is it gay to blow a transgender person?

Oriphiel · 01-22-2015, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth

i don't give a **** about getting an animal's consent, hence why it's not tricky to me. anyway, i will drop it. that argument was dead a long time ago but you seemed to have questions about it so i was clarifying what that thread was all about.

Spoken like a true rapist. I assume you were trying to say something along the lines of "I don't really care about this argument either way, so it doesn't matter to me"?

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 01-22-2015, 06:42 PM

no, i was saying i'm not too concerned about animal rights in general. e.g. i eat beef even though i didn't get the cow's consent first. i don't even have a great reason for doing so. i just like the way it tastes. i wouldn't kill a human being, because i think murder is wrong. but i don't think murder applies to animals. i think ****ing humans against their consent is wrong, cause i value human rights. i don't care about ****ing animals without their consent, because i don't see any good reason to extend human rights to them. hence it is meaningless to me to raise the complaint that it's wrong to **** animals cause you can't get their consent.

i am willing to drop it cause that was another argument from another thread. but you said you wanted to talk about it here so i was clarifying my argument for you. it's cool if you're not convinced by it, though. but i'm also not convinced by the consent objection. unless you're a vegan. in which case it would seem a bit more consistent to me.

GuD · 01-22-2015, 06:44 PM

I think his point from the getgo was that if people are okay with killing and eating animals for selfish reasons why aren't they okay with raping an animal for selfish reasons? Is it really any less morally vacant to **** a sheep than it is to kill and eat it? I'd say both acts are atrocious and that was my argument against him. If I didn't feel that eating meat was wrong then I'd actually agree with him too, it's a pretty solid point.

Oriphiel · 01-22-2015, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

I think his point from the getgo was that if people are okay with killing and eating animals for selfish reasons why aren't they okay with raping an animal for selfish reasons? Is it really any less morally vacant to **** a sheep than it is to kill and eat it? I'd say both acts are atrocious and that was my argument against him. If I didn't feel that eating meat was wrong then I'd actually agree with him too, it's a pretty solid point.

Killing doesn't have to be immoral. Animals can be given full and healthy lives, and slaughtered in a manner that is almost completely without pain. This actually brings an example to mind; there are nomads in north western China (I believe the Xinjiang region) that give their herds long and natural lives, and then slaughter them by puncturing a blood vessel in a way that causes them to simply fall asleep and die without pain. So the morality of killing is up for debate, because it varies in each case and is always open to variables and interpretations. In fact, there are even people who choose to let animals die naturally before they eat them.

While killing can be handled in a variety of ways that allow the animal to have a life free from unnatural pain, having sex with an animal can not be accomplished without causing unnatural pain to them. There are ways to kill and eat animals without even really disturbing their natural cycle, while sex will always be exploitative of their limited intelligence.

But I can see that nobody else seems very keen to kick this argument off again, and the reason why seems readily apparent as we are just going in circles (and the topic has already been discussed in another thread), so consider this my parting shot. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

DwnWthVwls · 01-22-2015, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oriphiel

But I can see that nobody else seems very keen to kick this argument off again, and the reason why seems readily apparent as we are just going in circles, so consider this my parting shot. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

You're argument just isn't logical and you're stubborn beyond reason.

Hi Brickwall, nice to meet you.

GuD · 01-22-2015, 07:17 PM

Yeah, meat can be made with limited suffering involved but I don't see that happening on a broad scale any time soon. I'd also venture to say that most people who eat meat eat meat made from questionable practices that would be comparable to rape. Those chicken nugget type things everyone loves? They grind little baby chicks up alive to make that stuff.

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 01-22-2015, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

Yeah, meat can be made with limited suffering involved but I don't see that happening on a broad scale any time soon. I'd also venture to say that most people who eat meat eat meat made from questionable practices that would be comparable to rape. Those chicken nugget type things everyone loves? They grind little baby chicks up alive to make that stuff.

damn... so that's why they taste so good

Oriphiel · 01-22-2015, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

Those chicken nugget type things everyone loves? They grind little baby chicks up alive to make that stuff.

