First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Do You Think The Government Has A Right To What Happens In The Bedroom? If So, what?
9566 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/28/16

WeeabooWarrior wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Sodomy laws, Incest Laws. Bestiality Laws. Statutory rape. There are many laws regarding sexual practices. Where do you draw the line?


I typically draw the line at bestiality and underage people. What about you?


I'm in favor of a government where the people consent to having sexual behavior regulated in need to form a better society. In other words, if the action of regulation is good for society.


Depends. Some of it is moral ninnynannying to me. A lot of things can be taken to benefit society. Please clarify?
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 5/28/16

sundin13 wrote:


WeeabooWarrior wrote:

It's not that marijuana is a gateway drug, the problem is Nihilism.


Nothing has meaning
∴ 420 blaze it

???

I'm dumbfounded. I literally cannot express how great this post is.
runec 
28306 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/28/16

Jackalope82 wrote:
Oh, I'm American. They like to throw laws around that they can't enforce. A simple finger poke could lead to a sexual assault case.


...what

6163 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Off the map.
Offline
Posted 5/28/16
10771 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / MO, USA
Offline
Posted 5/29/16
Actually I fell comfortable where the line has already been drawn.

I know theresa few of you out there, but incest is wrong. No 2 ways about it. Even if the law were to ever permit it, its wrong.
9309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Online
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

FlyinDumpling wrote:

Anything that is without consent which results in harm or abuse.

Minors cannot give consent. The reason for this is because Law regonises that they can easily be taken advantage and influenced by an adult. To protect minors, law made it illegal for an adult to engage in sexual activity with underage person. This is also most likely why agreements with minors are not binding

Incest often occurs as a form of child abuse in young children, for example child on child sexual abuse resulting from neglect. Or, child abuse inflicted by an older family member. For this reason and the one above, it's non consensual and considered abuse

Animals can't give consent, they are animals....


Tough one. You cannot tell me that a 16 year old cannot give consent?

Yep true, they are sort of giving consent because it is someone they trust. So it's easy to take advantage or etc
Like how priests use god.

Well, iam not so sure about that. I mean dogs will hump your leg. Iam pretty sure if a girl was doing something sexual with a dog and it did not like it it would growl or bark or try to attack or at least get away or whimper and cry.
If its not doing any of this then iam pretty sure its happy (or just stupid and has no idea what is going on i guess).
lol i admit i have seen dog porn and whilst i HAVE seen proof of an animal seeming in some distress, for the most part it seems happy and i've just thought "lucky dog!" or, "the dog is getting more action than me!?" lol
But a man doing it seems more wrong like rape or just more disgusting lol

But yeah i understand why there are laws against it. Even though like i said, dose not seem cruel to me, seems a lucky animal....

9805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Johnstown, PA, USA
Offline
Posted 5/29/16
I absolutely think that the government does. The value I see in these laws is that they help protect and defend people and animals who are coerced into sexual encounters, and similar scenarios.
28332 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16
Some things make sense, some things don't. In general the only thing that should be forbidden imho is rape in all its forms as it's cohercive/harmful. And of course, well, you can't really allow people to do stuff like kill each other no matter how fucked up a fetish they have. But beyond that it should all be game, there's no real solid evidence for reasoning like "if we allow X, then people will go to do Y as well!". If that was true then no matter WHAT we allow people will always go for something more extreme and end up committing crimes. Not everyone is some crazy thrill-seeker, in fact I'd say that's quite a minority. So yeah. Even incest I don't really see a problem with - the examples mentioned above of abuse are bad because they're, well, abuse, so they fall under the laws about rape and underage sex.

About underage sex I think we should probably have a slightly more flexible system than a single hard age limit. A 40 year old man raping a 14 year old girl and a 19 year old boy having consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend clearly aren't the same thing, but in some places in the US they'll both get the male landed on the sex offenders registry. Considering how lasting and serious the consequences of that are, it shouldn't be used this lightly over a simple question of numbers.

