1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Meat-Eating vs. Bestiality

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by Debater Slayer, Jan 10, 2016.

  1. Debater Slayer

    Debater Slayer Born-again Glompist
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    18,660
    Ratings:
    +9,227
    Religion:
    Metal
    I'm a meat eater myself. Just a preemptive clarification in case someone thinks about accusing me of repeating vegetarian propaganda (whatever that is).

    So, I have been thinking about why I and many others who have no religion oppose bestiality, and one of the most common reasons given is that one can't have the consent of animals to acts of bestiality. However, we also don't have the consent of animals to use them for labor or in industrial farming. We don't have their consent to slaughter them either.

    With the above in mind, what makes meat-eating acceptable and bestiality unacceptable?
     
    • Like Like x 7
  2. Terese

    Terese Mangalam Pundarikakshah
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,362
    Ratings:
    +3,068
    Religion:
    Sanatana Dharma
    Bestiality is Degenerate. Socially unacceptable.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,076
    Ratings:
    +8,945
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    But what is "degenerate" is a matter of fashion, and cultural norms change over time and vary between cultures. What is considered degenerate today might be the norm tomorrow.
    It was once socially unacceptable to be homosexual or to marry outside your race.
     
  4. Terese

    Terese Mangalam Pundarikakshah
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,362
    Ratings:
    +3,068
    Religion:
    Sanatana Dharma
    Yep, that's true. It's considered disgusting violating an animal like that in our society. Killing and eating something and raping an animal will give you two very different responses.
     
  5. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,076
    Ratings:
    +8,945
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Good post, DS.
    Exploitation is exploitation. What makes one form acceptable and another not?
    I see "might makes right" and consent as the salient issues here.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. Debater Slayer

    Debater Slayer Born-again Glompist
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    18,660
    Ratings:
    +9,227
    Religion:
    Metal
    Social norms are subjective constructs, though. What is the objective, logical basis for considering it acceptable to slaughter animals without their consent as opposed to engaging in bestiality?
     
  7. Terese

    Terese Mangalam Pundarikakshah
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,362
    Ratings:
    +3,068
    Religion:
    Sanatana Dharma
    Both are wrong, but it's societal which determines how bad it is. If you kill an animal, you are a hunter. No negative connotation to that word. If you rape a goddamn animal, wow.
     
  8. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    25,030
    Ratings:
    +7,696
    Religion:
    Liberal Christian
    Hunger is a more powerful desire, and starvation can kill you. That makes people think differently about food. Maybe its because of this that laws about food are weak laws. Laws can't feed people, but food can.
     
  9. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,076
    Ratings:
    +8,945
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    But what if you're on the receiving end, so to speak?:rolleyes:
     
  10. Terese

    Terese Mangalam Pundarikakshah
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,362
    Ratings:
    +3,068
    Religion:
    Sanatana Dharma
    Do you mean the recieving end of the arrow?
     
  11. Laika

    Laika Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2015
    Messages:
    7,035
    Ratings:
    +6,675
    Religion:
    Non-Religious
    come to the darkside DS. unleash your inner furry!

    [​IMG]

    it's not a perversion. it's a preference. :D
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Greased up & ready for action!
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    148,029
    Ratings:
    +41,261
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    You mean it's OK now?
    What a relief!
    (Mrs Revolt is Democrat.)
     
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,654
    Ratings:
    +12,609
    Religion:
    Druidry

    One satisfies a vital need. The other does not. Seems to me the difference is pretty clear. In environmental ethics, it is typically considered permissible for an organism to do what it wants if it is to satisfy a vital need.
     
  14. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Greased up & ready for action!
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    148,029
    Ratings:
    +41,261
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    Which one.....eating them, or ****ing them?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. BSM1

    BSM1 Who's a good boy?

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Messages:
    16,468
    Ratings:
    +7,446
    Religion:
    Buddhistic Panenthetic Jesusonian
    Are you saying that someday it may be acceptable to kill and eat homosexuals and those of other races?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,076
    Ratings:
    +8,945
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Yes, BSM. You've deduced my meaning exactly. :rolleyes:

     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. The Emperor of Mankind

    The Emperor of Mankind Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    6,417
    Ratings:
    +6,467
    Religion:
    Greek Paganism
    We gain tangible benefits from eating meat that we do not gain from bestiality: nutrition, vitamins & minerals.

    Sex with animals is immoral because:
    1. It's a good way to pick up diseases or infections
    2. It's unnecessary from a pleasure point of view. We don't need to have sex with animals for pleasure.
    3. It's unnecessary from a genetic point of view. Most children off human-animal matings would not be viable.
    4. It's seen as a sign of sexual degeneracy, lack of self-control etc.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Iti oj

    Iti oj Global warming is real and we need to act
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,689
    Ratings:
    +2,570
    Religion:
    RF cult leader & taosit black magician
    good thread/question but im a vegan so my answer is its not.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Iti oj

    Iti oj Global warming is real and we need to act
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,689
    Ratings:
    +2,570
    Religion:
    RF cult leader & taosit black magician
    wants or needs?
     
  20. Debater Slayer

    Debater Slayer Born-again Glompist
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    18,660
    Ratings:
    +9,227
    Religion:
    Metal
    But it would seem that we don't need to eat meat going by the fact that millions of people are fully vegetarian.
     
    • Like Like x 4
Loading...