Why is anal sex forbidden by most abrahamic religions?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

keiskay:

im sorry but you're way to passionate about your lust for animals

n0pe, I don't have a lust for animals, I have a lust for logic and sense (and capital letters). This law doesn't seem to make any sense. It's undefendable, yet, it exists.

that you refuse to read anything i have quoted or wrote.

Like what? What epic arguments or facts have I missed?

please re-read the thread and come up with a REAL argument for why you want to have relations with animals.

I'm opposing a ban and pro-freedom, you're in favor of the ban. You're the one who has to provide an argument, not me. If you want to do something, and it can't be proven by anyone that the thing you're doing is harmful, there is no reason to ban it. And by the way; if you have proven that one form of bestiality is harmful, you haven't made an argument, because I'm in favor of the law that bans cruelty to animals. The only way your it's-harmful-argument makes sense, is when it covers ALL BESTIALITY. ALL FORMS. Every erotic action between a human and a non-human. You even have to proof that getting a blowjob from an elephant is harmful.

I guess I misinterpreted it. I thought the reason why having sex with a man was because anal sex was forbidden. I guess the sin isn't sex without procreation after all, but just being against gays

Which is actually worse than i thought it was.

And derailment to bestiality is shocking. I usually thought that the whole gay sex leading to bestiality thing would be from a strong opponent to homosexuality, not from a supporter. Please end this stupid derailment.

Kendarik:

keiskay:

Show me studies where animals are trained by other animals to do stupid pet tricks.

And since you want studies, show me studies where this harm you talk about is documented.

http://stopbestiality.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/negative-effects-of-bestiality-on-dogs/

I could have sworn I said study, not a random blog with no evidence beyond their opinion.

fine were is your study supporting your view point and saying its completely natural. i never said children were the same as animals i simply stated that by your logic for your justifications that those actions could literally be justified the same way. children are generally viewed as unable to conesnt since most of them have no idea what they are actually doing. you said you see it as in now way wrong to teach a dog to have sex with humans since you construed it as a trick. i pointed out that pedophiles tell children that they are playing a game. my argument is completely valid to this discussion.

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

Me too, I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet. I thought that all cards were on the table in Christianity, and this website seems to back it up. Not sure about other religions.

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

I was actually expecting someone to provide it. Especially you because you claim that its ok for two men to love eachother, but not okay for them to have sex with eachother.

Danyal:

keiskay:

im sorry but you're way to passionate about your lust for animals

n0pe, I don't have a lust for animals, I have a lust for logic and sense (and capital letters). This law doesn't seem to make any sense. It's undefendable, yet, it exists.

that you refuse to read anything i have quoted or wrote.

Like what? What epic arguments or facts have I missed?

please re-read the thread and come up with a REAL argument for why you want to have relations with animals.

I'm opposing a ban and pro-freedom, you're in favor of the ban. You're the one who has to provide an argument, not me. If you want to do something, and it can't be proven by anyone that the thing you're doing is harmful, there is no reason to ban it. And by the way; if you have proven that one form of bestiality is harmful, you haven't made an argument, because I'm in favor of the law that bans cruelty to animals. The only way your it's-harmful-argument makes sense, is when it covers ALL BESTIALITY. ALL FORMS. Every erotic action between a human and a non-human. You even have to proof that getting a blowjob from an elephant is harmful.

well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_health its harmful to you.

Esotera:

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

Me too, I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet. I thought that all cards were on the table in Christianity, and this website seems to back it up. Not sure about other religions.

Thank you. This was contrary to the knowledge that i was taught when i was a christian. A misunderstanding on my part

Warforger:

Because the animal does not consent to it, like say a child, that's the main difference I'd guess.

Danyal:

In a kind of Utopian world where all animals get treated this way, I could understand your vision. If you are vegetarian and oppose people who eat meat, I could understand your arguments.

And...
-nearly everyone who opposes bestiality and is in favor of the ban, EATS MEAT!
Sex with animals is rape? And how would you call the locking up of animals and killing them at the end of their imprisonment to eat them?

Danyal:

We don't give a shit about animal consent, because we don't ask the consent of animals then we imprison and murder then.
We dó give a shit about the consent of animals, ánd we don't give children the ability to consent.

We don't treat animals and children in the same way. At least, not in my country, I hope it's the same in your country (or animals have a really good position and cannot be imprisoned or murdered).

keiskay:

Danyal:

keiskay:

im sorry but you're way to passionate about your lust for animals

n0pe, I don't have a lust for animals, I have a lust for logic and sense (and capital letters). This law doesn't seem to make any sense. It's undefendable, yet, it exists.

that you refuse to read anything i have quoted or wrote.

Like what? What epic arguments or facts have I missed?

please re-read the thread and come up with a REAL argument for why you want to have relations with animals.

