Anatoly Karlin @powerfultakes
Replying to @RichardHanania
I’m against legalizing bestiality because the animal consent problem hasn’t been solved, but probably actually will be quite soon thanks to Al (at least for the higher animals with complex languages). So why not wait a few more years. I don’t see disgust as a good reason. It was an evolutionary adaptation of the agricultural era against the spread of zoonotic illnesses, but technology will soon make that entirely irrelevant as well.
Philosophical question: if brutally torturing and murdering billions of animals is fine, why do we draw the line at sex? I’m a vegetarian and have never ideated it, but the position is untenable.
edit: What I’m saying is apparently nobody gives a fuck about consent when we’re talking about putting intelligent beings in a box barely bigger than themselves and feeding them slop until we think they’re overweight enough to unceremoniously dump dozens at a time into a gas chamber where we choke them while they’re conscious. But now that wieners are involved we’re suddenly holier than thou? Come on.
HMMMMM I WONDER
shots are on me tonight, vegetarian reply guy with pretend opinions was my last square before blackout!
deleted by creator
Centaurs raise a few more small issues
If you think my opinion is a meme then countering the argument should be easy.
“I can excuse bestiality, but I draw the line at animal cruelty”
That’s a nice way to put the question, yes.
Thinking about morality requires you to look like a gross idiot sometimes when you have to ask the questions that seem obviously wrong on the face of it. But that’s exactly what I’m asking, why does it seem so ridiculous to ask this question? Is it not obvious that fucking an animal is not as bad as treating it like shit for its lifetime and then brutally killing it? Is it not hypocritical to equate the two?
I understand that asking this question makes me look like a pig fucker but I’ll take the L if it gives us something interesting to talk and think about.
edit: If the act of fucking an animal hurts it then that is obviously immoral, but if they barely notice then it seems to me that the answer to the question of why that is wrong is internal to humans. I guess that’s what I’m asking; what is that thing we have internalised as wrong (which I have, as well, just for the record)? What is the moral reasoning behind that thing? Is it just that we’re weird about sex and we project those feelings onto the animal?
If people who eat meat are going to denounce bestiality as wrong (which again, I do as well, because of said internalised thing) I feel there should be some form of reasoning that is congruous with having no qualms about killing and eating animals.
I think your framing is flawed (I don’t think it’s an issue of consent so much as it’s an issue of creating animal suffering for personal benefit), but I broadly agree - I personally get past the hypocrisy because I have no interest in fucking animals, and push the suffering I cause by eating animal products to the back of my mind and pretending it’s not a thing. Responsibility is also meaningfully abstracted in the food example, making it far easier to pretend you’re not at fault compared to having a chicken impaled on your dick.
In a similar way, people consuming products made in sweatshops and people downloading CSA material are both exploiting children.
Interesting, thanks for the reply. For the record, the comment I replied to argued consent, hence the response.
edit: I just realized I’m wrong, that was the argument by the original OP.
deleted by creator