make your corruptible body worse than another corruptible body that dies? You have to know that is imposable. Why then do you do that? Be godly and no one will persecute anyone. 2 Timothy 3:12,Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. Take wild guess who is being persecuted?
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright Demonic religions have spoken only lies to you. Proverbs 12 22Lying lips are abomination to the LORD. You have the chronic liar Satan in you, I lie not. K J V<Proverbs 11,20They that are of a froward heart are abomination to the LORD: but such as are upright in their way are his delight. Proverbs 20 :10Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the LORD.You give the gay, zoosexual,and whoever an unfair balance being abominable.
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright because your body dies is filled with sin. You cannot pay that debt because death is certain. Wish ill will on humans persecuting like you are, and the soul will die along with the body when Gods light shines. That light is hell to humans like you. Repent, and you will see Gods light as comforting. It is your choice choose wisely. Don't, and when God purifies the universe wicked will literally be no more body, and soul.
kobidobidog 4 weeks ago
well they are the same in the sense that to most people like me think all gays, bestiality, pedophilia are all disgusting, but there are still others continue to do that short of thing and will fight to have the rights to do that kind of thing. so they're the same because they are very disliked by many but there are still some who practice it. what you have mentioned that they're not the same because kids and animals don't have consent. well from what i saw from google, apparently they do. O_O
Jinseual 1 month ago
Oh, evil uncle chuckles.
What is it with these republicans that operate at half power?
People who are gay have nothing to do with bestiality, pedophilia, necrophelia, or any other of the ..phelia's.
What is it with the over 70 generation? Where did these people come from?
OMG. I have relatives like this and they are just freaks. The republicans are the FREAKS. yuck.
Gay people are awesome.
Alcoholic, repressed, smoking, materialistic, republicans -are trash.
Livinggreen100 1 month ago
FACT: homosexuality, pedophilia, and zoophilia are all the SAME THING. you gays can deny and distance yourself from it all you want but all the pedos and horsefuckers agree that they should have the same rights as gays because just like gays, "they were born that way". Notice bestiality is on the rise. Animal fuckers have been coming out of the closet left and right ever since the gay rights movement passed. I don't have any positive or negative opinon. All im staing are FACTS i have observed.
Theasshole85 2 months ago 2
just a reminder. It all comes down to this. Gays pedos and zoophiles are 1 in the same because they "were born that way".
Theasshole85 2 months ago
@Theasshole85
Actually, it all comes down to this--God created mankind heterosexual. Don't blame Him for your sinful choices.
theRightizright 4 weeks ago
@theRightizright
wtf are you talking about. i like women.
rofl you believe in fairy tales like the bible hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Theasshole85 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Theasshole85
Yes, I believe God, and I believe IN God. He is God of your life too, whether you believe in Him or not. He gives you air to breathe, keeps your heart beating, and as long as you're alive, He offers you forgiveness for your sins through the blood that Jesus shed on the cross to pay for them. Don't be a fool; read His words in John's Gospel, and believe on Jesus Christ. Receive Him as your Savior today, while you still have time.
theRightizright 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theRightizright The truth sets humans free. lies kept humans in bondage. lies try to make one body that dies worse than another body that dies, and that is imposable. That mreans lies are in you coddled, and pampered as if they are truth holding you in bondage too. All kinds of sex on a planet of sex. Don't judge lest ye be judged.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
@Theasshole85 The truth sets humans free. The lies kept all that you mentioned in bondage. The lies tried to make one body that dies worse than another body that dies, and that is imposable.
kobidobidog 3 weeks ago
the problem is that christians believe that morals only come from the bible and you cant have secular morals
xierotron 3 months ago in playlist Pat Robertson is Evil
they both are alternative lifestyles
edwardd6681 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul on gay marriage (Dr. Paul says yes and even wins the Values Summit GOP Straw Poll!)
/watch?v=l1gzs27HswQ on gay marriage statement
/watch?v=ug1nZSI_fsA Values Straw Poll result conservation
Vote Ron Paul, President 2012! -- The anti-war candidate -- and champion of the Constitution!
vechorik 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is it with Patsy and gay sex? Doesn't he have anything better to think about than other men's penises?
