Denmark bans sex with animals.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

You are probably right considering the increasing frequency of female teachers having sex with male students.

[TigerTale 357]

One of the most progressive countries on earth is putting limits on who or what it's citizens can have sex with. Are they suggesting there are boundaries, in regards to sexual activity, that shouldn't be crossed?

[cooltigger21 0]

One of the most progressive countries on earth is putting limits on who or what it's citizens can have sex with. Are they suggesting there are boundaries, in regards to sexual activity, that shouldn't be crossed?

Their age of consent is 15. Others go down to 14.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

Didn't some English broad marry 1 or more of her pets ?

Who are we to tell her who / what she can love ?

I don't know about that but I do remember some guy married his car.

British woman marries her dog, confesses: 'I'm totally her b---h'

Amanda Rodgers, 47, and her dog/wife Sheba married in a beautiful ceremony attended by 200 guests in Croatia: 'I knew that we were meant to be,' Rodgers says.

http://www.nydailyne...ticle-1.1717772

And how, may I ask, did this dog say "I do", sign or voluntarily make his mark on a marriage license application, or in any way demonstrated informed consent (Or even basic understanding of the meaning of the event, for that matter, consent or not)? Ditto for the alleged car? Is there any reason to think that either so-called "marriage" has any legal standing? Or instead, almost certainly, were these just sham cockamamie personal 'rituals' carried out by loons? (In fact, one could argue that such stupidity raises questions as to whether the human half of either "couple" meets the legal standard for sanity required for legal consensual marriage.)

Once again...although I'm sure this won't get through some heads any more than the last zillion times it's been said:

Legal marriage requires the freely-given informed consent of two persons of legal age. If you oppose gay marriage, fine, that is your right. But if so, simply own it--"I don't agree with same-sex marriage because of my personal beliefs"--and stop trying to impose your beliefs on other adults who wish to be married. Also, STOP TRYING TO CONFLATE IT WITH PEDOPHILIA OR BESTIALITY!. Such comparison just makes the person doing the comparing look ridiculous.

As for when DKW or anyone else anticipated legal same-sex marriage: Who cares and how is that relevant??

I'm sure there were folks in Alabama in the 1920's-'30's who never dreamed interracial marriage would be legal. Does that make it an abomination if a white woman marries a black man today? Or go back a century before that: Don't you suppose there were at least a few in the 1830's that couldn't dream that slavery might be outlawed?. Does that make emancipation any less ethical?

As late as July of 2013 (the date of this article) the majority of the states where bestiality was legal still banned same-sex marriage:

In 55% of the states wherein Bestiality is legal, Same Sex Marriage is not. The states which do not criminalize Bestiality, yet ban Same Sex Marriage are as follows:

Kentucky; Montana; New Jersey; Nevada; Ohio; Texas; Virginia; West Virginia; and Wyoming (Note: New Jersey does permit Civil Unions.)

http://www.allthings...e-sex-marriage/

That seems far more screwed up to me. I can screw a pig, but I can't marry my true love?

The whole point is that the left wants to change the basic definition of marriage and morality. Opposition to this is called hate.Once you change it one time who's to say you can't change it another time.

What if it does? What if, 100 years from now, there is a fundamental shift in "morality"? The vast majority of people decide something the was "immoral" really is not. Should people in the future be bound by the people of the past? Your argument is ridiculous and hypocritical. We aren't talking about governing the future (do we even have that right?) Let's just stick to governing in the present.

Stop with the rhetoric and fear. Why don't we just accept the fact that the majority believe in no longer discriminating against homosexuals and, there is absolutely no indication that giving homosexuals equal rights under the law will promote beastiality.

If you want to attack beastiality, why not crusade against the multitude of porn sites that show it?

I am sure the Danes and the LBGT community would appreciate it if you left them out of your absurd, nonsensical, irrational, closed minded attempt to defeat SSM by somehow connecting it to beastiality.

[around4ever 4,139]

I travel all over the southeast. I am thinking that the offspring of these human / animal relationships are required to live in the southeastern United States.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

The capital is Tuscalooser.

[WarTim 3,456]

Progressives moving their agenda on down the road...

[AUTUmike 79]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

Progressives moving their agenda on down the road...

So you believe beastiality is part of the progressive agenda? Really?

