Bestiality/Zoophilia should be legal and is not inherently immoral

I answer in caps because it's easiest for me. I am not "shouting" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Assuming that animals want YOU is a big leap." Not if you had seen what I have seen. When a male animal gets on your back and starts humping you, there is no other rational interpretation. PLEASE DO NOT TYPE AS IF YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO EVER SAW SUCH. NOW, SINCE YOU DIDN'T, PLEASE, CONSIDER THE FEMALES. "Size/pain is not mentioned in your post." Of course not, I should hope it is obvious that not all animals are valid sexual partners. Temperament, human sociability, anatomy, and of course individual variation are all factors in determining if an individual of a species should be considered an appropriate partner. HOPE AWAY AS IF IT HELPS. PEOPLE WHO WANT TO HURT THINGS, LIKE TO HURT ANIMALS BECAUSE ANIMALS DO NOT TELL ON THEM. SERIOUSLY, I DON'T CARE TO PREVENT THE SEX IF IT IS A GOOD THING BUT TOO MANY PEOPLE will HURT ANIMALS IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. They all have long histories of domestication. Humans have a long history of developing and understanding communication with them, especially with dogs and horses. WHY DO YOU TYPE THE ABOVE /\ AND THEN, STATE THAT THERE CAN BE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE PAST BELOW? \/ "You would need further regulation to prevent full sized humans for splitting chihuahuas" No I don't, intentionally causing severe pain or death to your animals is already covered by animal cruelty laws that need make no mention of sex. You may as well have said "you need further regulation to prevent a full sized human from hitting a Chihuahua with a hammer" WE DO. "and SOMEthing to limit child-experimentation" You mean sexually mature adolescents experimenting with animals? Why? that is their parents purview. Better animals than other humans their age, no unwanted pregnancies. I DID NOT TYPE "ADOLESCENT" BECAUSE I DID NOT MEAN ADOLESCENT. IF YOU GIVE PERMISSION FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE SEX WITH ANIMALS, A LOT MORE OF IT WILL HAPPEN. IF A LOT MORE OF IT HAPPENS, CHILDREN WILL ASSUME THAT THEY GET TO TRY. CHILDREN ARE NOT GOOD WITH MANY SORTS OF ANIMALS IN NON=SEXUAL ACTIVITIES...BITES, SCRATCHES, PERMANENT FEAR. IF YOU WANT THIS, AND IS SURE SEEMS LIKE YOU ARE VERY VERY READY, I WOULD NOT WANT LITTLE KIDS PUTTING FINGERS IN FIDO AND I DON'T SEE HOW YOU ARE GOING TO STOP THAT FROM HAPPENING. "AND, I do not see a comprehension of communicable diseases in your thinking." I comprehend communicable disease just fine, that is why my post does not make mention of it. Just like HIV doesn't make all human-human sex immoral no interspecies STD makes all interspecies sex immoral. Not to mention the fact that there isn't anything equivalent to HIV on the radar, all diseases communicable by sex are similarly communicable by any body fluid contact. THE SENTENCES ABOVE ARE IRRELEVANT BECAUSE OF THIS - NEXT - SENTENCE. >Such may occur everytime you touch an animal unless the strictest precautions are taken. I CAN SMELL IT FROM HERE! {"Pets started by them coming to us willingly and staying with humans willingly." You can't possibly know that it was 8,000 years ago. I WANT TO INTRODUCE THE ABOVE SENTENCE /\ TO YOUR PREVIOUS SENTENCE > "They all have long histories of domestication. Humans have a long history of developing and understanding communication with them, especially with dogs and horses. "} "Genetics plays a big role in homosexuality and has been studied a lot. So, your point that no one has a clue about gayness is way off course." Afraid I am not way off. It has been studied a lot that is true but to little avail. If you heard stuff about a 'gay gene' being discovered you have been the victim of sensationalist news stories. It has been inferred that genetics plays a big role in homosexuality. If a 'gay gene' has been identified being homosexual could be predicted. If you think it has been identified tell me what chromosome it is on? Is it dominant or recessive trait? WHY ARE YOU AFRAID OF BEING NOT OFF? THERE IS ENOUGH INFO ON GAYNESS AND GENETICS FOR YOU TO LOOK SILLY SAYING THAT NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GAY NESS. "The studies of horseback-riding have postulated that the first time a human got on a horse, it was, probably, teen-aged boys and it was, probably, consensual." Aside from the fact that this can't postulation can't possibly be supported what relevance does it have at all? I WILL INTRODUCE YOU TO THIS. PREVIOUS, SENTENCE OF YOURS "They all have long histories of domestication. Humans have a long history of developing and understanding communication with them, especially with dogs and horses. " WHAT RELEVANCE IT HAS IS IN ANSWER TO YOUR LAST STATEMENT. "I want to wrap up with an example question: Horseback riding. Do you believe a horse can consent to being ridden? How would you know?"