A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Vomitorium

[WilliamOK]

Good luck, next generation.

thefederalist.com/2015/02/10/a-funny-thing-happened-on-the-way-to-the-vomitorium/

"So are you ready to set aside “Fifty Shades of Grey” and talk about the normalization of sexual relations between humans and animals? Seriously, in November New York Magazine ran an exhaustive interview with a 42-year-old man from Canada who described in graphic detail his love affairs with horses. …

"Daily Beast author Jay Michaelson recently vindicated the old slippery slope argument by stating: “I do like the idea of same sex marriage as a liberation gateway drug.” His prediction was that same-sex marriage is likely to result in the “Christian right’s nightmare,” in which society sees the spreading of new “sexual possibilities” and practices. Gay marriage will very likely transform marriage, Michaelson asserts, and non-monogamy could very well be one of the things gays “teach” straights. In other words, a funny thing has happened on the way to complete legalization: advocates are now saying (taunting?) that gay marriage may have exactly the effect the opposition has warned against. Perhaps it’ll be, as the Daily Beast’s teaser affectionately put it, “a Bible thumper’s idea of Sodom and Gommorah.”

"Okay, so why not give that last premise some real consideration? Michaelson’s piece, basically on cause and effect, is an open invitation to speculate not just on the future of monogamy, but on the future of all “sexual possibility,” just as the Christian Right warned. …

“What if all of our sexual taboos were legalized in the interests of tolerance and freedom? Or what if normalization of all taboos was simply allowed to “evolve” in the wake of ever-more calls for ever more tolerance? …”

thefederalist.com/2015/02/10/a-funny-thing-happened-on-the-way-to-the-vomitorium/

 

[Melodeonist]

Perhaps I should become a Plain Catholic. The mainstream world is going to Hell in an hand basket (or did it arrive yet?).

 

[Ignatius]

Good luck, next generation.

thefederalist.com/2015/02/10/a-funny-thing-happened-on-the-way-to-the-vomitorium/

"So are you ready to set aside “Fifty Shades of Grey” and talk about the normalization of sexual relations between humans and animals?

“What if all of our sexual taboos were legalized in the interests of tolerance and freedom? Or what if normalization of all taboos was simply allowed to “evolve” in the wake of ever-more calls for ever more tolerance? …”

thefederalist.com/2015/02/10/a-funny-thing-happened-on-the-way-to-the-vomitorium/

There were practically no limits in the pagan world into which the The Apostles and their successors went with the Gospel. It seems to have gone full circle.

 

[GEddie]

I think it is all part of the same flop: the redefinition of marriage, the redefinition of sex and gender to make these a social construct, the drive to grant personhood to nonhuman animals while restricting it in human life – all of this is designed to cheapen life and revert to the worship of nature and sex.

I.e., the world known before our LORD.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[pianistclare]

I think it is all part of the same flop: the redefinition of marriage, the redefinition of sex and gender to make these a social construct, the drive to grant personhood to nonhuman animals while restricting it in human life – all of this is designed to cheapen life and revert to the worship of nature and sex.

I.e., the world known before our LORD.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[Bradski]

Perhaps I should become a Plain Catholic. The mainstream world is going to Hell in an hand basket (or did it arrive yet?).

Neither. You have an internet connection and now you know what has always been going on, because there are lots of other people with internet connections who can’t wait to tell you about it. In suitably horrified tones.

Twenty years ago I would have had to spend a lot of time and effort to get any literature on zoophilia (which is about as far from mainstream as you can possibly get). And I doubt very much whether I would have found a need or a reason to do so. Now detailed accounts are found two clicks away from a Catholic forum. Whodda thunk.

If you want to join in with the righteous indignation and treat all this as something which has just been discovered, proving beyond any doubt whatsoever that the barbarians are at the gate, then please feel suitably shocked.

Oh, and make sure to pass on the link to as many friends and colleagues as possible. We don’t want people going through life not knowing about these things. How would they ever know that the sky is falling if you don’t keep pointing it out.

 

[Pat_M]

Perhaps I should become a Plain Catholic. The mainstream world is going to Hell in an hand basket (or did it arrive yet?).

Whatever you do, don’t become an atheist. They have no sense of humor whatsoever!

 

[GEddie]

Does Hell, Michigan, have reserved handbasket parking???



ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

whatever you do, don’t become an atheist. They have no sense of humor whatsoever!

+1, lol!

 

[Viki63]

What I object to (and I don’t have much of a sense of humor on some issues, sorry to say) is that it traumatizes the animals.
There was a big article on a recent discovery of a sex ring involving horses, dogs, and who knows what. It was really sad, because it went into detail about the PTSD that the animals were suffering. The horses would go into panic states when approached by a man.
That is horrible. It’s animal abuse. So on top of it’s being disgustingly sinful, it’s mean.
What else is there to say?

