User talk:Zoophile

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Zoophile! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

Would asking you to stop help any? --Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:10, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

If bestiality is wrong because animals can't give consent then for that same reason you should be a vegetarian because animals can't give consent to wanting to be eaten--Zoophile 02:12, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but we have to be a tad careful. I have no issue with the edit, so I put it back. Human still may have an issue. --Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:13, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Human has problems with basic fundamental rights, and supports authorian oppression of animals which have done no wrong --Zoophile 02:16, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Huh? I mean Human. --Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:18, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Would you kill your aunt/ cousin etc. of course not and for that same reason I will not kill animals --Zoophile 02:20, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

I happen to disagree but that's just me. I like the edit because if your not opposed to eating meat but are opposed to beastility, which is basically the same thing with consent, in a wierd way. --Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:25, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Does our Zoophile friend support the raising, murdering, and eating of innocent plants? ħuman 02:43, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Plants share a very small amount of our DNA for example bananas share only about 50% of your DNA, while mammals share more than 90%, lesser of two evils --Zoophile 02:44, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

You lose. You are justifying eating plants because they are less like us. End of argument. ħuman 02:54, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

But Animals can't rationalize or think. They work on pure instinct. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:46, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

That is not true there is one gorilla I heard of who communicates in sign language, also from the argument you could eat people who are mentally challenged --Zoophile 02:47, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Maybe that gorilla is the missing link. Mentally challenged people, just like babies can communicate when afraid or in need. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:49, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Not true some mentally challenged people on an intellectual level are vegetables --Zoophile 02:51, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Do you mean someone like Terry Schaivo? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:51, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

No, what I meant is some people suffer from extreme cases of retardation --Zoophile 02:53, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

But they are still human. They are still people. Animals aren't people. They don't think, they don't feel. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:57, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Even bees can communicate --Zoophile 02:58, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Zoophile, we are all entitled to draw differing lines when it comes to which animals we should include within our protective sphere. There are religions groups in India which are very careful not to kill any insects as they go because killing insects is destroying a life. Some people are vegetarians but will eat fish, some vegetarians but not vegans. Some don't support cruelty to animals but will kill them provided they are caused no pain. Some don't even care about causing pain to animals.

Under your philosophy those who are prepared to kill more animals than others could be considered more immoral. Thus to the Indian fella, you who walks down the road being painstakingly careful not to harm any insects are a monster. It all depends on what we personally include within our list of animals to protect. We are all entitled to our opinions but please stop trying to assert there is a moral issue here. I just don't think there is one.--Damo2353 03:10, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Liberal

I wouldn't make that edit again, it fails, even as parody. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 03:08, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

You seem like a very good editor, and I really don't want to have to block you for even a second. Please stop it. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:09, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

If I can find sources can the text be put back in, are you acting like this because of Lieingbral deceit --Zoophile 03:11, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

No. There is no way to verify anything but the Dawkins quote, which I doubt happened. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:14, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

My bad. That you may do. Why not make an essay correlating Beastiality and Meat-Eating. It would be a very valued addition. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:16, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Would you people who know better please use indents, so our zoophiliac friend will also know how to use them? PS, other monkeys are 98% my DNA, all else is a lesser evil. Why, gee, M. Zoophilistine, I bet you live on nuts and berries! Wait, no, they too deserve to live. Eat rocks. ħuman 03:17, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Why would you group Dawkins with all liberals? It's like Conservapedia saying that Liberals hate women because John Edwards said Ann Coulter was a she-devil. Put it on dawkins page if you want, but it does not belong on the liberal page. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:25, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

QUIT TRYING TO KILL MY LULZ--Zoophile 03:26, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

QUIT TRYING TO KILL MAI KITTEH! ħuman 04:32, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Wherein I propose that our new friend, Zoophile, is an unproductive bore

Zoooophile, I notice that we have an article on veganism. Maybe at one of those your efforts would actually be appreciated - as in, you can present the perspective, link to other articles, and argue the case, by editing there? Pleas quit leaving your silly arguments on our sex with animals article (but feel free to leave a link there? - PS, witty is always appreciated here)ħuman 04:38, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

He may need to be moved from the vandal cat first. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 14:55, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Ooooh... what's the consensus on that? ħuman 17:37, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ <blink>⇨</blink> ↕ ▽ ←} .smret tsegnorts eht ni erusaem siht esoppo I .eno t'nsi erehT