Alaska and Florida consider bans on bestiality

[HAL 9000 96]

Then you must agree that three consenting people should together be able to share the benefits of marriage.

To limit it to two people returns to the same old practice of using religious customs and laws to limit how people arrange modern families.

See how easy this is

i've said the same thing too, yet to no avail. bisexual people don't have a ranking with some around here.

Some people set themselves up as the gate-keeper... while pretending not.

I on the Other hand admit, that for a host of reasons Marriage must consist of one woman and one man.

If and when, we allow men to marry men, then I certainly agree to be consistent to all, we must let people (of legal age) decide for themselves, who

and how many , constitute a marriage.

slip, slip, slip.

[*Robert* 2]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

[HAL 9000 96]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

Exactly! Oh!! And ANIMALS CAN MARRY ANIMALS!!!

[Ban Hammer 13,726]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

not been to arkansas have you?

[Peikko 1,575]

Then you must agree that three consenting people should together be able to share the benefits of marriage.

To limit it to two people returns to the same old practice of using religious customs and laws to limit how people arrange modern families.

See how easy this is

Erm - no.

You haven't thought it through.

When did he ever do that?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its silly - there's been inumerable discussions about this topic in the various threads about gay marriage. Its like he waits a few months and then pulls out the exact same stale argument.

Not only is it patently ridiculous on the face of it - but it proves absolutely nothing about the people who support it, and only panders to Danno's cartoonish assumptions about "libruls".

Tired, hackneyed old cliches that reflect nothing than anyone actually believes.

[*Robert* 2]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

not been to arkansas have you?

Guess I know where I'm NOT going for vacation this year!!!

[franklie 0]

In Mexico they have the Donkey Show

Where a woman will get a Donkey to have an erection and then she proceeds to have sex with the Animal.

I wonder why that is legal?

Is that true or just a rumor ?

sadly it is. some of my former friends from uni (sick f*cks) went to tijuana to see some...

The "donkey show" in Revolution in TJ, the "donkey show" in Boys Town and the "donkey show" in other red-light districts are now all urban legends. It's funny how the barkers and the scammers try to get the gringos and rob them. Prostitution with women or transexuals on the other hand continues unabated.

[Ban Hammer 13,726]

In Mexico they have the Donkey Show

Where a woman will get a Donkey to have an erection and then she proceeds to have sex with the Animal.

I wonder why that is legal?

Is that true or just a rumor ?

sadly it is. some of my former friends from uni (sick f*cks) went to tijuana to see some...

The "donkey show" in Revolution in TJ, the "donkey show" in Boys Town and the "donkey show" in other red-light districts are now all urban legends. It's funny how the barkers and the scammers try to get the gringos and rob them. Prostitution with women or transexuals on the other hand continues unabated.

it seems you know just a bit too much about all of that.

[Danno 1,228]

Its silly - there's been inumerable discussions about this topic in the various threads about gay marriage. Its like he waits a few months and then pulls out the exact same stale argument.

Not only is it patently ridiculous on the face of it - but it proves absolutely nothing about the people who support it, and only panders to Danno's cartoonish assumptions about "libruls".

Tired, hackneyed old cliches that reflect nothing than anyone actually believes.

Dude, I can't believe you accuse anyone of using cliches, when your response to anyone on any topic is the same 3 or 4, cut-n-paste answers.

NOw let me get this right.

You both have no religious reasons to believe Man is any more special than animals right?

You both realize inter- species sex is not only possible but has been commonly practiced.

You both recognize that men and woman use animals for every thing from pets to pelts,

as sled dogs and racing dogs. Circus acts and lab research, ...(none of "these" animals give consent)

yet for some reason you think

the weight of Government should be in peoples bedrooms preventing some fruit-cake lady from having relations with her more than willing Boxer.

Why would you want the Govt. acting as the sex police after telling us this is exactly what you don't want the Govt to do?

Why do you push your views of morality on people who may not share your religious/ moral principles?

Why do you Beasti-phobic people wish to take basic "rights" from others?

No one is suggesting interspecies marriage, that would be silly because animals cannot be a part of contracts but they can be a part of relationships and you won't let them

Tsk Tsk

[Peikko 1,575]

Its silly - there's been inumerable discussions about this topic in the various threads about gay marriage. Its like he waits a few months and then pulls out the exact same stale argument.

Not only is it patently ridiculous on the face of it - but it proves absolutely nothing about the people who support it, and only panders to Danno's cartoonish assumptions about "libruls".

Tired, hackneyed old cliches that reflect nothing than anyone actually believes.

Dude, I can't believe you accuse anyone of using cliches, when your response to anyone on any topic is the same 3 or 4, cut-n-paste answers.

NOw let me get this right.

You both have no religious reasons to believe Man is any more special than animals right?

You both realize inter- species sex is not only possible but has been commonly practiced.

You both recognize that men and woman use animals for every thing from pets to pelts,

as sled dogs and racing dogs. Circus acts and lab research, ...(none of "these" animals give consent)

yet for some reason you think

the weight of Government should be in peoples bedrooms preventing some fruit-cake lady from having relations with her more than willing Boxer.

Why would you want the Govt. acting as the sex police after telling us this is exactly what you don't want the Govt to do?

Why do you push your views of morality on people who may not share your religious/ moral principles?

Why do you Beasti-phobic people wish to take basic "rights" from others?

No one is suggesting interspecies marriage, that would be silly because animals cannot be a part of contracts but they can be a part of relationships and you won't let them

Tsk Tsk

I'll answer for myself.

Your logic, quite simply isn't - logical that is. I have to say though, you have built yourself a very elaborate sandcastle.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again you didn't think it through. We have laws against the cruel treatment of animals. Someone is already pushing their morality on a person who wants to own a pet.

Bad reasoning danno. Tsk tsk.

[HAL 9000 96]

Oh boy!

[panamania79 2]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

Well,there was that one Jerry Springer episode where some old guy was married to his horse,they couldn't show it all.

[Ban Hammer 13,726]

Does that mean if men can marry men, and women marry women, that men and women can start marying animals too?!

Well,there was that one Jerry Springer episode where some old guy was married to his horse,they couldn't show it all.

i guess he had that special upside down saddle.