I bet he's a closet porn addict.
eastariel 5 months ago
cont. "Thus, a sexual “relationship” between human and animal cannot
be considered consensual."
sunset261 6 months ago
cont." Piers Beirne, Prof. of Criminology at USM, points out that “for genuine consent to sexual relations to be present...both
participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires. Bestiality is by nature sexual
coercion because animals are incapable of genuinely saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to humans in forms we can readily
understand.” In human-animal relationships, the human has power and control over the animal, often in all
aspects of the animal’s care and well-being. "
sunset261 6 months ago
In a 1997 article, Piers Beirne, Professor of Criminology at the
University of Southern Maine, points out that “for genuine consent to sexual relations to be present...both
participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires. Bestiality is by nature sexual
coercion because animals are incapable of genuinely saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to humans in forms we can readily
understand."
sunset261 6 months ago
from an srticle by the vermont animal cruelty task force: "In his 1993 article, Dr. Frank Ascione stated that “bestiality may be considered cruel even in cases when
physical harm to an animal does not occur (this is similar to the case of adult sexual activity with a child where
consent is presumed to be impossible).” This is because animals are unable to be fully informed, communicate
consent, or to speak out about their abuse."
sunset261 6 months ago
@Trustisaliability saying gay sex is wrong doesn't make it so. Sure if logical if you goal is reproduction but since when was reproduction the only purpose of sex?
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"There is huge difference between 2 consenting adults having sex and somebody having sex with an animal."←There is no difference if the animals are also fully sexually mature consenting adults animals.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I can't even begin to describe the ignorance of that statement but i'll try. It is illegal to have sex with children because children do not have the decision-making ability that adults do. Animals typically have even less decision-making ability than those children. Animals do not know how to properly assess situations and they're consequences like adult humans do. To stay there's no difference is i'm sorry but it's just fucking stupid.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
You misunderstood, please read again.
There is no difference between 2 fully mature aniamls (of the human specie) having sex and two fully mature aniamls (one human one non-human having sex) they both are:
1- Mature.
2-Consenting.
3-Animals.
I was not comparing the mentality, I agree humans are less intelligent, though that doesn't affect them much in making decisions like what to eat or with who to have sex.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo No, I didn't misunderstand. It DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER if they're both mature and consenting because animals, even when fully matured. do not have the ability to make informed decisions that human adults do. Therefore, it is still considered abuse.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"Animals do not have the ability to make informed decisions that human adults do. Therefore, it is still considered abuse."←By your logic, if I pet my dog in the head it is abuse because he can't consent to that? Or you believe a dog can make an informed decision about letting a human pet him in the head?
And what about giving a handjob? Would it be abuse if I give my dog one? You know people that do artificial insemination of dogs masturbate males and females, is that abuse too?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Wow you honestly think that petting something on the head and having sex with it are even close to similar? Petting something on the head What a stupid fucking argument. People who artificially inseminate dogs don't do it for their own personal sexual pleasure, nor do they do it for the sake of the animals being pleasured. So no, it isn't abuse. It's a professional procedure used by breeders and farmers so they can have more animals to sell or use for food.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"Wow you honestly think that petting something on the head and having sex with it are even close to similar?"←I do believe it, I pet my dog because he enjoys it, same reason I give him handjobs, he enjoys them. I like to do things that my dog enjoys, it makes me happy. :)
"Petting something on the head What a stupid fucking argument"←Ad hominem. Calling my argument stupid doesn't disprove it.
So, him masturbating a dog is not abuse, but if I do the exactly the same it is abuse? Why?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo. It's abuse because you'd be doing it for your own sexual gratification. Since you are doing it for sexual pleasure and dog's cannot make informed decisions about sex it is classified as sexual abuse of an animal. Artificial insemination is not done for sexual pleasure at all. the purpose of artificial insemination is not making the animal feel pleasure but to produce more offspring.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
►Definition of animal abuse: the crime of inflicting physical pain, suffering or death to an animal.◄
"It's abuse because you'd be doing it for your own sexual gratification."←Where I'm inflicting physical pain, suffering or death on an animal?
"dog's cannot make informed decisions about sex it is classified as sexual abuse of an animal"←That is also true when is a vet masturbate dogs, by your logic that would also be animal abuse. But, by the real animal abuse laws, it is NOT abuse.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo lolwut where did you get that animal abuse only include pain suffering or death? I already told you why mastrubation of dogs for artifical insemination in not abuse because sexual gratification is not the goal at all. in many places in the U.S. beastiality constitutes the sexual assault of an animal so to say it's not legally considered abuse is just flat out wrong. Way to get your facts from wikipedia
sunset261 6 months ago
♣Part 1♣
@sunset261
"already told you why mastrubation of dogs for artifical insemination in not abuse because sexual gratification is not the goal at all."←I'm informing you that obtaining sexual gratification from doing A.I. is not considered animal abuse because it does not cause pain, suffering or death to the animal, that is a FACT (it actually causes pleasure) you can Google the definition of what constitutes animal abuse. Giving pleasure to an animal DOES NOT constitute animal abuse.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo so what? If somebody sexually molests a child is that not sexual abuse? yes, it is. Whether they feel pain or not it is still considered sexual abuse this really isn't that hard. Also in many places in the u.s. it is still considered animal cruelty.
sunset261 6 months ago
-comment 2-
@sunset261
"so what? If somebody sexually molests a child is that not sexual abuse? yes, it is."←Sex with immature creatures harms them physically and mentally, zoosexuals normally only have consensual sex with fully sexually mature animals, this doesn't result in any harm for them.