 

[NeedsMercy]

What I object to (and I don’t have much of a sense of humor on some issues, sorry to say) is that it traumatizes the animals.
There was a big article on a recent discovery of a sex ring involving horses, dogs, and who knows what. It was really sad, because it went into detail about the PTSD that the animals were suffering. The horses would go into panic states when approached by a man.
That is horrible. It’s animal abuse. So on top of it’s being disgustingly sinful, it’s mean.
What else is there to say?

Agreed. That is the **huge **difference between sex with other consenting human adults and bestiality, rape, child sexual abuse, etc. In the latter cases, there is someone being harmed, physically, mentally and emotionally. And that is also why I dislike these type of articles that link homosexuality with bestiality, or with child molestation. There’s no comparison. And there’s nothing funny about it at all.

 

[exnihilo]

Agreed. That is the **huge **difference between sex with other consenting human adults and bestiality, rape, child sexual abuse, etc. In the latter cases, there is someone being harmed, physically, mentally and emotionally. And that is also why I dislike these type of articles that link homosexuality with bestiality, or with child molestation. There’s no comparison. And there’s nothing funny about it at all.

You seem to predicate the ‘huge’ difference on consent. But the notion that consent it the most important factor in morality is a modern notion. Even in the modern world its use seems to be limited to allowing sexual perversion. In the remnants of Christendom consent is the justification for the decriminalization of deviant sex. But all of these countries have massive governments that prohibit all manner of consensual activity. In other words the principles are all out of sorts.

If consent is the most important moral factor these giant states would not exist. But they do. That is an excellent indicator that the issue is not consent at all but justification. We justify that which is wrong.

The only thing holding back bestiality is that far too many people, maybe most, seem to care more for animals than their fellow man. They make the mistake of conceiving of the harm in hurting animals being chiefly in the animal versus in the soul of the man doing the harm.

 

[WilliamOK]

You seem to predicate the ‘huge’ difference on consent. But the notion that consent it the most important factor in morality is a modern notion. Even in the modern world its use seems to be limited to allowing sexual perversion. In the remnants of Christendom consent is the justification for the decriminalization of deviant sex. But all of these countries have massive governments that prohibit all manner of consensual activity. In other words the principles are all out of sorts.

If consent is the most important moral factor these giant states would not exist. But they do. That is an excellent indicator that the issue is not consent at all but justification. We justify that which is wrong.

The only thing holding back bestiality is that far too many people, maybe most, seem to care more for animals than their fellow man. They make the mistake of conceiving of the harm in hurting animals being chiefly in the animal versus in the soul of the man doing the harm.

They think the animal is being harmed. THAT is what bothers them. … Lord save us. And yes, I do laugh too because it is just so ridiculous all around.

Just so you all know, the indication is that most of the time the animal is not harmed, and no legal case can be made on the grounds of animal cruelty. This is because - and I apologize for having to tell you this on grounds of decorum - but the usual scenario is that the human is a male who is using an animal who is also male. I hope that is sufficient to make the point.

In Washington State, no bastion of conservatism, the only legal recourse they had was to outlaw bestiality, which they did. Yes, you heard it right, a liberal state that loves abortion and homosexual sex acts felt it necessary to outlaw a sexual practice.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw_horse_sex_case

Also note that “zoophilia” is the new “gay” version of bestiality. Note that this is the first step toward making bestiality more acceptable. They always start by thinking up a new word to call it, one that makes it sound less perverted. Zoophiles love animals right? What could be wrong with that? Lord save us.

It’s not fun to talk about this stuff. But it’s better to know what’s coming than to be shocked later. The only other choice is to bury your head in the sand. The bestiality case above was one of the most-read articles of the year in that area’s newspaper. So it would seem it is just human nature that we take note of such heinous occurrences in our communities. The only other choice is to bury one’s head in the sand. Not to dwell on it, I totally agree with that, but maybe to prepare for the future somehow? Or at least have more motivation to pray with zeal and purpose.

 

[NeedsMercy]

You seem to predicate the ‘huge’ difference on consent. But the notion that consent it the most important factor in morality is a modern notion. Even in the modern world its use seems to be limited to allowing sexual perversion. In the remnants of Christendom consent is the justification for the decriminalization of deviant sex. But all of these countries have massive governments that prohibit all manner of consensual activity. In other words the principles are all out of sorts.

If consent is the most important moral factor these giant states would not exist. But they do. That is an excellent indicator that the issue is not consent at all but justification. We justify that which is wrong.

The only thing holding back bestiality is that far too many people, maybe most, seem to care more for animals than their fellow man. They make the mistake of conceiving of the harm in hurting animals being chiefly in the animal versus in the soul of the man doing the harm.

