And they are both right
That’s the thing that bothers me about religious people, the only thing stopping the lot of them from committing heinous crimes is the fear of eternal damnation. It’s like they have no morals at all.
Look at your “religious” politicians. It is just a tool to control the stupid they don’t believe in any of it.
Some of them don’t. Even facing “eternal damnation”, they’ll still commit terrible crimes.
And I thought the ubiquitous Christian baby was bad…
I think the hypothetical doesn’t have much to do with morality. There is no moral reason not to. But there are other reasons.
Actions don’t have to be immoral for them to be judged or questioned. People who’d have sex with a dead deer aren’t hurting anyone, but they are making choices that would ordinarily lead one to be sceptical of them as a person and be weary of other choices they might have made you are not aware of and if the choices they will make in the future.
wary*
Is that the best argument you’ve got, my god fearing friend?
^(non-native speakers are gone non-native speak. Appreciate the correction, but people make mistakes on the internet all the time. It’s quite a job to take on to correct all of them.)
Putting aside the “why the hell would you want to do that?” aspect, let’s assume that you’re the guy in the picture and you do. It would be morally wrong even if the deer were alive because a non-human animal cannot give consent. It’s wrong after it’s dead because it’s disrespectful to the deer, which was once a living being. Don’t need religion to understand that.
It’s wrong after it’s dead because it’s disrespectful to the deer, which was once a living being.
But people eat the deer with zero moral qualms. Are you really going to tell me that yanking something’s skin off, cracking its bones, gouging out its internal organs, and processing its meat into sausages for roasting is a sign of respect?
If the animal represents your only available food source, consuming it is required to continue living.
You aren’t going to die if you fail to rape a dead animal, but you might if you fail to eat one.
is it true that anyone rich enough to eat deer meat need it, or any kind of meat at that, to survive?
For how many people do you think animals are the only viable food source? How many in this thread? Like 10%? Sure hope anyone with options therefore doesn’t…
well, why is it we should disrespect? don’t give me wrong, i agree hat we should respect, but many customs of respect like this one seem to have origins nearly as arbitrary as faith
I mean there are evolutionary reasons most humans feel disgust towards things, in this case mainly the spread of disease. If none of these were problems, there isn’t really a good moral case to be made against it unless you believe in some sort of afterlife.
I don’t think you’ll get consensus on the “it’s disrespectful” reasoning. It might not be inherently religious (although most religions I’m aware of expand upon it to specific procedures or prohibitions) but “respecting” the vessel which once contained a life seems very much tied up in sentimentality and woowoo more than sound reasoning or pragmatism. It’s just engrained into social norms at this point but, purely speculation, burial and burning were probably done for the same reasons other animals do it - you don’t attract other predators or suffer the scent of death inviting maggots, flies and other vectors for disease. It probably became more ritualistic and religious over time. If I’m dead someone can dangle my lads from their rearview like a pair of fuzzy dice for all I care - which will be not at all because I’m dead.
Getting any part of one’s body inside a dead carcass has nothing to do with morals…. It’s fucking DISGUSTING! Remember that piece of meat is currently being eaten and digested by billions of bacterias. All eating and defecating everywhere inside and out… flies have burrowed eggs in it, worms are crawling everywhere, and all this is releasing toxic gases from all the rotting and digesting…. Also all the sphincters have released so the bowels are leaking out …! Nope…nope….nope….!!!
Remember that piece of meat is currently being eaten and digested by billions of bacterias. All eating and defecating everywhere inside and out… flies have burrowed eggs in it, worms are crawling everywhere, and all this is releasing toxic gases from all the rotting and digesting
A proper Appalachia Orgy
Excuse me what
I don’t know that I would say that it is wrong, morally. It is fucking disgusting though, like from a sanitary perspective, it is indicative of an aberrant psychology and poor judgement, likely detrimental to your health, it would have massive social consequences if people knew about it, and there are far more safe, healthy, and socially acceptable ways to achieve the same ends. So you objectively should not be doing that. But I don’t think that it is any more morally wrong to fuck a rotting carcass than than to eat it. I would still highly discourage both practices though.
What if you knew noone would see you and the deer pussy was still fresh and warm?