All USA has animal cruelty laws, they still let non-abusive consensual sex with animals to be legal (in those 19 states I mention) as if the sex is consensual and harmless, it is not abusive at all.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo my point was, even if the children aren't harmed at all by the act, it is still considered abuse because they cannot give informed consent. By the way, having sex with animals can be harmful to the animal too such as rectal tearing and some animals can even be killed from penetration. like children since they do not have advanced decision-making abilities and since you control every aspect of their well-being it cannot truly be considered consensual.
sunset261 6 months ago
♦Part 1♦
@sunset26
"still considered abuse because they cannot give informed consent."←Wrong, it is abuse because it is harmful and it is harmful because they can't consent to sex and that leads to mental or physical harm.
Yes, I know some sexual activities with animals can be harmful, I don't support those activities and animals do not consent to those activities. I only support consensual sex, where the animal is not harmed and is a willingly participant or at least neutral of the activity.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♦Part 2♦
@sunset26
"since you control every aspect of their well-being it cannot truly be considered consensual."←It is consensual, I don't force him to have sex with me, I do control some aspect of his life but I don't control him when it comes to sex (that would be rape) he is the one making every single decision and I respect them. He decides when he doesn't want any more oral sex, he decides when and where he wants to fuck me, he decides if he wants to give me oral sex or not. Understand?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
by your logic i guess molesting a child even if they consent is not sexual abuse because they are not being harmed. The problem is. it IS sexual abuse. The same goes for animals.
sunset261 6 months ago
-Comment 4-
@sunset261
"by your logic i guess molesting a child even if they consent is not sexual abuse because they are not being harmed"←Where in my comments I have supported sex with immature creatures? There is plenty of evidence that sex with children, even if they consent it is mentally harmful for them. Maybe you didn't knew about this fact?
"The problem is. it'S sexual abuse. The same goes for animals"←We have sex with consenting adult that don't get harmed from sex, it is not the same.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♣Part 2♣
@sunset261
Bestiality is legal in 19 USA states, the places where bestiality is illegal they use illogical laws like sodomy and crimes against (PS: they also use those laws to make homosexual sex illegal) those laws are unconstitutional. If you care about educating yourself about bestiality and the law, you can read these 4 Bitly links:
bit(dot)ly/iR95tf
bit(dot)ly/kE75PC
bit(dot)ly/iIT2KQ
bit(dot)ly/lcseDW
Just replace (dot) for an actual dot "." and copy paste it in the address bar.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Some places might have those reasons but in many places, someone who has sex with animals can be charged with animal cruelty. It doesn't matter if the animal is sexually mature or not. Having sex with children even if they consent isn't wrong simply because they aren't sexually mature. It's also wrong because it would be taking advantage of the fact that they don't have a decision making ability on par with a human adult. This is the same reason why bestiality is wrong.
sunset261 6 months ago
-Coment 3-
@sunset261
"It doesn't matter if the animal is sexually mature or not"←It does matter, having sex with sexually immature creatures (animals or humans) harm them mentally or physically, having consensual sex with adults is harmless.
Sex with children is wrong because it's harmful. "taking advantage" of them has nothing to do with the reason it is illegal, parent can take advantage of their kids and make decision for them, as long as it is not harmful to the child, it is legal to do so.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♣Part 3♣
@sunset261
I don't think homosexual relationships are equal to zoosexual relationships, they are SIMILAR, equal means the same and there are some difference so they can't be equal. If you talk about zoosexual rights and homosexual rights, yes they are equal, we both have the same rights to have sex and relationships with consenting adult (humans or animals)
Yes, a dog intelligence is comparable to a mind of a 3 to 5 year old, but dogs are sexually mature and they can consent to sex.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo no they are not because consent from an adult human and consent from adult animals are not the same thing. Homsoexual relationships are fundamentally equal between each party. The same is not so for zoosexual ones. Since animals do not the advanced capacity for decision-making that adult humans do it is more akin to taking advantage of a child than having sex with another adult. It doesn't matter if they are sexually mature or not.
sunset261 6 months ago
-comment 1-
@sunset261
"consent from an adult human and consent from adult animals are not the same thing."←Definition of CONSENT: Agree to let some one do something to you. •► If I consent to be petted by you, it is the SAME as if my dog consent to be petted by you.
"Homosexual relationships are fundamentally equal between each party. The same is not so for zoosexual ones."←Explain how is my relationship unequal with my K9 boyfriend?
