"chico chupacabra" perverted twisted shithead from > wrote in message ...

> pearl wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >>><snip>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>And just to be clear, you *do* endorse bestiality:
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> *As long as the feelings are mutual*,
> > > > > > > >>>>>> and there's *no coercion or force involved,* why
> > > > > > > >>>>>> should you be concerned? Personally, I have no
> > > > > > > >>>>>> problem with people's personal choices *as long as
> > > > > > > >>>>>> they don't harm or cause distress to another*- be it
> > > > > > > >>>>>> human or animal. [emphasis in original]
> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dwzj7
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>From an AR point of view. What people do in the privacy of
> > > > > > > > their own home may be sick as hell, but as long as they're not
> > > > > > > > harming or causing distress to another - that's their business.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So you endorse it. You don't condemn it. Saying it's
> > > > > > > "their business" is endorsement of it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Saying it is sick as hell is condemnation.
> > > > >
> > > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > Of course it is condemnation.
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > Of course it is condemnation.
>
> You wrote yesterday, "Whether I think there should be a law against
> it is another question." That CONDONES it, it doesn't condemn it.

So the state of Texas condones bestiality as there's no law against it?
Better get writing to your representatives to tell them to condemn it.

I wrote over two years ago that I think it is a perversion, and I do.

> > condemnation
> > 1. an expression of strong disapproval; pronouncing
> > as wrong or morally culpable
>
> Yet you still find it in your heart to condone it: "Whether I think there should be a law against it is another question."

So the state of Texas condones bestiality as there's no law against it?
Better get writing to your representatives to tell them to condemn it.

I wrote over two years ago that I think it is a perversion, and I do.

> > > We're not talking about any states. We're talking about YOU. You
> > > endorse bestiality.
> >
> > No I don't.
>
> I. You offer qualified objections to it:
> *As long as the feelings are mutual*,
> and there's *no coercion or force involved,* why
> should you be concerned? Personally, I have no
> problem with people's personal choices *as long as
> they don't harm or cause distress to another*- be it
> human or animal. [emphasis in original]
> lesley ("liesley") - http://tinyurl.com/dwzj7
>
> II. You've condoned it as a matter of privacy:
> "What people do in the privacy of their own home may be sick as hell, but as long as they're not harming or causing distress to
another - that's their business."

So the state of Texas condones bestiality as there's no law against it?
Better get writing to your representatives to tell them to condemn it.

I wrote over two years ago that I think it is a perversion, and I do.

> III. You've further stated that you'd even oppose laws against it:
> "Whether I think there should be a law against it is another question."

So the state of Texas condones bestiality as there's no law against it?
Better get writing to your representatives to tell them to condemn it.

I wrote over two years ago that I think it is a perversion, and I do.

> Whose side are you on, Lesley? The animal ****ers' side.

On the side of responsible freedom of choice.

> > And, like many, I don't believe that I've
> > the right to interfere with others' choices
>
> Unless they want to EAT an animal instead of **** it. You have a perverted sense of right and wrong, pervert.

Unless it causes harm and distress, pervert.