I'm opposing a ban and pro-freedom, you're in favor of the ban. You're the one who has to provide an argument, not me. If you want to do something, and it can't be proven by anyone that the thing you're doing is harmful, there is no reason to ban it. And by the way; if you have proven that one form of bestiality is harmful, you haven't made an argument, because I'm in favor of the law that bans cruelty to animals. The only way your it's-harmful-argument makes sense, is when it covers ALL BESTIALITY. ALL FORMS. Every erotic action between a human and a non-human. You even have to proof that getting a blowjob from an elephant is harmful.

well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_health its harmful to you.

It doesn't seem more harmful than regular unrestricted and unprotected sex doing all kinds of weird shit with multiple partners, and it doesn't seem more harmful than smoking or drinking alcohol. Doesn't seem like a valid reason for a ban.

Danyal:

Warforger:

Because the animal does not consent to it, like say a child, that's the main difference I'd guess.

Danyal:

In a kind of Utopian world where all animals get treated this way, I could understand your vision. If you are vegetarian and oppose people who eat meat, I could understand your arguments.

And...
-nearly everyone who opposes bestiality and is in favor of the ban, EATS MEAT!
Sex with animals is rape? And how would you call the locking up of animals and killing them at the end of their imprisonment to eat them?

Danyal:

We don't give a shit about animal consent, because we don't ask the consent of animals then we imprison and murder then.
We dó give a shit about the consent of animals, ánd we don't give children the ability to consent.

We don't treat animals and children in the same way. At least, not in my country, I hope it's the same in your country (or animals have a really good position and cannot be imprisoned or murdered).

I know you don't like bestiality being banned, but bringing up the topic meant to discuss why gay sex is so bad is highly highly insulting to gay people like me.

And the Derailment of the Year Award goes to...

taciturnCandid:

I know you don't like bestiality being banned, but bringing up the topic meant to discuss why gay sex is so bad is highly highly insulting to gay people like me.

Really there wasn't much to discuss. He was wrong about the problem being anal as far I as I know. There is a direct prohibition about men carnally knowing men.

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

You can't post something that doesn't exist.

keiskay:

Kendarik:

keiskay:

http://stopbestiality.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/negative-effects-of-bestiality-on-dogs/

I could have sworn I said study, not a random blog with no evidence beyond their opinion.

fine were is your study supporting your view point and saying its completely natural. i never said children were the same as animals i simply stated that by your logic for your justifications that those actions could literally be justified the same way. children are generally viewed as unable to conesnt since most of them have no idea what they are actually doing. you said you see it as in now way wrong to teach a dog to have sex with humans since you construed it as a trick. i pointed out that pedophiles tell children that they are playing a game. my argument is completely valid to this discussion.

Hey you are the one that wanted studies, I was just pointing out that you don't have any either.

And your argument is totally strawman unless you want to claim that people and animals are the same. I can shoot my pet in the head, not so much my child. I can slaughter an animal for food, once again, not so much for my child. I can sell a pet, and again, not a child.

Consent doesn't apply to animals as it does to humans so your comparison is silly.

Da hell did this topic get turned into lots of bestiality discussion? I came expecting some hot tips about anal activities rigorous debate about the morality and ethics of the question at hand. With OP on this, stop derailing the train... Or at least explain to me how it has any relevance to the question at hand.

Danyal:

We don't treat animals and children in the same way. At least, not in my country, I hope it's the same in your country (or animals have a really good position and cannot be imprisoned or murdered).

Oh I know that, but eating animals is natural, having inter-specie sex isn't. I personally don't care about bestiality really.

Warforger:

Danyal:

We don't treat animals and children in the same way. At least, not in my country, I hope it's the same in your country (or animals have a really good position and cannot be imprisoned or murdered).

Oh I know that, but eating animals is natural, having inter-specie sex isn't. I personally don't care about bestiality really.

Please provide a scientific definition of "natural". Also are you suggesting that only natural things are good?

taciturnCandid:
One of the arguments I've heard is that God doesn't find anything wrong with homosexuals, but it is a sin to engage in sexual acts other than vaginal intercourse. The only thing that this would provide an advantage for is in a group with a small population trying to reproduce, but we no longer live in a small population.

So why is it a sin? If God really wanted to make it a sin, then why did he make it so pleasurable for both parties involved? I can understand the person on top having an experience similar to vaginal penetration and having it feel good, but why does it feel so good to be on the receiving end?

From what i understand, it is called sodomy to engage in any act that isn't vaginal sex. So what about cases where men have anal sex with women? Is it just as bad, and why?