Nowhere have I stated that “consent” is the **only **criterion to determine the morality of an action. I defy you to tell me where I made such a claim. What I am saying is that the article in question equates homosexuality with other forms of sexual activity which involve violence to another sentient being. And that allegation is a perversion of truth. My idea of “consent” has nothing to do with your idea of some sort of “justification” for what you might think is immoral behavior.

Now, you state that you are from the US. Then, you should know that sexual activity with animals is not yet illegal in all 50 states, as bizarre as that may seem. What that says to me is that people of wealth have enough influence to keep such laws on the books for whatever vile reasons they may have. Your statement that far too many people care more for animals than people—which I infer includes myself—is an insult to all people of good will towards all of God’s creation. Animals have consciousness and feelings, and experience pain and, in the Catholic faith, we believe that animals possess souls also. To do violence to another soul would be an abomination. Further, per the CCC…

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.

 

[GEddie]

Nowhere have I stated that “consent” is the **only **criterion to determine the morality of an action. I defy you to tell me where I made such a claim. What I am saying is that the article in question equates homosexuality with other forms of sexual activity which involve violence to another sentient being. And that allegation is a perversion of truth. My idea of “consent” has nothing to do with your idea of some sort of “justification” for what you might think is immoral behavior.

Now, you state that you are from the US. Then, you should know that sexual activity with animals is not yet illegal in all 50 states, as bizarre as that may seem. What that says to me is that people of wealth have enough influence to keep such laws on the books for whatever vile reasons they may have. Your statement that far too many people care more for animals than people—which I infer includes myself—is an insult to all people of good will towards all of God’s creation. Animals have consciousness and feelings, and experience pain and, in the Catholic faith, we believe that animals possess souls also. To do violence to another soul would be an abomination. Further, per the CCC…

No-one is arguing that animals do not have a soul, although the CC holds that it is not equal to a human soul. Still, animals are by definition beings with soul (anima).

Most Americans are not aware of all laws in states where they do not live. There is no need to be. That is how federalism works.

But if bestiality is not illegal in every American state, that is because the society has historically moved **away **from such prohibitions. Bestiality was illegal in the Colonies, not because of lack of animal consent, but because it was recognized as a **human **perversion.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[NeedsMercy]

They think the animal is being harmed. THAT is what bothers them. … Lord save us. And yes, I do laugh too because it is just so ridiculous all around.

Wow. I hope that you are a troll; if you are not, your ideas are très scary.

The animal **is **being harmed. Forced sex is violence. Violence is immoral. And yes, it bothers me. Forced sex on women and children also bothers people or hadn’t you noticed? And just what is so laughable and ridiculous about animals being harmed???

Just so you all know, the indication is that most of the time the animal is not harmed, and no legal case can be made on the grounds of animal cruelty. This is because - and I apologize for having to tell you this on grounds of decorum - but the usual scenario is that the human is a male who is using an animal who is also male. I hope that is sufficient to make the point.

Okay, show me your evidence that animals are **not **being harmed by being raped by humans. I want veterinary or scientific evidence. If you can’t produce it, then we can all toss your comments into the wastebin. Just so you know, 36 states have laws on the books criminalizing sexual activity with an animal, although admittedly, according to the Animal Legal Defense Fund, these are hard to get convictions on. States not having an expressly written law will prosecute under anti-cruelty laws.

aldf.org/resources/laws-cases/the-crime-of-bestialityzoophilia-sexual-assault-of-an-animal/

In Washington State, no bastion of conservatism, the only legal recourse they had was to outlaw bestiality, which they did. Yes, you heard it right, a liberal state that loves abortion and homosexual sex acts felt it necessary to outlaw a sexual practice.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw_horse_sex_case

For the record, how do you define a state which “loves abortion and homosexual sex”?

Also note that “zoophilia” is the new “gay” version of bestiality. Note that this is the first step toward making bestiality more acceptable. They always start by thinking up a new word to call it, one that makes it sound less perverted. Zoophiles love animals right? What could be wrong with that? Lord save us.

What exactly do you mean by “zoophilia [being] the new ‘gay’ version of bestiality”? Who are the “they” that you are referring to? According to most dictionaries, “zoophiles” are not people who love animals but people who are sexually drawn to animals. Like the article in question, I find your equivalence of homosexuality with bestiality repulsive and insulting, not to mention without basis in fact.