•But is not akin to a child, they are fully mature adults.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo It is fundamentally unequal because A. They are unable to be as fully informed of the situation as you are and B. You are in almost absolute control over every matter of their well-being. You have all the control in the relationship. To even mildly suggest that it's an equal relationship is moronic. It is akin to a child as you are the one who is in complete control of them and they do not have the ability to give informed consent to sex. Therefore it is more like a child.
sunset261 6 months ago
♦Part 3♦
@sunset26
"They are unable to be as fully informed of the situation as you are"←OK, lets assume that is true, what does my K9 boyfriend needs to be fully informed about before engaging in sexual activities with me?
"You are in almost absolute control over every matter of their well-being."←I only control him when it is necessary to protect him, I don't control him when it comes to sex, he makes his own decisions, he can consent to things he likes or denied consent to things he dislike.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo That's not what i'm talking about I mean you are in control of his water and food, where he goes and when, what kind of medical treatment he gets. That's what I mean by ALL aspects of his well-being.
sunset261 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo No you see, it isn't because do the the limited brain capacity of animals. they can never be as fully aware of the situation as humans therefore their consent cannot be treated in the same way as a human consenting. This is why we have different justice systems for adults and children, because during youth ones ability to make decisions based on the situation is not as well-developed as an adult's. This is why consent from a human and an animal are different.
sunset261 6 months ago
♦Part 4♦
@sunset26
"therefore their consent cannot be treated in the same way as a human consenting."←I'm not saying that their consent should be treated in the same way human consent is treated, they consent in a more simple way.But it is still consent, and it is still important to respect animals consent to avoid harming them mentally or physically, not only when it comes to sex, but for any other non-sexual activities. Ignoring the consent of the animal for any kind of activities is harmful.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo it's not "more simple" they can consent but due to their nature, it is impossible for them to give informed consent. quoting a fact sheet from the VACTF "Piers Beirne, Professor of Criminology at the USM, says “for genuine consent to sexual relations to be present both participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires.
sunset261 6 months ago
•Part 1•
@sunset261
"they can consent, but can't give informed consent."←What does my dog has to be informed about before fucking my ass?
"for genuine consent to sex both participants must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires"←He is referring to HUMAN consent. Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?
"ALL aspects of his well-being."←Controlling all that doesn't affect his ability to give consent to sex. So what is the problem?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Again, it's not a matter of "what they need to be informed about" more than it is that they are never fully aware of the situation. Animals cannot legally give consent to anything as their language is often general and ambiguous. If a dog does one thing it might be interpreted as something else as there is no real way to know. Ultimately it is the taking advantage of your control over their lives and their limited awareness of what is going on that makes it wrong.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 2♥
@sunset261
"Again, it's not a matter of "what they need to be informed about"←You are saying they can't give informed consent. So it is a matter of what they need to be informed about. Stop avoiding the question and answer, what does my dog needs to be informed about before fucking my ass?
"they are never fully aware of the situation"←Untrue, my dog is fully aware that fucking my ass feels good, he is aware that he has to be on top of me and hump, how can you say he is not aware of it?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I'm not talking about fully aware of the feeling i'm talking about being fully aware of the situation, same with children, a child might know that sex feels good but they do not have the capacity to think that their parents might be arrested because of it. Just as animals don't have the capacity to think about if their masters might be arrested because of it probably not.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 3♥
@sunset261
"Animals cannot legally give consent to anything as their language is often general and ambiguous."←I agree, but why would animals need to give legal consent to have sex with a human? All they need is to give non-legal consent. You can kill animals, make them your slaves (also know as pets) do experiments on them, all this without the animal legal consent. So, why my dog needs legal consent for sex? When I could legally eutanize him him and eat him without his legal consent?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Because sex always requires legal consent from both parties or else it qualifies as rape or molestation. You can't legally euthanize a dog just because you feel like it nor can you eat your dog. The only reason we do animal testing is so we don't risk human lives. However sex ALWAYS requires legal consent from both parties.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 4♥
@sunset261
"If a dog does one thing it might be interpreted as something else, no real way to know"←That is not true, First non-human animals can't lie, if they say NO it means NO, if they say YES, it means YES. On the other hand, humans can lie, they can say YES during sex but at the same time be thinking "NO STOP"
Second, if a human misinterpreted the animal language, only HE should be punished, same as we punish individual humans that rape because they misinterpreted human consent.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Oh and how would one tell if the animal's body language? It's not like the animal could testify about it.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 5♥
@sunset261
"Ultimately it is the taking advantage of your control over their lives and their limited awareness of what is going on that makes it wrong."←Taking advantage of animals limited awareness of what is going is L.E.G.A.L. you can own pets (that is taking advantage of them) you can eat meat (that is taking advantage of them) you can use them to pull objects, guide blind people, etc (that is taking advantage of them) if you think all that is wrong, are you a VEGAN with no PETs?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Yet again, we are talking about consent for sex here, that is a very different issue from consent for other things.
sunset261 6 months ago
No he's not referring to human consent alone he's talking about genuine sexual consent and the full quote shows that that's his position on bestiality as well. "Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?" That's irrelevant as we're talking about domesticated pets not livestock or game animals.
sunset261 6 months ago
Comment removed
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♥Part 6♥
@sunset261
"Question, did some one asks animals for their informed consent to be murdered for food?" That's irrelevant as we're talking about domesticated pets not livestock or game animals."←In India Cows are pets, in china dogs are food. So don't avoid the question and answer it.