Get a deer tick on my junk? No thanks.
What if you knew there’d be no consequences - just deer pussy?
Can I help you, dude?
Idk maybe drive recklessly through West Virginia in the fall
It also cannot consent, and I am big into consent, though
Douglas Adams actually explored this. In The Restaurant at The End of the Universe, Arthur is waited upon by a sentient bovine creature whose species wants to be eaten and spend their lives conditioning themselves to be as succulent as possible.
Arthur was preeetty fuckin weirded out by that.
Yeah, is it consent if you are genetically forced to be consenting?
I loved that part of the book, fellow hitchhiker.
Is it consent if everything is deterministic and free will is an illusion???
Okay, I am going to go drink some whiskey
genetically forced
Dude is deep as the 10th circle of hell.
Cuz like are they forced? They were spawned by the infinitely possible universe. Implying that free will itself is fundamentally constrained by biology, or perhaps the deterministic nature of the universe itself.
It reminds me of the lyrics,
Are we not good enough?
Are we not brave enough?
Is the violence in our nature
Just the image of our maker?
Now you are quoting Rise Against!? Are you me?
I mean, it’s not like we care about consent when it comes to the animals we eat, or whose secretions we drink. Weird to draw the line at sex/rape, but not at killing/murder.
I don’t think objects without a subjective experience need to give or are capable of giving consent. I don’t think anyone needs to ask their fleshlight for consent, e.g.
If it were a living deer, then it would need to give consent but be unable to. (I think it’s reasonable to say any supposed communications from the deer is less trustworthy than “Facilitated Communication”, and not sufficient consent.)
Morality doesn’t exist.
Morality is just Empathy re-branded by religion in order to be codified and used to cudgel uneducated medieval serfs.
What they preach about in not killing, not raping, not fucking deer, etc… etc… literally comes from simply giving the barest minimum of shits about the people around you.
Their problem however, is that Empathy not only predates their religion by hundreds of thousands of years (if not millions), but that Empathy is not limited to humans, which would mean that they’re no longer the creator’s “special little boy”.
So they rename it, put it into neat and easy little Mnemonic devices (lets call them sins) and then run around telling the uneducated peasants “don’t do this, don’t do that” even though most people weren’t doing those things anyway because most people have empathy and simply aren’t assholes.
I believe morality exists and that it has an objective metric; wellbeing.
If you intentionally impair or damage the wellbeing of another, then you are being immoral.
Right. But I’m saying that most people don’t do that because most people can empathize with others.
Morality is just another word for Empathy.
How do you fuck your deer then?
First I fawn over them…
Depends on which end got damaged the most from the truck.
“Morality doesn’t exist” is a wild claim.
Moral nihilism is a well explored area of philosophy. Personally I would phrase it as “there is no discernible objective standard for morality,” but “morality doesn’t exist” is a simpler way to say it
I’m saying that moralilty is just another word for Empathy.
That dirty doe, I’d make her hooves curl.
That’s THE BEST ?
Fucking hell…
I mean they did say best logical fallacy. And their logic is indeed fallacious.
And maybe even fellatious depending on the carcass.
Hygiene. Sure, you can avoid it by getting a special taxidermy with fleshlights or whatever they’re called, but if you go that far you’re beyond saving.
Also deprecating corpses are still icky in my moral codex, so unless you find some human, who explicitly wants their body to be preserved for necrophiliac sex reasons (they do exists), that’s the only loophole.
See? I can debate-bro my way into basic human decency! At least they learned that children cannot consent, and “God said so” isn’t the only reason why people find pedophilia icky (the Bible says it’s okay if the child is pubescent).
I’m not talking morals with someone who has a moral codex from 2000 years ago.
I’ll never get over the slavery angle. Like, right after delivering your people from generations of slavery would have been the perfect opportunity to go “We’re not doing that shit again.”
No no you don’t get it, God had to allow slavery because there was no way the humans in that time would put up with not having slaves. He had to make some concessions. Telling everyone to cut off their baby’s foreskin though, that’s fair game
Its not, you do you, friend. I don’t think your god cares either. Follow your bliss.
Just, um, let me get far enough I don’t need to see/hear it, and I will never eat venison from you again.
