|
|
|
Reep, let me explain. You've unwittingly hit upon a very sore subject. One common argument people use against allowing same-sex marriage is the slippery slope fallacy. That of, 'if we allow same-sex marriage, then what's next? People marrying horses? Paedophilia?' The things is, that's very offensive to gay people, because homosexuality is consensual between two adults (or at least, should be; just as heterosexuality should be consensual between two adults, but there are bad eggs in every batch out there) and occurs between two beings of the same level of sentience - as was pointed out above. Bestiality is something that happens without consent. And paedophilia, well, I'm sure I don't need to elaborate on the wrongness of paedophilia.
So comparing the two, homosexuality and bestiality (consensual sex between men and animal rape), is inaccurate and at least a little offensive. You probably didn't mean to do that, and probably merely meant it in the way that OMB describes, but to be honest more elaboration in the original post was needed to convey that sense in your question, and not the slightly offensive comparison that was hinted at by the wording.
Now, to answer your question: I don't think bestiality is moral or correct, for the reasons of consent above.
Thanks for the video. I'd really like to hear it, I just need to find a spare hour to listen. I may bug you for a brief synopsis on its points of argument later . _________________ I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it. These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.
|
|