If informed consent is so important, why is OK to murder animals but not OK to let a male dog fuck a human? A Dog would enjoy fucking a human, dog would not enjoy being murdered and eaten by a Chinese guy.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I didn't avoid the question. I just pointed out that it's irrelevant we're not on the subject of whether or not we should be able to kill animals. You are the one dodging the question by going to an irrelevant subject. We're talking about consent for sex, nothing else.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 7♥
@sunset261
"No he's not referring to human consent alone he's talking about genuine sexual consent and the full quote shows that that's his position on bestiality as well."←ALL COMES DOWN TO INFORMED CONSENT, that is why I ask you, What does my dog needs to be fully informed about before having sex with me?
►Answer my questions like I answer yours, stop avoiding them◄
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo If you control all aspects of their well being you don't know whether they are consenting because it's something they want or because it's something they feel they have to. Rather like women in ancient times would often submit to their husbands because If they didn't something bad might happen. For genuine sexual consent to be present both parties must be conscious, fully informed and positive in their desires. Dogs cannot be fully informed therefore it is not true consent
sunset261 6 months ago
•Part 2•
@sunset261
"If you control all aspects of their well being you don't know whether they are consenting because it's something they want or because it's something they feel they have to."←Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks? Also, dogs live in the present or past, they can't plan ahead. "something they feel they have to" ←That requires planing about the future, dogs can't think about that.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks" Hmm maybe because they might think that if they did something to upset you it might risk their own well-being as you are in full control of theirs.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 1♥
@sunset261
"Please explain why would a dog think that he has to do something just because I control the water, food, medical treatment and walks" Hmm maybe because they might think that if they did something to upset you it might risk their own well-being as you are in full control of theirs."←Do you have evidence that dogs are smart as a human with the capacity to rationalize ahead in the future and reach the conclusion that if they don't obey their owner they may get punished?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Do I have evidence that they can do it as well as humans, no and i never said they did, but do I have evidence that they can think they can think about things in advance in general terms of sensation, sure I do, it's what pavlov's work was based around. If someone scolds his dog for not having sex with him repeatedly and then afterwards, the dog does it voluntarily is it still considered true consent from the dog or are they doing what they have been conditioned to do?
sunset261 6 months ago
▬Part 1▬
@sunset261
Can an animal testify about normal animal abuse? What's your point? Make all animal ownership illegal to protect animals because they can't testify if their owners are abusive to them?
Yes, you are avoiding the question, you say animals must give legal informed consent, so I ask: Why it is OK to murder a cow without her legal informed consent but it is BAD to give her oral sex? Why the cow only needs to give legal informed consent for sex but not for being murdered for food?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
▬Part 2▬
@sunset261
"Yet again, we are talking about consent for sex here, that is a very different issue from consent for other things."←So I don't need legal consent from a human to eutanize him? Last time I check you do need the human legal consent, same as if you want to have sex with a human. To have sex with a human or to kill them you need legal informed consent, to murder animals, make them work, have sex with them, experiment with them, you don't need legal informed consent.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
▬Part 3▬
@sunset261
Legal informed consent is defined in the law books as something only humans can give, that is why you don't need legal informed consent from animals. Also, my dog has fully informed consent when he has sex with me.
"Because sex always requires legal consent from both parties or else it qualifies as rape or molestation. "←That applies only to 2 or more humans having sex, would you say that 2 dogs having sex is rape or molestation because they can't give legal consent?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
▬Part 4▬
@sunset261
"You can't legally euthanize a dog just because you feel like it nor can you eat your dog."←Legally you can and eat the dog, countries like Canada, Korea, China and others, is 100% legal. And to my knowledge only in USA Carolina has a law making illegal to eating domestic animals, by the way, cows, pigs, chickens are domestic animals too, stupid contradictory law if you ask me.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
▬Part 5▬
@sunset261
"Just as animals don't have the capacity to think about if their masters might be arrested because of it probably not."←Arrested for what? It is legal to have consensual sex with animals where I live, it is legal in 19 USA states and legal in many other countries.