According to the American Psychological Association, sexual orientation refers to heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality — not paraphilias such as pedophilia. Paraphilias, as defined by the American Psychiatric Association, are characterized by sexual urges or behaviors directed at non-consenting persons or those unable to consent like children, or that involve another person’s psychological distress, injury, or death.

splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths

It’s not fun to talk about this stuff. But it’s better to know what’s coming than to be shocked later. The only other choice is to bury your head in the sand. The bestiality case above was one of the most-read articles of the year in that area’s newspaper. So it would seem it is just human nature that we take note of such heinous occurrences in our communities. The only other choice is to bury one’s head in the sand. Not to dwell on it, I totally agree with that, but maybe to prepare for the future somehow? Or at least have more motivation to pray with zeal and purpose.

The only people burying their heads in the sand are those people that think that animals are not cruelly harmed by bestiality and those who think that bestiality is not immoral for such reasons. I don’t foresee a future with a country full of zoophiles. My prayers right now include an end to all ongoing animal cruelty, which includes bestiality, and a conversion of all abusers.

 

[NeedsMercy]

No-one is arguing that animals do not have a soul, although the CC holds that it is not equal to a human soul. Still, animals are by definition beings with soul (anima).

Most Americans are not aware of all laws in states where they do not live. There is no need to be. That is how federalism works.

But if bestiality is not illegal in every American state, that is because the society has historically moved **away **from such prohibitions. Bestiality was illegal in the Colonies, not because of lack of animal consent, but because it was recognized as a **human **perversion.

ICXC NIKA.

GEddie, I included the part about the soul because exnihilo has defined himself as Protestant and may not be familiar with this part of Catholic tradition. Not all Catholics are aware of it.

Also, my statement about the legality of bestiality in the various states was in response to his comment:

The only thing holding back bestiality is that far too many people, maybe most, seem to care more for animals than their fellow man.

I was trying to show that *not enough *people care for animals.

As far as laws prohibiting bestiality, I think it is time for the pendulum to swing the other way, if indeed that is the history of such laws. Knowing what we know today about animal consciousness, communication, intelligence and societal behavior should engender us to more rigorously protect animals from such reprehensible human behavior.

 

[exnihilo]

Nowhere have I stated that “consent” is the **only **criterion to determine the morality of an action. I defy you to tell me where I made such a claim.

And nowhere did I claim you did.

What I am saying is that the article in question equates homosexuality with other forms of sexual activity which involve violence to another sentient being. And that allegation is a perversion of truth. My idea of “consent” has nothing to do with your idea of some sort of “justification” for what you might think is immoral behavior.

I don’t get that from the article. I thought the article was pointing out that other forms of deviant sex could be considered normal. I didn’t see violence as being a factor in most of those forms. Homosexual sex is however like other deviant forms of sex in so far as being deviant.

Now, you state that you are from the US. Then, you should know that sexual activity with animals is not yet illegal in all 50 states, as bizarre as that may seem. What that says to me is that people of wealth have enough influence to keep such laws on the books for whatever vile reasons they may have.

Maybe. Or maybe it just wasn’t that big of a problem until recently. Anyway it doesn’t matter what the law is the courts now tell us what is moral and what is not.

Your statement that far too many people care more for animals than people—which I infer includes myself—is an insult to all people of good will towards all of God’s creation. Animals have consciousness and feelings, and experience pain and, in the Catholic faith, we believe that animals possess souls also. To do violence to another soul would be an abomination. Further, per the CCC…

I don’t know your thoughts on this matter or mean to imply what your thoughts are.

I understand the Catholic position (essentially Aristotelian) and agree with it. But the chief evil being done when being cruel to animals is to the soul of the man being cruel. The physical evil the animal suffers is less evil than the moral evil. It seems to me many people focus on the physical evil the animal suffers. While this is real it is not the greater issue.

 

[on_the_hill]

It’s not fun to talk about this stuff.

Then why talk about it?

 

[mikekle]

Its always been my opinion that the current LGBT groups fighting for more rights, are going to open the doors to all kinds of crazy things in the near future, I think before too long, gay marriage will be protected at the federal level in every state, they have been changing public perception of gay people over the past decade or so, and its working…its quite normal to see gay sex scenes on tv shows, movies, when this kind of thing would have never happened just 10-15 yrs ago. This is just the beginning imo,

Ive seen tv shows about people who actually are in love with objects, (cars, animals, one guy it was balloons, another was literally trying to marry his car, he also claimed he had ‘sex’ with this car regularly lol), I dont doubt that this is happening either, I have a feeling once the LGBT crowd gets all they want, the next group ‘in line’ will start fighting for their rights, probably using the same tactics the LGBT groups used successfully, They will slowly change public perception of their ‘interests’ no matter how crazy or wrong it initially seems, it happened with the gay crowd, no reason why it wont be the exact same for other groups out there too. (people who desire relationships with animals, children, objects, etc.)

We are definitely heading down a bad road when it comes to this topic! I think its scary how they can change public perception in such a relatively short amount of time too.