@Background Pony #AA0F  
All I see is you making dumb arguments that we should apply human standards to animals.
 
I’d ask if you were a vegan, but you haven’t told me already, so…

.

@kassarc16  
I’ve literally never once used the words “lesser” to describe them. They have lesser intelligence, but not lesser worth. If I thought they had less worth than humans, I wouldn’t even care if they were raped.
 
Do you really expect the average person to understand the body language on every animal? There can be expects that have complete knowledge on it, but having be legal allows the average person to rape the animals. And even with people who can read the body language, it’s undeniable that an animal has no ability to consider the possible health risks they could get from it or anything like that and they’re most likely thinking it will lead to reproduction. They aren’t intelligent enough to make a decision about if they will let you do it or not so no matter what, it’s abuse.
 
The really embarrassing thing is that you’re the one sitting here talking about me thinking of them as lesser creatures when I’m the one concerned for their rights and that doesn’t want them to be fucking raped. How about you actually respond to my points instead of this bullshit strawman argument that you know for a fact isn’t what I’m saying.

@Background Pony #AA0F  
So, again “animals are lesser creatures”, and no one could possibly learn and understand another species’ way of communicating.
 
Gotcha. Grab the oven mitts cause we done here.

@kassarc16  
Except you’re a human and can easily identify body language that implies if they want it or not. Not to mention the fact that another human has the ability to make more informed decisions than most animals that only act based on instinct.

@Background Pony #AA0F  
If I have sex with someone who doesn’t speak the same language, it’s rape, by your logic.

@kassarc16  

 
Seriously? Nobody can be this dumb, you have to be trolling, right?
 
On the off chance you’re not, no, it has nothing to do with a sense of superiority. Humans are factually more intelligent than any other known species, but that’s not the main factor. We can’t determine body language to the full extent and it’s not like we can talk to them to ask if they want it. The only way to find out is to stick your dick in them and see if they like it, which is immediately rape. Even with people who are complete experts on animal’s body language, they still can’t talk to them and make sure they can make an informed decision on having sex with another species and making it legal causes to many problems with people who don’t know shit about body language.
 
You’re forcing the animal to have sex with you and that’s a huge crime against the animal. It’s an issue of right’s for the animals themselves and protection for them, not a sense of superiority.

@Background Pony #AA0F  
So “A human sense of superiority over less “intelligent” species and the disgust at “sullying” oneself with contact with one of those “things”?” was correct.

@kassarc16  

 
They can consent with others of the same species, obviously. They are incapable of consenting with humans because they can’t fucking speak and the “they looked like thy were enjoying it argument” doesn’t mean shit.

@Background Pony #AA0F  
So all animal mating is rape, then, if an animal can’t consent?

@kassarc16  
LOL! No, it’s because animals are incapable of consent.

@Background Pony #0E5C  
A human sense of superiority over less “intelligent” species and the disgust at “sullying” oneself with contact with one of those “things”?

@amantes  
Understand what? The multiverse stuff or the bestiality arguement?

@Darth Sonic  
Thanks Darth, you wouldn’t believe how many people don’t understand that.  
Multiversal Relativity it is!

@Background Pony #AA0F  
Oh, hi. We were just talking about you.

@Background Pony #0E5C  
You… Completely misunderstood me.
 
I said sapience DOES disqualify bestiality. Meaning wanting to pork a Pony from Equestrian is A-Okay.
 
@amantes  
I propose a sort of Multiversal Relativity then. The events of FIM are fictional relative to our Universe.

@Background Pony #0E5C  
Playing devil’s advocate, the ability to give meaningful consent?

@Darth Sonic
 
I take exception to your last sentence.
 
Why is the act of a horse having sex with another horse ok,  
but the act of a human having sex with a horse not ok?
 
What makes one act morally reprehensible but the other one not?

@Ferrotter w3wt! Dis gai gits it!

@Scrounge  
Niggoslav is right. Bestiality does reduce the risk of prostate cancer. Not necessarily any more effectively than just jacking off (unless you get off better with bestiality). But frequent ejaculation does significantly reduce the risk of prostate cancer.

@Darth Sonic  
Oh, I see. Darn me then.  
The Fluttershy in this picture is indeed a fictional representation. But if she exists in another universe, would then the drawing, despite fictional, not count as art of a real person? Or would it only be by a coincidence that it happens? Does ignorance that a drawing depicts a real person make it any less a drawing of someone real? But then, would anything ever conjured in the human mind be considered remote viewing of reality?

@amantes  
Guess I wasn’t clear. I already acknowledged the existence of such a universe. That such a universe exist doesn’t negate the fact that the Fluttershy we watch is not the hypothetical Fluttershy of that universe, but rather a fictional character in an animated television show.

@Darth Sonic  
But the various outcomes of any given event are infinite. The world could have developed with equines becoming the dominant species. They could have developed vision that makes them see the world as if it was made in flash. They could have who knows what abilities. Endless possibilities can lead to an infinite number of outcomes, so pretty much anything imaginable could exist in another universe.  
None of this matters though, as our own universe could prove to be a simulation. If that happens, we would be as fictional as Fluttershy.

@amantes  
A Wild Philosopher appears!
 
Actually, Multiverse theory does not negate Fluttershy’s fictional nature! Fluttershy is still a flash animated collection of pixels, given “voice” by a trained actress, and that her life and world was made up by another mind. That said life and world are potentially nigh identical to that of a real life persons in a hypothetical universe is mere cosmic coincidence (if perhaps and inevitable one).
 
It’s the same reason Morgan Freeman is not Nelson Mandela, despite playing the part of Mandela in a movie. Despite being based upon a real person, that character was still fictional!
 
As for those who don’t believe sapience disqualifies bestiality? They’re idiots.