Oh come on. They don't grind up baby chickens. They just stick adult chickens in tiny cages and force-feed them until they become as bloated as possible, forcing them to have more eggs than they could ever possibly have in nature, and then kill them in the most drawn out and painful ways possible. After all, they're not monsters. (the moral: Sometimes the truth is worse than the myth)

GuD · 01-22-2015, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oriphiel

Oh come on. They don't grind up baby chickens. They just stick adult chickens in tiny cages and force-feed them until they become as bloated as possible, forcing them to have more eggs than they could ever possibly have in nature, and then kill them in the most drawn out and painful ways possible. After all, they're not monsters. (the moral: Sometimes the truth is worse than the myth)

Granted the narration is pretty dramatic and this is not necessarily where everyone's meat is from but this is very real.

Xurtio · 01-22-2015, 06:48 PM

I believe that only specific classes of animals can experience suffering. Probably most higher mammals (as they have homologous circuitry to ours associated with suffering) and birds (who evolved parallel to us and developed a lot of similar brain functionality).

I don't think plants, insects, or bacteria have feelings. Reptiles, fish, and amphibians (and other non-mammalian vertebrates) are in more of a difficult place to determine the extent of their conscious experience.

I still eat birds and mammals though, because I can't handle a vegetarian diet psychologically (I have tried).

View Poll Results: is it gay to blow a transgender person
yes	21	65.63%
no	11	34.38%
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll

01-22-2015, 06:44 PM	#3 (permalink)
GuD Dude... What? Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,322	I think his point from the getgo was that if people are okay with killing and eating animals for selfish reasons why aren't they okay with raping an animal for selfish reasons? Is it really any less morally vacant to **** a sheep than it is to kill and eat it? I'd say both acts are atrocious and that was my argument against him. If I didn't feel that eating meat was wrong then I'd actually agree with him too, it's a pretty solid point. __________________ I spit bullets in my feet Every time I speak So I write instead And still people want me dead ~msc

01-22-2015, 07:17 PM	#6 (permalink)
GuD Dude... What? Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,322	Yeah, meat can be made with limited suffering involved but I don't see that happening on a broad scale any time soon. I'd also venture to say that most people who eat meat eat meat made from questionable practices that would be comparable to rape. Those chicken nugget type things everyone loves? They grind little baby chicks up alive to make that stuff. __________________ I spit bullets in my feet Every time I speak So I write instead And still people want me dead ~msc

01-22-2015, 06:48 PM	#10 (permalink)
Xurtio Brain Licker Join Date: Apr 2014 Posts: 1,083	I believe that only specific classes of animals can experience suffering. Probably most higher mammals (as they have homologous circuitry to ours associated with suffering) and birds (who evolved parallel to us and developed a lot of similar brain functionality). I don't think plants, insects, or bacteria have feelings. Reptiles, fish, and amphibians (and other non-mammalian vertebrates) are in more of a difficult place to determine the extent of their conscious experience. I still eat birds and mammals though, because I can't handle a vegetarian diet psychologically (I have tried). __________________ H̓̇̅̉yͤ͏mͬ͂ͧn͑̽̽̌ͪ̑͐͟o̴͊̈́͑̇m͛͌̓ͦ̑aͫ̽ͤ̇n̅̎͐̒ͫ͐c̆ͯͫ̋ ̔̃́eͯ͒rͬͬ̄҉

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-22-2015, 06:42 PM	#2 (permalink)
~~John Wilkes Booth~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 2,235	no, i was saying i'm not too concerned about animal rights in general. e.g. i eat beef even though i didn't get the cow's consent first. i don't even have a great reason for doing so. i just like the way it tastes. i wouldn't kill a human being, because i think murder is wrong. but i don't think murder applies to animals. i think **ing humans against their consent is wrong, cause i value human rights. i don't care about ing animals without their consent, because i don't see any good reason to extend human rights to them. hence it is meaningless to me to raise the complaint that it's wrong to ** animals cause you can't get their consent. i am willing to drop it cause that was another argument from another thread. but you said you wanted to talk about it here so i was clarifying my argument for you. it's cool if you're not convinced by it, though. but i'm also not convinced by the consent objection. unless you're a vegan. in which case it would seem a bit more consistent to me.