Senate approves bill legalizes sodomy and bestiality in US military

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

selectively and hypocritically empathise with animals when they feel like it.

And I can't stand people who assume that this is what is going on in this thread.

The topic is bestiality, so I'm going to offer my opinion on just this.

For your information, I'm also against cock fighting, experimentations, and not swiftly killing an animal that is going to be turned into a meal. I was simply sticking with the topic and not bringing up all the other atrocities that humans subject onto animals.

How about we talk about women who are addicted to drugs and forced to have sex with animals on camera by some sicko who then provides her with her fix since she gave him the footage he's going to sell to his sick friends/clients?

How about children who are forced to have sex with animals in order to fracture their personalities for programming purposes?

I just love people who only view sex for pleasure and can't even touch the fact that sex has such an evil, dark side meant to control and manipulate victims. Now, it's all legal.

I hope this bill was changed because someone captured and released footage of some "important" person forcing themselves on a little dog. Does anyone even know how much damage can be done to a poor defenseless animal? Oh, that's right. Sex always feels good for both parties.

Originally posted by Afterthought
For your information, I'm also against cock fighting, experimentations, and not swiftly killing an animal that is going to be turned into a meal.

You see, I've got to stop you here.

''Swiftly killing an animal that is going to be turned into a meal'' ?

Considering that there's no need to kill any animal for a meal, then I have to ask you how killing an animal for a meal ( swiftly or otherwise ) is any better than having sex with one ?

If anything, I'd say that the latter was better for the animal's welfare.

It seems strange to me that people are so surprised that sodomy is repealed and yet sex with animals seems to disgust them.

Since man has always pushed the boundaries of anything, how long did people think beastiality would be illegal after homosexuality was pushed to be normalaised and actually promoted in society?

I said three years ago it won't be long. I didn't think it would be quite this soon, amybe 2015 but if this report is true...here we go.

Eventually there will be groups of people who want sex with animals to be normalised, then legalised and then have the right to marry their animals as well.

Don't laugh, that what they said about homosexuality only 25 years ago and people mocked the possibility of homosexual promotion and marriage back then.

Sheep farmers might yet have a rise in demand for their animals

You sure it isn't just a redundancy that is being corrected? Perhaps it is still illegal as stated in another part of the UCMJ. These stories tend to be exaggerated and not entirely truthful.

uuummmmm..
why did they need a law making bestiality illegal for US soldiers in the first place?

This reminds me of a David Cross bit about republicans grouping beastiality, incest and sodomy in the same category.. haha.

What's the verdict on this though? Did they really legalize beastiality, or was this written by someone that is extremely biased against sodomy?

Just my opinion but maybe they had to repeal the bestiality part because so many Sheeple were enlisting in the military. While many of the great military men/women (can't say best of the best because that will always be tainted by that scene in MIB 1) think outside the box the everyday military man/woman will only follow the hole in front of them and can't think for themselves.

reply to post by FlyersFan


THIS is what they're spending their time on.

Holy bejesus.

Well atleast i know I can join the military now


hahahha JK. soooo JK.

or am i?

Originally posted by Danbones
uuummmmm..
why did they need a law making bestiality illegal for US soldiers in the first place?

Well those types of things need to be made clear for some southerners!







I am sooo totally joking around. I saw ur avatar and thought i'd poke fun.

It's just a silly thread so i thought being silly was appropriate!

Hope you can take a lil jabbing.

Originally posted by Expat888
oops.. will refrain from several good jokes that spring to mind.. not need a ban..

Can understand the part on sodomy as homosexuals are allowed to serve..

but bestiality ???? I dont even want to know on that one...

maybe they should give the troops some leave time if animals are starting to look good to them...

*note to pet owners and farmers worldwide* lock up your pets to keep them safe..

If you don't think this happens in Appalachia, you're 'way out of the knowing. Many young men are first introduced to sex by a cousin or a neighbor hanging one of their siblings over a bridge... and telling the young boy he has to screw a pig or a lamb, or some other poor animal... or they'll drop his sister on her head in a creek or a river. DON'T kind yourselves, this really still goes on, and lots of siblings get dropped. IN BIBLE COUNTRY! "Family Values." Yeah... right!

Interesting. Perhaps, there might be some sort of mass experimentation going on with the hybridization among species. I hope this is NOT a joke thread because I don't like the idea of the US military sodomizing, err, alleged "terrorists" either. Eww.

Originally posted by Battleline
Your rant sounds more like a defence for "anel sex" then how stupid we are not to have read the bill and understood it the way you have.

You left out oral. Why did you leave that out? What is wrong with oral and anal sex?

What happen here was that people got so grossed out about a reg in the UCMJ restricting beasteality that the debate just went to that in stead of debating the letter of the bill and why they repealed it for the now openly gay military.

The letter of the law is just as much about the sodomy as the beastiality so why do you choose to focus where you choose to focus?
Now it is a gay thing? I guess no one ever told me only gay people have oral and anal sex.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

 

selectively and hypocritically empathise with animals when they feel like it.

And I can't stand people who assume that this is what is going on in this thread.

The topic is bestiality, so I'm going to offer my opinion on just this.

For your information, I'm also against cock fighting, experimentations, and not swiftly killing an animal that is going to be turned into a meal. I was simply sticking with the topic and not bringing up all the other atrocities that humans subject onto animals.