The bestiality case... I think saying "we forbid bestiality because it's rape to the animal" would be a huge piece of hypocrisy. We KILL animals freely to EAT them. We inseminate them artificially to select for the best breeds. We sell and buy them. Let's not pretend that fucking them could possibly be the worst thing we can do to them - it is perhaps the one that they might occasionally agree to and enjoy, compared to the others. Bestiality laws are for humans and because of concerns of decency; animals are, at all effects, treated as things.
6200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / H-Town
Offline
Posted 5/29/16
Lol Confused on the Post then reading the comments only makes it worse -.-
9309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Online
Posted 5/29/16

TheGordianNot wrote:

Some things make sense, some things don't. In general the only thing that should be forbidden imho is rape in all its forms as it's cohercive/harmful. And of course, well, you can't really allow people to do stuff like kill each other no matter how fucked up a fetish they have. But beyond that it should all be game, there's no real solid evidence for reasoning like "if we allow X, then people will go to do Y as well!". If that was true then no matter WHAT we allow people will always go for something more extreme and end up committing crimes. Not everyone is some crazy thrill-seeker, in fact I'd say that's quite a minority. So yeah. Even incest I don't really see a problem with - the examples mentioned above of abuse are bad because they're, well, abuse, so they fall under the laws about rape and underage sex.

About underage sex I think we should probably have a slightly more flexible system than a single hard age limit. A 40 year old man raping a 14 year old girl and a 19 year old boy having consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend clearly aren't the same thing, but in some places in the US they'll both get the male landed on the sex offenders registry. Considering how lasting and serious the consequences of that are, it shouldn't be used this lightly over a simple question of numbers.

The bestiality case... I think saying "we forbid bestiality because it's rape to the animal" would be a huge piece of hypocrisy. We KILL animals freely to EAT them. We inseminate them artificially to select for the best breeds. We sell and buy them. Let's not pretend that fucking them could possibly be the worst thing we can do to them - it is perhaps the one that they might occasionally agree to and enjoy, compared to the others. Bestiality laws are for humans and because of concerns of decency; animals are, at all effects, treated as things.


Yeah pretty much this.
9566 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/29/16

TheGordianNot wrote:

Some things make sense, some things don't. In general the only thing that should be forbidden imho is rape in all its forms as it's cohercive/harmful. And of course, well, you can't really allow people to do stuff like kill each other no matter how fucked up a fetish they have. But beyond that it should all be game, there's no real solid evidence for reasoning like "if we allow X, then people will go to do Y as well!". If that was true then no matter WHAT we allow people will always go for something more extreme and end up committing crimes. Not everyone is some crazy thrill-seeker, in fact I'd say that's quite a minority. So yeah. Even incest I don't really see a problem with - the examples mentioned above of abuse are bad because they're, well, abuse, so they fall under the laws about rape and underage sex.

About underage sex I think we should probably have a slightly more flexible system than a single hard age limit. A 40 year old man raping a 14 year old girl and a 19 year old boy having consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend clearly aren't the same thing, but in some places in the US they'll both get the male landed on the sex offenders registry. Considering how lasting and serious the consequences of that are, it shouldn't be used this lightly over a simple question of numbers.

The bestiality case... I think saying "we forbid bestiality because it's rape to the animal" would be a huge piece of hypocrisy. We KILL animals freely to EAT them. We inseminate them artificially to select for the best breeds. We sell and buy them. Let's not pretend that fucking them could possibly be the worst thing we can do to them - it is perhaps the one that they might occasionally agree to and enjoy, compared to the others. Bestiality laws are for humans and because of concerns of decency; animals are, at all effects, treated as things.


Good point. Especially about bestiality. Although it might fall under animal cruelty for some animals, as a cat can't normally take an erect penis human and well....survive. Kenneth Pinyan died from a perforated colon because he took a horse penis in the ass. I remember when I learned about the "rape rack". I stopped eating meat for what, 3 years? I now switched to a mix of organic and humane certified though I can't help but feel like scum.
28332 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Good point. Especially about bestiality. Although it might fall under animal cruelty for some animals, as a cat can't normally take an erect penis human and well....survive. Kenneth Pinyan died from a perforated colon because he took a horse penis in the ass. I remember when I learned about the "rape rack". I stopped eating meat for what, 3 years? I now switched to a mix of organic and humane certified though I can't help but feel like scum.


Ah, yeah, that's a different matter of course, if the animal also dies from it. But in a way even our animal cruelty laws are really schizophrenic. It's an entirely different matter and it would go off topic but we really use criteria that are all over the place in judging what can and can't be done to an animal. Like how in science research you're supposed to protect animals from excessive suffering - by putting them down immediately even for minor injuries or signs of distress. It sounds stupid . If you're using them, go all the way, at least you'll get the results and won't have to sacrifice more animals for the same project.

