Homosexuality is normal because it is observed in the animal kingdom. Well, rape exists in the animal kingdom too. Are civil rights for rapists next?

[mota bhai 2,675]

Sea otters ... have been observed forcibly copulating with, and in the process killing, juvenile harbor seals off California.

Writing in a recent edition of the journal Aquatic Mammals, Heather Harris of the California Department of Fish and Game and colleagues document nineteen occurrences of this behavior in Monterey Bay between 2000 and 2002, leading to the deaths of at least 15 seals.

Harris and her colleagues describe one incident in vivid detail:

A weaned harbor seal pup was resting onshore when an untagged male sea otter approached it, grasped it with its teeth and forepaws, bit it on the nose, and flipped it over. The harbor seal moved toward the water with the sea otter following closely. Once in the water, the sea otter gripped the harbor seal’s head with its forepaws and repeatedly bit it on the nose, causing a deep laceration. The sea otter and pup rolled violently in the water for approximately 15 min, while the pup struggled to free itself from the sea otter’s grasp. Finally, the sea otter positioned itself dorsal to the pup’s smaller body while grasping it by the head and holding it underwater in a position typical of mating sea otters. As the sea otter thrust his pelvis, his ####### was extruded and intromission was observed. At 105 min into the encounter, the sea otter released the pup, now dead, and began grooming.

On some occasions, they further note, otters would guard and copulate with the seals long after their victims had died -– as much as seven days afterward, in fact.

...

Harris and her co-authors point out that it is not dissimilar to standard sea otter mating protocol, in which males will often approach the female from behind, grip her around the chest with his forepaws, and grasp her nose or the side of her face with his teeth. Although the female frequently resists, generally the two eventually spin in the water, the male behind the female, until mating is complete. Here, too, the encounters may prove fatal for the female, either as a result of wounds inflicted from the male’s bites and scratches or because of drowning. Harris and colleagues describe one instance in which a male otter held a struggling female underwater until her body became limp and then copulated with her several times.

http://news.discovery.com/animals/the-other-side-of-otters.htm

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Otters must die. We must do God's work.

[Darnell 8,479]

analogy not work, alas. is nice try, but it not work.

compare 'almost same' brainpan size, say pig or ape, and have a rethink.

otters aren't 'sentinent enough' for me for a valid comparison then stretching bullsh|t conclusion to cover humans.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[david'sgirl 134]

Otters must die. We must do God's work.

otters are too cute to die

[mota bhai 2,675]

otters are too cute to die

Do you think men who rape women to death and then continue to sexually ravage their dead bodies for a week are also cute?

[david'sgirl 134]

Do you think men who rape women to death and then continue to sexually ravage their dead bodies for a week are also cute?

I think that is a bizarre response to a benign retort.

Are you seriously trying to compare animals like seals and otters to humans? I assumed it was meant in jest.

Edited April 21, 2013 by david'sgirl

[mota bhai 2,675]

Are you seriously trying to compare animals like seals and otters to humans?

Pro-LGBT rights activists (human beings, I presume) do it all the time. They say homosexuality exists in nature as evidence of it being perfectly natural and harmless.

Now that you see that rape and necrophilia exist in nature as well, will you give rapists and necrophiliacs (is that the right word?) the same courtesy and respect you have bullied society into giving homosexuals?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Do you think men who rape women to death and then continue to sexually ravage their dead bodies for a week are also cute?

They are in no way analogous to homosexuals desiring committed relationships via marriage. Unless you are an unrepentant **-phobe.

Pro-LGBT rights activists (human beings, I presume) do it all the time. They say homosexuality exists in nature as evidence of it being perfectly natural and harmless.

Now that you see that rape and necrophilia exist in nature as well, will you give rapists and necrophiliacs (is that the right word?) the same courtesy and respect you have bullied society into giving homosexuals?

Meds proving no longer effective?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

They are in no way analogous to homosexuals desiring committed relationships via marriage. Unless you are an unrepentant **-phobe.

Meds proving no longer effective?

Marriage is not present in the animal world. Your argument fails.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Pro-LGBT rights activists (human beings, I presume) do it all the time. They say homosexuality exists in nature as evidence of it being perfectly natural and harmless.

Now that you see that rape and necrophilia exist in nature as well, will you give rapists and necrophiliacs (is that the right word?) the same courtesy and respect you have bullied society into giving homosexuals?

I understand your point as do most of the people going off on tangents and pretending your saying something else...

When I've seen the "evidence" presented that there are gay animals it tends to be males sticking their shlongs someplace where they think it might feel good or has a right set of weight/size/feel/color which includes same gender, different species, my leg (bad dog!), various inanimate objects, etc, etc.. This proves nothing to me about being gay but maybe says something about the strong male humping instinct.

But so what? Exactly zero people on the planet will change their views based on gay animal finding evidence pro or con. It will solidify the beliefs in those who are "pro" and be dismissed by those "con" or vice-versa if the evidence points the other direction. That is human nature and is seen everyday in the majority of posts in P&R. In this particular case I would fall into that camp: positive proof that there are or are not gay animals would not change my views on the subject.

In the end if person "A" wants to do whatever with person "B" - for whatever reason - and there is no direct harm to others, the knee-jerk response should always be to leave them alone unless there is overriding evidence that society as a whole is being harmed.

Edited April 22, 2013 by OnMyWayID

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

what does being normal or not normal have to do with anything?

who cares if it is "normal" ? As long as it is between consensual adults who gives a rat's @ss and why would anyone want to deny rights to someone because of what they do in their bedroom? I ask you kindly to stay the #### out of my bedroom (or kitchen)

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Original post removed to keep my response from getting nuked also......NOTE!!!

Dear God man, are you drunk... Really ??

This may be the most bizarre ####### I have ever seen posted in here..Also the title has nothing to do with the story. I expect a nukage shortly. Heck If i were not morally opposed to reporting, which I think is childish immature I can't stand on my own feet behavior, I would report it.

Edited April 22, 2013 by The Nature Boy

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I understand your point as do most of the people going off on tangents and pretending your saying something else...

When I've seen the "evidence" presented that there are gay animals it tends to be males sticking their shlongs someplace where they think it might feel good or has a right set of weight/size/feel/color which includes same gender, different species, my leg (bad dog!), various inanimate objects, etc, etc.. This proves nothing to me about being gay but maybe says something about the strong male humping instinct.

But so what? Exactly zero people on the planet will change their views based on gay animal finding evidence pro or con. It will solidify the beliefs in those who are "pro" and be dismissed by those "con" or vice-versa if the evidence points the other direction. That is human nature and is seen everyday in the majority of posts in P&R. In this particular case I would fall into that camp: positive proof that there are or are not gay animals would not change my views on the subject.

In the end if person "A" wants to do whatever with person "B" - for whatever reason - and there is no direct harm to others, the knee-jerk response should always be to leave them alone unless there is overriding evidence that society as a whole is being harmed.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Marriage is not present in the animal world. Your argument fails.

I didn't make any such argument.