It seems to me that before homosexuals can make any sort of ground with fundamentalists, then this has to be changed.

because people in churches want you to ( and i quote this from a former theology teacher, i might go to a high school where I can take mandarin chinese and astrophysics, but i have to take a few theology classes while im there which blows) "be open to the possibility of a child" in other words, if you in any way shape or form try to not have a kid during sex, its a sin. Because "obviously" all sexual acts are for is procreation and a "holy sign of Gods love". Bleh, So Glad i gave up on nonsense. I owe a particular thanks to this website for that.

Esotera:

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

Me too, I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet. I thought that all cards were on the table in Christianity, and this website seems to back it up. Not sure about other religions.

taciturnCandid:

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

I was actually expecting someone to provide it. Especially you because you claim that its ok for two men to love eachother, but not okay for them to have sex with eachother.

I recommend that you read the link Esotera provided. It can explain things better than I can.

Kendarik:

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

You can't post something that doesn't exist.

Which is basically my point.

Wow, crimson5pheonix is going to be pissed...

OT: It isn't forbidden in Christianity, as far as I know. I have never encountered a verse in the bible that forbid it, so I assume it would be okay. I don't know enough about Judaism or Islam to comment on those.

Esotera:

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

Me too, I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet. I thought that all cards were on the table in Christianity, and this website seems to back it up. Not sure about other religions.

Are you sure that page is legit? Their threesome page makes me think they are either an elaborate prank or some horny dude with a Bible trying whatever excuse he can think of to get his born-again wife get up to a bunch of kinky stuff with him.

EDITED TO ADD: For feth's sake, they have a passage titled, "Fisting as an Act of Faith."

taciturnCandid:

And derailment to bestiality is shocking. I usually thought that the whole gay sex leading to bestiality thing would be from a strong opponent to homosexuality, not from a supporter. Please end this stupid derailment.

I will end the derailment, but if you had read what I actually stated, it was because the arguments against bestiality and anal sex are roughly the same.
*Boohoo it isn't natural!*
Not because I thought bestiality leads to gay sex or something. It was not too insult you, or gay people, and if I was trying to insult anyone, it's moralfags who have extremely bad arguments against both homosexuality and bestiality.

Well, for one the word "sodomy" doesn't actually appear in the Bible, where it does it's translated from terms which have no relation to Sodom at all. In its current form it's an English word dating back to the few centuries after the reformation.

Obviously, it gets its name from the city of Sodom, which is recorded in the Bible as a very sinful place, and is associated with same-sex intercourse. The key line here is, and this has been the normative reading:

NIV:
They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

However, I'm told a more literal translation is:

ESV:
And they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.

Which doesn't have to be sexual at all. Just like in English, 'to know' someone in Hebrew can be both a sexual or non-sexual term, it's not really clear which one this is. Lot's reaction suggests the former, but it's not really clear.

The idea of homosexual sex specifically as 'the sin of sodom' (peccacum sodomiticum) dates to the 6th century, specifically to the Roman Emperor Justinian who was the first Christian to legally mandate the punishment of same sex intercourse with the death penalty..

But the actual word 'sodomy' is a much more recent product of puritanism and counter-reformational Catholic doctrine which were increasingly opposed to the idea of sex as anything but a tool for making babies.

So yeah, there's nothing Biblical whatsoever to suggest that anal sex is bad. There's very little Biblically to suggest that same sex intercouse is bad. As with most of the things modern Christians tend to claim the Bible says, 90% of this is later doctrine and suspect translation.

Danyal:

taciturnCandid:

And derailment to bestiality is shocking. I usually thought that the whole gay sex leading to bestiality thing would be from a strong opponent to homosexuality, not from a supporter. Please end this stupid derailment.

I will end the derailment, but if you had read what I actually stated, it was because the arguments against bestiality and anal sex are roughly the same.
*Boohoo it isn't natural!*
Not because I thought bestiality leads to gay sex or something. It was not too insult you, or gay people, and if I was trying to insult anyone, it's moralfags who have extremely bad arguments against both homosexuality and bestiality.

except homosexuality does occur in nature. i have yet to see a dog fucking a cat or vice versa.

Katatori-kun:

Are you sure that page is legit? Their threesome page makes me think they are either an elaborate prank or some horny dude with a Bible trying whatever excuse he can think of to get his born-again wife get up to a bunch of kinky stuff with him.

EDITED TO ADD: For feth's sake, they have a passage titled, "Fisting as an Act of Faith."

Sorry, I've been drinking so didn't check the site...my bad. I'm still fairly sure that there's nothing specifically against anal sex in vanilla Christianity though...it'd be nice to see someone find a link to prove or disprove it either way.

keiskay:

except homosexuality does occur in nature. i have yet to see a dog fucking a cat or vice versa.