Why is killing an animal for food better to the animal then having sex with it? I would like to know exactly how you arrive at your answer as well.

reply to post by daggyz


Everything you are "predicting" was on Jerry Springer a decade ago. No memories of the man who married his donkey? How about the sex far that was shut down in Washington now that beastiality has finally been outlawed there? You are just saying random things to try to connect homosexuality with beastiality and you failed from the outset by framing sodomy as a homosexual act.

Seriously, folks.
If someone is sick enough to have sex with an animal, do you really think they're going to be gentle?
No. They're probably the type of person who can't keep a girlfriend because they enjoy inflicting pain during an act that's supposed to be pleasureable.

Here's some horror stories for those defending sex with animals:

"Serial dog rapist on the loose"
www.woofpetbakery.com...

Offenders are listed when they “have been convicted of a "criminal offense against a victim who is a minor" or a "sexually violent offense," as explained in the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act. However, it does not explicitly rule out offenses against animals.

"Student charged with animal cruelty, criminal sodomy against dog"
fortheloveofthedogblog.com...

Officers investigating a large quantity of blood at his apartment in the 2100 block of Heatherwood Drive confronted Basoflas when he returned to his apartment after a property manager called in a complaint. After further investigation, it was deemed that the blood involved abuse of a dog. The body of the dog was later found at an undisclosed location. Basoflas was arrested for allegedly sodomizing and killing a dog.

Although humans have the ability to use foreplay and external stimulation to relax the anal muscles prior to penetration, animals do not.
www.hemorrhoidshemroids.com...
What causes rectal prolapse in animals? One reason:

Finally, the anal opening was not designed by evolution for sexual penetration, so anal sex, being an activity involving the invasion of the anorectal canal, can cause the muscles to give way, thereby leading to rectal prolapse.

If you feel the need to defend those who have sex with animals, you might as well be on Jerry Sandusky's side.

Serial killers start out with animals for a reason and maybe we're understanding a different type of mentality with those who feel inclined to have sex with animals. If you enjoy causing pain through sex, an animal cannot report you and you'll always have a voiceless victim.

Originally posted by LilithWon

Originally posted by Battleline
Your rant sounds more like a defence for "anel sex" then how stupid we are not to have read the bill and understood it the way you have.

You left out oral. Why did you leave that out? What is wrong with oral and anal sex?

What happen here was that people got so grossed out about a reg in the UCMJ restricting beasteality that the debate just went to that in stead of debating the letter of the bill and why they repealed it for the now openly gay military.

The letter of the law is just as much about the sodomy as the beastiality so why do you choose to focus where you choose to focus?
Now it is a gay thing? I guess no one ever told me only gay people have oral and anal sex.

So did you just come out of the woodwork to attack me for not stateing my reply the way you thought it should have been stated?

It figures to find a gay rights "shill" trolling a post where oral,anal and beasteality sex acts are being deiscussed.

It was never a gay thing.........................tell you showed up slick.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

Considering that there's no need to kill any animal for a meal, then I have to ask you how killing an animal for a meal ( swiftly or otherwise ) is any better than having sex with one ?

Animal that is swiftly killed does not even feel much pain, (in case of euthanasia, none) and its over. Having sex with an animal on the other hand, may be stressful and even painful for the animal, depending on the consequences, and may look more like rape. It is also less important for society than animal products, thus the willingness to ban it.

There may be element of moral outrage present. But I am sure lots of opponents of bestiality oppose it not due to any sexual immorality, but due to genuine concern for animal wellbeing, which is a worthy cause.

I'm not sure why making it a point to "allow" these things is considered a priority. Satanic subversion at its worst.

reply to post by L00kingGlass


You're exactly right. It is a Satanic objective and the main focus is to destroy all morals in order for the take over to successfully happen. Just brainwash everyone into believing that sex with animals is acceptable and has nothing to do with rape and pain.

Originally posted by Maslo
Animal that is swiftly killed does not even feel much pain, (in case of euthanasia, none) and its over. Having sex with an animal on the other hand, may be stressful and even painful for the animal, depending on the consequences, and may look more like rape.

''A human who is swiftly killed does not feel much pain. Having sex with a human, on the other hand, may be stressful and even painful for the person, depending on the consequences, and may look more like rape.''

So, according to your argument, murdering and cannibalising someone is ''justifiable'', yet statutory rape is not.

Very peculiar.

Originally posted by Maslo
It is also less important for society than animal products, thus the willingness to ban it.

Is killing and eating sentient mammals, when other more ethical food sources are freely available, ''important for society'' ? Are horse racing and greyhound racing ''important for society'' ? Is it ''important for society'' to enslave animals in zoos and aquariums ? I guess that keeping birds, rodents, snakes, fish and lizards in constrictive and claustrophobic cages/tanks is not ''important for society'' ?

Originally posted by Maslo
There may be element of moral outrage present. But I am sure lots of opponents of bestiality oppose it not due to any sexual immorality, but due to genuine concern for animal wellbeing, which is a worthy cause.

An ''element'' of Moral Outrage ?! Are you serious ?!

The only reason why bestiality is illegal, is because of disgust and revulsion at the perpetrator of the act, rather than compassion towards the animal. That is pretty much the definition of Moral Outrage.