[DKW 86 7,426]

I travel all over the southeast. I am thinking that the offspring of these human / animal relationships are required to live in the southeastern United States.

The consensus of 97% of Scientists would agree...lol

[cooltigger21 0]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

20 years ago homosexuality was thought of the same way.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

20 years ago homosexuality was thought of the same way.

And, twenty years ago the laws reflected that point of view. STOP trying to govern the morality of the present by the moral standards of the past. Stop trying to govern the morality of the future. Some conservative.

Your argument is absolutely absurd. If you are going to argue against SSM, at least make a good argument.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Everyone knows what I think of gay marriage. That said, the comparison to pedophilia or bestiality is not an apt comparison. And it's a great way to be dismissed from the discussion right off the bat as someone the other side won't take seriously. Of course, many on the pro-SSM side dismiss anyone that doesn't fully support their view no matter what, but this is a surefire way to make that opposition 100% against you.

To me, if you want to look at an apt comparison to the next frontier of "marriage equality" and taboos to fall it will be polyandry (group marriage, for example 2 men and 3 women all married to each other) and polygamy (both one man with multiple wives and one woman with multiple husbands). These have consenting adults involved. And aside from some clerical concerns, if you don't really get why the sex of the participants matter, you really have no rational basis to claim that the number of participants do.

[cooltigger21 0]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

20 years ago homosexuality was thought of the same way. The essential point is thaxtx there are those that always seek to have their particular perversion made normsl. Once you remove the barrier for one group it's hard to just turn around and close vot before more get through. They don't think what they do as bad or harmful. In media and elsewhere, people with traditional values are portrayed as hateful, crazy people. If you believe in God and the biblical story of the creation you are all but accused of being full fledged nit ready for the world insane asylum. That stuff is for losers.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

20 years ago homosexuality was thought of the same way. The essential point is thaxtx there are those that always seek to have their particular perversion made normsl. Once you remove the barrier for one group it's hard to just turn around and close vot before more get through. They don't think what they do as bad or harmful. In media and elsewhere, people with traditional values are portrayed as hateful, crazy people. If you believe in God and the biblical story of the creation you are all but accused of being full fledged nit ready for the world insane asylum. That stuff is for losers.

Discrimination is NOT a traditional value.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUTMike.....so my post is idiotic? That's a stupid response. :-\

[icanthearyou 4,463]

AUTMike.....so my post is idiotic? That's a stupid response. :-\

No, he made an argument. He explained why. You failed to do so.

[AUTUmike 79]

AUTMike.....so my post is idiotic? That's a stupid response. :-\

No, he made an argument. He explained why. You failed to do so.

Yep, your post is indeed idiotic. By all means though, convince me otherwise by responding to my argument.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I wasn't arguing, just expressing an opinion. But I guess if you disagree with someone's opinion it is idiotic.

[AUTUmike 79]

As incredible as it may sound, we will be dealing with this issue somewhere down the road. The same sex marriage thing opened Pandora's box.

That's an idiotic statement. Just like the lunacy of likening pedophilia with homosexuality, this is a conservative idea that unsuccessfully attempts to link homosexuality with sexual actions in which one party is victimized at the expense of the other.

20 years ago homosexuality was thought of the same way. The essential point is thaxtx there are those that always seek to have their particular perversion made normsl. Once you remove the barrier for one group it's hard to just turn around and close vot before more get through. They don't think what they do as bad or harmful. In media and elsewhere, people with traditional values are portrayed as hateful, crazy people. If you believe in God and the biblical story of the creation you are all but accused of being full fledged nit ready for the world insane asylum. That stuff is for losers.

For your argument to succeed, we have to accept that homosexuality is on par with rape (of animals or children). And if that sounds ridiculous, its because it is--but that is the argument you and PT continue to make.

[AUTUmike 79]

I wasn't arguing, just expressing an opinion. But I guess if you disagree with someone's opinion it is idiotic.

If you express an opinion that is illogical and based on a backwards, bigoted framework, then yes, that opinion is idiotic.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Show me where I said that.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Why is that?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

Why is that?

"For your argument to succeed, we have to accept that homosexuality is on par with rape (of animals or children). And if that sounds ridiculous, its because it is--but that is the argument you and PT continue to make."

[augolf1716 21,207]

6 pages on having sex with animals......that's impressive....................................... I think