Danyal:
In the Netherlands today, we consider bestiality a sin, uh, a crime, even while we have got laws that criminalizes cruelty to animals. ?!?! Lot of people on this forum seem to agree with the law, so you could ask them why they consider it a sin/crime.

Dude, drop it. (S)He's not talking about beastiality, (s)he's talking about anal sex preformed on humans.

Blatherscythe:

Danyal:
In the Netherlands today, we consider bestiality a sin, uh, a crime, even while we have got laws that criminalizes cruelty to animals. ?!?! Lot of people on this forum seem to agree with the law, so you could ask them why they consider it a sin/crime.

Dude, drop it. (S)He's not talking about beastiality, (s)he's talking about anal sex preformed on humans.

Did you actually follow the discussion and read my reasons for posting it? But I created a thread to discuss bestiality. Won't need to discuss it here anymore.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.339175-End-the-ban-on-bestiality

Seekster:
So am I the only one who has noticed that nobody (at least as far as I can see) has actually posted a verse from the Bible concerning anal sex?

I'm not as concerned with that as with the lack of mention of health information, like the fact that evidence suggests that rectal tearing creates higher higher incidents of infection, whether STIs or other.

Not to mention at the times the Bible was written, there wasn't personal sanitation levels necessary to protect the penetrator from disease.

Me- I would love to have anal sex with you honey.

Girl- Thats disgusting, how could you be so vulgar.

Me- I am sorry, let me say it in a nice way.

Me- I would like to make love to your butt.

Girl- Asshole.

Kendarik:

Warforger:

Danyal:

We don't treat animals and children in the same way. At least, not in my country, I hope it's the same in your country (or animals have a really good position and cannot be imprisoned or murdered).

Oh I know that, but eating animals is natural, having inter-specie sex isn't. I personally don't care about bestiality really.

Please provide a scientific definition of "natural". Also are you suggesting that only natural things are good?

Erm what? I'm not going by what I think, like I said in that last sentence I don't care, does eating other animals happen in the wild usually? Yes. Does a gorilla fucking a zebra happen in the wild? I'm not too sure about that. That's the popular definition.

The only other reason to be against it is if the animals had any consent towards the sex which would be really hard to prove, but then again we also murder them without their consent so there's that.

keiskay:

Danyal:
In the Netherlands today, we consider bestiality a sin, uh, a crime, even while we have got laws that criminalizes cruelty to animals. ?!?! Lot of people on this forum seem to agree with the law, so you could ask them why they consider it a sin/crime.

animals have no way to consent. its also mentally damaging for the animal and changes the animals mental understanding of human beings. plus its excessively cruel and not natural.

I despise the "not natural" argument. Mostly because it assumes nature is synthetic.

Fact: Primates sometimes use other animals for masturbation. In certain cases, they use a frog's mouth as an extremely primitive fleshlight. You can google this. It happens. This is just one example.

The "not natural" argument always fails, because everything is derived from natural sources. Its the worst argument since "the bible tells me so."

What plenty of people are rightly trying to point out here is that what is natural or not doesn't matter for our evaluation of whether it should be allowed or not because things happening in nature cannot because of that fact alone be considered morally good. In fact, nature is pretty much amoral. Laying eggs in living animals with the larvae eating the animals from the inside is perfectly acceptable in nature because it works for the procreation of the species. Simple as that, no morality involved.

Or maybe the Bible was written...BY A WOMAN?!?!

Istvan:
I guess the rule was created because it was viewed as unclean, same reason as pork being forbidden in some places.

I think we have a winner here. Compared to vaginal sex or oral sex, anal sex is not only more advanced, but also heightens the risk that the reciever will be hurt in one way or another. Add to that the fact that the bacterial culture of the colon and rectum are of the kind that can cause some nasty diseases if they appear somewhere else (such as another persons genitals, oral cavity etc.) and that the bible was written in a time and place where showering after sex was out of the question and it should be pretty obvious why it would be forbidden.

It runs the risk of giving the reciever an infected wound and the giver a bacterial infection, which would effectively risk the life of both at the time. Just like pork quickly spoiled in the heat of the middle east and thus became dangerous to eat.

My understanding was that the anti-sodomy came from the same place as the anti-masturbation. God doesn't like you to spill your seed outside of a vagina.

I always thought that story was kind of taken out of context though. As far as I know God never says anything to the guy specifically out ejaculating outside of a vagina, he punishes the guy because he tells him to father a child with the woman and he doesn't want to so he ejaculates on the ground, God gets pissed and gets Old Testament on his ass. To me it always seemed more like God was punishing him for not doing what he was told, rather than being mad at the simple act of ejaculating outside of a vagina.

Of course this overlooks many things. You can have anal sex and just not ejaculate. What about men who are infertile, etc. But hey, that's religion for you.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked