Originally Posted by fxashun

Well here we go....
If the title of this thread is to reflect the impetus that started it, it has the wrong name. No one is advocating animal marriage. What I am trying to figure out is how is any thinking person supposed to come to the conclusion that homosexuality is any more "normal" than the other deviant sexual desires. Homosexual people say sex isn't for procreation, and it doesn't matter that our bodies obviously weren't designed for homosexual activity any more than any the other deviant desires, not to mention that not a single religion (which over 90% of humans follow) condones and many specifically condemn it. Additionally, there is not a single livign organism that has found a need to reproduce homosexually.

Before I can come to terms with allowing homosexual people to "marry", a term that signifies the natural and obviously correct orientation for humans to couple, someone needs to explain to me how I'm supposed to separate homosexuality from zoophilia and pedophilia in more concrete terms than legal and consent. Because to me, while they are all urges that point in different directions, they are all abnormal in that they bastardize the instinct that points human affection in a direction our bodies were designed.

We can't look to the APA since they have already destroyed any credibility as a scientific organization with their social stance on this subject. The decision to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders is suspect. As I pointed out in a previous post how can you deem homosexuals "normal" but you have to "educate" people into believing it too. Especially with no scientific proof that homosexuality is any more medically normal than the other sexual defects.

For example, I have heard that homosexuality "might" or "could" be population control. Really? Well couldn't zoophilia fall under that umbrella too? No kids will result from it. Sounds plausible to me. I mean if you are gonna ignore procreation and biology and just do "what works" men have been having sex with animals forever. Why is zoophilia still a disorder? Some members of the APA have pointed out this discrepancy, so I'm not the only one to come to this conclusion. And in the DSM III they state "stated that sexual contact with animals is almost never a clinically significant problem by itself".
Bestial.eu
So should we consider a law abiding zoophile "normal" too? Just as with homosexuality, the largest problem the zoophile seems to have is the "uneducated" masses.

And what about the "other animals do it" defense for homosexuality. There have been instances of cross species sex documented. In fact National Geographic did a article on it.
Interspecies Sex: Evolution's Hidden Secret?
Maybe there is a natural internal drive for humans to mate with other species too? Are the states that are enacting laws to make bestiality a crime imposing on these people natural urge, just like the sodomy laws used to do to homosexuals? I mean if we are to come to the conclusion that it is "normal" and I don't see how it's not if homosexuality is.

What about the "I was born this way" or "would I choose to be gay" reason. Well do you think someone chooses to love a goat, dog, or horse? Sounds like quite a stretch considering the social climate of the today. According to this zoophile,he would like to marry his animal lover..
Ontario Superior Court, Same Sex Marriage, Zoophilia
"Philip Buble is just one of many zoophiles who think that they should be able to marry their four-legged loved ones. The argument that they raise to support their position is that since the definition is of marriage is no longer restricted to a union between a man and a woman, it need not be restricted persons. People like Buble should not have to endure discrimination and a loss of self esteem due to their sexual orientation and lifestyle choices."



We've changed the laws prohibiting homicide to allow for those that choose to abort, we are being asked to change the marriage laws to allow for those that choose to marry their own gender, why is it such a stretch for us to change the law a bit more to allow for a person to legally recognize their love for their animal lover. I mean since procreation, and physiology and religion can't be used as basis for marriage laws, what is there to keep it from happening. All we are doing is recognizing "love" and who are we to control what "people do in their bedroom/barn/trailer" though "unfair laws based on religion?