Can you tell me what else my dog needs to be fully aware that is relevant before fucking me? Because problems with the law is not a problem, at least not where I live.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
▬Part 6▬
@sunset261
You can only train dogs that consents to be trained and no dog will consent to be trained into doing something that is painful, you can't train a dog to consent to be fucked if he/she feels pain from being fucked, no matter how many nice threats or kicks you give to that dog, he/she will always feel pain during penetration and she/he will never say yes to sex, he/she will always show signs of not consenting, you can't train a dog to do something NEGATIVE. (to be continued...)
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo " You can only train dogs that consent to be trained. lolwut. conditioning is an observed effect that happens whether the dog consents or not. I didn't say you could condition them to do something harmful to themselves, I said that you could condition a dog to consent to sex. Even if the dog doesn't want sex VIA conditioning the dog's master could make it consent to him.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"I said that you could condition a dog to consent to sex."←Yes you can but only to things that are neutral to the dog.
In cases where the dog doesn't want to do something because he/she has an illogical reaction,what you can d, is desensitize a dog, once the dog is desensitized, he will do it by himself (if the action is positive) or he can be trained if the actions is neutral.
I don't see anything unethical with training a dog to do a sexual trick, he still consented to be trained.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Dog's don't consent to be trained. Training dogs by definition consists of making them do something they don't normally want to do by forcing them to associate it with either reward or punishment.
sunset261 6 months ago
▬Part 7▬
@sunset261
(continuation...) You can train something that is neutral by making it positive. For example, if a dog doesn't lick your genitals because it is a neutral activity, you can spread food over them to make the activity positive. You can make neutral activities into positive, but you can't make NEGATIVE activities into positive. For example, you can't train a dog to lick razor blades, no mater if you spread something tasty over the blades, the dog will feel pain and say NO thanks.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Yet you can also punish them and scold them for not doing it. You can make a dog consent to sex via conditioning even if it really didn't want to, it might just do so to avoid punishment.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"you can also punish them and scold them for not doing it"←First, that would be animal abuse. Second, punishment works to train dogs to stop a behabior, it doesn't work to make dogs do a behabior. If some one is looking to train his dog to do something, using punishment will not work, using a reward will work.
"Dog's don't consent to be trained."←If that is true, how do you train a chihuahua to eat burning charcoal or to walk over broken glass or to let a human penetrate him?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Exactly if you try to have sex with the dog and the dog resists one can condition them to consent by punishing them if they resist. Where exactly do you draw the the connection between a dog not consenting to be trained and the ability to train dogs to do things that will hurt themselves. I already said you cannot train a dog hurt itself but that doesn't mean a dog consents to training.
sunset261 6 months ago
•Part 1•
@sunset261
To train a dog you need to repeat a neutral action many times and give a reward to make it a positive action.
For example, to train my dog to give the paw, I grab his paw and place it in my hand, then reward him with food. I was able to train that behabior because he consent to let me grab his paw with my hand and move it over my other hand. If he didn't consented to let me grab his paw, I would have never succeed in train him to give the paw. Are you understanding?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•Part 2•
@sunset261
I know a dog that was hit by a car and his front paws broke, after healing, he got traumatized, he will bite anyone who touches his paws. Tell me, how can I train that dog to give the paw, when I can't even touch his paw to start the training? That dog will not consent to be trained to give the paw.
You could desensitize him to be touched in the paws and then train him to give the paw after he is not aggressive when touched, takes a couple of weeks to archive.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•Part 3•
@sunset261
Either way, desensitizing a dog or training a dog to do a neutral action by adding a positive reward is not considered animal abuse.
Now, that aggressive dog I mention can be trained to stop bitting when touched in his paws in 2 ways:
1-By desensitization, which is archived by touching his paws and giving him something tasty like food (ethical way of training him)
Or...
2-Beating him every time he bites, so he learns that biting will cause him pain (animal abuse)
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•Part 4•
@sunset261
"Exactly if you try to have sex with the dog and the dog resists one can condition them to consent by punishing them if they resist"←You can punish and condition a dog to not bite or run when he/she is being raped (in case the punishment is more painful than the actual rape) still... the dog will show signs of fear, submission and pain, all those signs translate in "I don't consent to this" so... a person training his dog that way is doing double the animal abuse.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo And as i said before, dog's animal language, unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations so one could interpret their signs of submission as consent. The analogy you used before was a false one as humans language is readily understandable by humans you can't interpret "yes" as "no" yes, means yes and no means no. Vague animal body language is not the same.
sunset261 6 months ago
-part 2-
@sunset261
"unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations"←You evidence that is true?
Do you really believe a that a dog who growls, shows the fangs, barks and bites while having goosebumps hairs all over his back has no clear direct translation?
Do you really believe a that a dog that humps your leg while shooting precum all over it has no direct translation?