I wouldn't apply the same rights to animals that we apply to humans of course, and if I were to guarantee some minimal personhood rights (life, freedom) to some I'd pick only a few species - dolphins, apes, whales, elephants perhaps. I wouldn't go as far as say we have to all become vegan or something. But at least having some sort of coherent ethical frame in which to see these problems. The current one seems to be "cute fluffy animals must be protected, tasty animals and pests can fuck off".
33051 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

runec wrote:


Jackalope82 wrote:
Oh, I'm American. They like to throw laws around that they can't enforce. A simple finger poke could lead to a sexual assault case.


...what



It's true, people use some of the laws to their advantage just to get money out of it. This scam happens quite often and more often than not such cases screw the innocent party over.
17191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

MrAnimeSK wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

Anything that is without consent which results in harm or abuse.

Minors cannot give consent. The reason for this is because Law regonises that they can easily be taken advantage and influenced by an adult. To protect minors, law made it illegal for an adult to engage in sexual activity with underage person. This is also most likely why agreements with minors are not binding

Incest often occurs as a form of child abuse in young children, for example child on child sexual abuse resulting from neglect. Or, child abuse inflicted by an older family member. For this reason and the one above, it's non consensual and considered abuse

Animals can't give consent, they are animals....


Tough one. You cannot tell me that a 16 year old cannot give consent?

Yep true, they are sort of giving consent because it is someone they trust. So it's easy to take advantage or etc
Like how priests use god.

Well, iam not so sure about that. I mean dogs will hump your leg. Iam pretty sure if a girl was doing something sexual with a dog and it did not like it it would growl or bark or try to attack or at least get away or whimper and cry.
If its not doing any of this then iam pretty sure its happy (or just stupid and has no idea what is going on i guess).
lol i admit i have seen dog porn and whilst i HAVE seen proof of an animal seeming in some distress, for the most part it seems happy and i've just thought "lucky dog!" or, "the dog is getting more action than me!?" lol
But a man doing it seems more wrong like rape or just more disgusting lol

But yeah i understand why there are laws against it. Even though like i said, dose not seem cruel to me, seems a lucky animal....

Please remember that not all animals are dogs. There are many animals that cannot can growl or fight back. It's also important to mention that "not whimpering", is not consent just like not crying doesn't mean someone is happy.

Animals generally cannot show objective consent because they are not human, all interpretation of it is based largely on the person discretion. A human is more aware about what they will do to than an animal understands what will be done to them. It doesn't matter if it's a man or a woman. Just because you want to fuck a girl and not be fucked by a dog or a guy, doesn't mean anything
17191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

TheGordianNot wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Good point. Especially about bestiality. Although it might fall under animal cruelty for some animals, as a cat can't normally take an erect penis human and well....survive. Kenneth Pinyan died from a perforated colon because he took a horse penis in the ass. I remember when I learned about the "rape rack". I stopped eating meat for what, 3 years? I now switched to a mix of organic and humane certified though I can't help but feel like scum.


Ah, yeah, that's a different matter of course, if the animal also dies from it. But in a way even our animal cruelty laws are really schizophrenic. It's an entirely different matter and it would go off topic but we really use criteria that are all over the place in judging what can and can't be done to an animal. Like how in science research you're supposed to protect animals from excessive suffering - by putting them down immediately even for minor injuries or signs of distress. It sounds stupid . If you're using them, go all the way, at least you'll get the results and won't have to sacrifice more animals for the same project.

I wouldn't apply the same rights to animals that we apply to humans of course, and if I were to guarantee some minimal personhood rights (life, freedom) to some I'd pick only a few species - dolphins, apes, whales, elephants perhaps. I wouldn't go as far as say we have to all become vegan or something. But at least having some sort of coherent ethical frame in which to see these problems. The current one seems to be "cute fluffy animals must be protected, tasty animals and pests can fuck off".
We have animal cruelty laws to prevent the needless suffering of animals. Granted, farming and crowded chicken coops largely conflict with those laws and should be remedied.

Does bestiality not fall under animal cruelty to you? And if it doesn't, how do you determine the guidelines for it, accurately? As long as the animal doesn't die from it than all things go?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.