Should animal porn be illegal?

I knew I would find you on this thread. This is right up your alley.

 

Let's say there's a deranged mass murderer on the loose who gets off on people watching his crimes on television - oh wait! There are plenty of people like that! Plenty of mass shootings are done because of the fame it brings the person - in fact many serial killings have the same motive. By the logic you use above we should outlaw media reporting of mass murders.

The only difference between the above example and the thread's topic is that you subjectively consider the act of viewing the latter to be disgusting or offensive.

The principle you're employing is that indirectly providing incentives to commit crime is wrong. But this leads to obvious absurdities as shown.

ie: no it should not be illegal.

 

Such an ironic comment from someone honoring a mass murderer.

 

OMG, masturbation and erections were illegal? I did not know that. Wow, good thing I never got caught. Is there a statute of limimitations?

"Making too much money, making too little money, looking at breasts, looking at ankles, reading about communism or sex or politicians or other
religions"? My God man, I have broken so many laws, please dont snitch on me. I assume you are talking about the USA right? I mean that the impression the OP gave at the beginning of his thread.

Where did you see that "thoughts" should be illegal? What is the law making reading porn illegal? (*)(*)(*)(*), I'm just committing crime all over the place. Maybe I really should be a liberal so I can do anything I want except think for myself, be conservative or have morals.

 

Learn a little history. Look up the Victorian ere. And in the Puritan colony of New Haven, masturbation got you the death penalty.

Also, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, there were massive campaigns against masturbation. PArents could buy a metal cage for their sons that had nail points sticking into the center that he would have to lock on himself, if he got an erection, he would be pierced. Popular books and warnings for women about how masturbation could drive you mad and make you end up in insane asylums, where inmates sometimes masturbated in openly in front of the curious onlookers who toured the facilities, and masturbation was one criterion that could get you committed.


A patented device designed to prevent masturbation by inflicting electric shocks upon the perpetrator, by ringing an alarm bell, and through spikes at the inner edge of the tube into which the penis is inserted.

Reading porn has been illegal for most of USA history, and many would like to return to that.

 

Whew, thank God I wasnt born until 1943. Nah, I dont need to learn the history of masturbation. Lived through enough of it myself, thanks.

 

My chief complaint about this is, that our elected representatives can't seem to tell the difference between the common offense and the common defense in modern times; why should we expect anything more efficacious, from something as "nuanced" a porn?

 

Is there really that much interest in animal porn on this forum? 82 posts? are you people desparate for something to talk about?

 

you seem to be intrested enough, taking your time to comment.

I'm only showing my dislike of animal porn.

 

Why should people of morals care about what people without those same morals do in their spare time? In my opinion, it merely may demonstrate a lack of Faith by complaining about having to walk in the shadow of the valley of pornography and potentially fearing, "evil".

 

VERY appropriate diagram!

 

I suppose we CAN ban porn with puppies/kitties/ponies/etc, but not dogs/cats/horses/etc.

Not that I'm interested in porn of any kind (honest).

 

The statutory difference between child porn and animal porn would be that the former can/does otherwise have a massive audience creating large demand for, and therefore increasing the abuse..

Whereas I doubt there's quite that big of an audience for animal porn..

And if you consider that law is almost always more preferential to treatment of humans than of animals then it makes perfect sense.

Like the congress while catering to food producing corporations can allow them to abuse chickens, whereas to sell off human rights would be more difficult (but doesn't stop them still though).

 

Adult animals can consent to sex with a human if it's someone they trust. It is also not always abusive. However, the porn industry often drugs the animals in order to film the "work" and the animals are often underfed and neglected when no onscreen. Therefore, beast porn should be illegal to view IMO, whether the animals are adult or not and it is no more indicative of consensual animal sex than human on human porn is indicative of a healthy, loving relationship.

 

Why can't we expect capitalism and the subjective value of morals to produce market friendly values and morals?

 

No actually they do not have the cognitive ability to know any better - nor do they know about STDs, or whether the individual is carrying them - etc - so it is abusive, just like claiming that an 8 year old can 'consent' to sex with an adult.

 

Human exceptionalism at its finest. There are no STDs that can be passed on from human to animal. Look, I'm a vet student, I quite know what animals can and cannot catch, and the only zoonosis' that can be caught through sexual contact can also be caught through non-sexual contact . But this subject grosses me out too much to fully explain all the reasons why you're wrong. I'd prefer not to think about it that long

 

Humans are exceptional compared to animals.

A person who wants to screw an animal is mentally or emotionally disturbed, and wants a relationship with something that can't say 'no' back to them - therefore such deviant behavior should not be encouraged as normal.

 

No, we really aren't

You know, before I went into vet medicine, I interned at a state mental hospital, and I was quite surprised to find out that people who attracted to animals are not considered mentally disturbed by the mental health community and that treatment is not recommended unless the person is not able to function in society. Not only that, I was shocked to find out numerous studies had been done that reached the same conclusion.

 

Yes we are - liberals just say that because of their 'xenophilia', and need to put down the majority in favor of the minority (which includes animals).

Then the definition of mentally disturbed needs to be broadened to include a person so messed up emotionally that they can't get a girlfriend and need to bond with an animal which doesn't know any better, so they can't experience rejection.

 

Man, you really hate animals. That's sad

And animals can indeed reject human advances, violently and dangerously.

 

I don't hate them - I'm a member of PETA (people eating tasty animals).

 

Yes, you do hate them, if you so underestimate them that you don't think they can decide for themselves if they want something or not.

And you only confirm your hatred by suggesting it's ok to eat them and not (*)(*)(*)(*) them. I guess you're going to be saying they consent to be eaten next.

 

I'm sure that's what NAMBLA members say about 3 year old children too. Trying to justify their perversions.

A dead animal can't 'not consent' to being eaten - since it's already dead. Whether or not it consented to being killed is none of my concern at that point.

 

I believe the abomination of hypocrisy should be more illegal than animal porn.