Do you really believe a that a dog that jumps around while wagging his tail has no direct translation?
REALLY?
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo "unlike human language is vague and has not direct translations" the fact that by the nature of the language themselves there physically cannot be a direct translation. Body language is vague and does not directly translate into human speech whether it be dogs or not. Those actions you described are general indications of emotion. General indications of emotion don't have direct translations into human language as they can be expressed a variety of ways.
sunset261 6 months ago
•5
@sunset261
"General indications of emotion don't have direct translations into human language as they can be expressed a variety of ways."←You gota be kidding me. Seriously, if you try to do something to a dog and he gets angry and moves aways from you and bites you and barks and growls, that means NO, it can't be anymore clear than that. Any dog behaviorists, ethologies, trainer or dog owner will tell you the same I'm telling to you.
You don't seem to have a clue about dogs...
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo either way we've gotten so off topic. We should get back to even if a dog consents is it still okay. And I say no, In a relationship where you hold all the power it is wrong because dogs having a very small capacity to rationalize and never be fully aware of the situations they are in, cannot legally consent to anything let alone sex. I don't see why you think that animals' consent to sex should be legally recognized when animal consent for anything else is not.
sunset261 6 months ago
•6
@sunset261
You don't seem to have a clue about dogs and you keep talking like if you where an "expert" why don't you go an do a research first about dog body language, and come back to me when you have more information, after you realize of your errors.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•7
@sunset261
OK back to topic again;
"cannot legally consent "←Irrelevant, we don't even ask animals for legal consent when e kill them there is no reason to as for that to pleasure them. Period, next topic please.
"fully aware of the situations they are in"←I have asked you, what they have to be fully aware and you mention that they need to know that they actions can send to jail the owner (not true as bestiality is illegal over here) so what else they need to be really aware of? Answer me‼
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
The issue is Sex which requires legal consent from both parties. If legally recognized from both parties is not present it is classified as molestation or rape.
sunset261 6 months ago
Comment removed
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♥Part 2♥
@sunset261
"If legally recognized from both parties is not present it is classified as molestation or rape."←A veterinarian doing an artificial insemination (where he manually masturbate both animals till orgasm) is that is molestation? Is owning a dog slavery? Is killing a cow and eating her murder? By your logic, since animals can't give legal consent to all that, the veterinarian is doing rape, a dog owner should be guilty of slavery and a butcher should be given death penalty... ಠ_ಠ
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo It's not irrelevant as legal consent is the entire issue. Alluding to whether or not we have the right to kill them is the irrelevant thing. Killing something does not require their consent. Sex does legal consent from both parties or else it is rape or molestation. Stop dodging the issue and answer my question. If dogs' consent is not legally recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception?
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 4♥
@sunset261
"Killing something does not require their consent."←So I can go kill you and that would be OK? Last time I check, it is legal to kill some one if that person consent, it is called euthanasia (or assisted suicide) but it is illegal to do it without the other person consent, it is called murder.
Legal consent can't be applied to animals, the laws says so, it is only to be applied to HUMANS.
If you apply it to animals, you could be guilty of murder for killing a roach...
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
♥Part 5♥
@sunset261
"Sex does legal consent from both parties or else it is rape or molestation."←WRONG, A 17 year old can have sex with an 18 year old and it would not be rape or molestation, even that the 17 year old can't give legal consent till he/she is 18.
"If dogs' consent is not legally recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception?"←I just answer this in comment ♥Part 3♥. PS: I'm not dogging any of your questions, I have answer them all (unlike you)
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•8
@sunset261
"very small capacity to rationalize"←Why does a dog need to rationalize? They can have sex just fine with other dogs without that ability, why would they need to to fuck a human or a cat or an object? They don't need that, it is irrelevant to them. Next topic.
"I don't see why you think that animals consent to sex should be legally recognized"←It is already legally recognized in many countries. Respecting the animal consent is the only way to have non-abusive sex with them.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo I didn't say that it wasn't i said that I see why you think it SHOULD be. Dog's consent isn't recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception.
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 3♥
@sunset261
"Dog's consent isn't recognized in any other area, why should sex be the exception."←Consent is recognized in animal abuse laws, you can be punished for ignoring animal consent, as ignoring animal consent leads to mental or physical harm which is recognized as animal abuse. That is why in some countries consensual bestiality is legal, while if you rape animals, you are going to get punished under animal abuse laws if you get caught.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
•8
@sunset261
"And I say no, In a relationship where you hold all the power"←Having power is not a crime, using that power to force some one against his will is a crime, I don't use my power to force my dog to haver sex with me so there is nothing wrong with having more power than him.
