Qwerthy
#567465
2008-Jun-09 07:44 AM
@Beeblebrox
My response here is almost certain to garner me some lampooning, but:
(1) We don't care about animals' consent when we eat them or force them to perform tasks or use them in medical experiment, so why should sex be different?
(2) What if someone added consent in their will that their body be used for necrophilia?
Child molestation is, of course, to be condemned in that the person is a human being who cannot give informed consent.
1. Animals have no rights. They lack the self-awareness that is a necessary component of obtaining them. What animals do have is a measure of dignity, respect, and consideration that we grant them. Raising animals for food and for medical experimentation are activities that produce positive results at a minimum of cruelty. Having sex with animals (apart from any potential health risks) is not an activity that will produce positive results and falls into the category of cruelty.
2. The disposition of Human corpses is governed by law as a necessary part of maintaining public health. Decaying bodies are not famous for being hygenic and will draw pests and breed disease. There is limited discretion granted to the deceased/loved ones in terms of disposal, i.e. sprinkling ashes over certain locations; donating one's body to science;, etc. However, this latitude is sharply limited where it could negatively affect the public health.
I wouldn't lampoon anyone for asking questions. In fact the questions presented were reasonably sensible and could, under the right circumstances, be considered valid debating points.