"animal consent for anything else is not"←Ignoring consent when you adopt a pet cause no harm, ignoring consent when you have sex with an animal does cause harm, consent is very important to respect during sex.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Yet they never consent to be euthanized and that DOES harm them therefore that argument is void. I'm asking you, why should animal consent be legally recognized in sex but not in anything else. I agree that it is something to respect but I'm talking about whether a dog's consent can be legally recognized or not. Animals never consent to animal testing and that DOES harm them, why should animal consent be legally binding only in sex?
sunset261 6 months ago
♥Part 6♥
@sunset261
"Yet they never consent to be euthanized and that DOES harm them therefore that argument is void."←Having consensual non-abusive sex doesn't harm them either, so your argument they need to give legal consent is void. :)
"I'm asking you, why should animal consent be legally recognized in sex but not in anything else."←Animal consent is already recognized in animal abuse laws. Animal consent is recognized in many activities (including sex)
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo oh? In what activities other than sex is animal consent legally recognized? Pray tell me, I want to hear. Show me one animal abuse law that recognizes animal consent. Please I would like to see that as well.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
Just use logic:
1-Animal abuse is anything that cause harm, death or torture to an animal.
2-Ignoring the consent of animals causes them harm, death or torture.
3-By logic: Animal abuse laws recognize that you should respect the consent of animals unless you want to be a criminal.
For example, you can't make animals over work, they reach a point where they don't consent to work any more, if you force them against their will, it will harm them, cause torture or kill the animal.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo That doesn't make their consent legally recognized it just means you can't harm them. Ignoring the consent of animals does not always cause them harm. If you put a dog in their crate even if they don't consent, does that cause them harm? If you take the dog to the vet even if they do not consent does that cause them harm? That argument doesn't hold up as it assumes that ignoring animal consent is always harmful.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"That doesn't make their consent legally recognized it just means you can't harm them."←It is legally recognized that you can't harm animals? Because the only way to not harm animals is respecting their consent.
"If you take the dog to the vet even if they do not consent does that cause them harm?"←Depends of the dog, depends how you force him to go inside, depends how long you leave him inside, etc.
PS: I never said it always cause harm, it depends of the situation it can be harmful.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo laws against harming them is not the same thing as legally recognizing their consent as not respecting their consent doesn't always result in harm.Whereas you claimed, "Animal abuse laws recognize that you should respect the consent of animals unless you want to be a criminal." whereas that just isn't true since ignoring it doesn't always result in harm. This shows that the argument that laws against harming animals is the same as legally recognizing consent is false
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
But harm is almost always the result of ignoring the animal consent, just because an exceptions exist, it doesn't mean that my theory is not true.
For example: Driving over the speed limit is illegal, if a cop car drives over the speed limits for a reasonable reason, does that means that driving over the speed is not illegal?
And exemption to the rule doesn't means that the rule is wrong, almost always a animal is harmed is the result of ignoring the animal consent. Minus exceptions.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Your theory was that animal abuse laws preventing harming animals is legally recognizing their consent. I showed you that since,often, when animal consent is not respected, i.e. taking them to the vet, putting them in an animal shelter while away, or getting them groomed, it results in no harm at all. Therefore, your conclusion that animal abuse laws preventing harm is the same as legally recognizing animal consent is a false one.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
I ask you, is animal abuse legally recognized by the law? YES or NO?
Because most of the time (if not always) when an aniaml is harmed, is because the human did something that the animal didn't want to experience.
Ignoring consent doesn't always leads to harm, but harm is always the result of ignoring their consent. (minus exception like accidents)
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo Your assertion was that animal cruelty laws preventing harm to animals = legally recognizing the consent of animals. for this to be true it would mean that not recognizing an animals' consent always harms them, which by your own admission isn't so. Therefore Animal cruelty laws preventing harm to animals does not equal legally recognizing the animals' consent as disregarding an animals' consent does not equal harming the animal
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"for this to be true it would mean that not recognizing an animals' consent always harms them"←False. As I explained before and exceptions doesn't mean the rule is false. The example you sited is a clear exception, if you don't take animals to a vet they can die which is worse than not taking them to the vet against their will.
Animal cruelty is when some one intentionally harms an animal, almost always that happens when the animal consent is ignored. Minus some exceptions.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago
@DogsneedpIeasuretoo The problem is that there is no such rule that states that ignoring an animal's consent always harms them. You are re just making that up. I recognize that when someone harms an animal it is almost always against their consent, but that is not the same thing as saying that ignoring their consent always results in harm. That just isn't true.
sunset261 6 months ago
@sunset261
"The problem is that there is no such rule that states that ignoring an animal's consent always harms them."
Almost all animal never consent to get harmed, if an animal gets harmed 99.9% of the time it was against his consent.
Yes I make that rule UP but doesn't mean is a false rule, it is supported by logic, logic counts as evidence too.
DogsneedpIeasuretoo 6 months ago