Posted on 09/18/2006 7:33:33 AM PDT by Neoliberalnot
Animal bordellos draw Norwegians Denmark's animal bordellos reportedly draw Norwegian clients, but both countries have loopholes that make such establishments legal. Here a Danish animal owner offers his horse to a Danish journalist claiming to be interested in animal sex.
Related stories: Former cop busted in pig pen - Neither Denmark nor Norway has a prohibition on sex with animals, as long as the animals do not suffer.
On the Internet Danish animal owners advertise openly that they offer sex with animals, without intervention from police or other authorities, Danish newspaper 24timer reports.
In correspondence with the animal owners, the newspaper was told that the animals involved have many years of experience and that the animals themselves wanted sex. The cost to the client varied from DKK 500-1,000 (USD 85-170).
(Excerpt) Read more at aftenposten.no ...
"Ya but the old testament also says you should kill your kid if he talks back and does not honor his parents."
No, it doesn't.
The New Testament also re-iterates the prohibitions against sexual immorality in about five places, as well.
Hey, you asked. Don't blame me if you don't like the answer.
No blame intended.
So... I guess I should STOP supporting the Danish until they put an end to this vile & revolting custom??
To give you a "Law" answer, I would go here:
http://www.askmoses.com/search.html/search?btnG=Ask&ie=&site=AskMoses&output=xml_no_dtd&client=AskMoses&lr=&proxystylesheet=AskMoses&oe=&filter=p&restrict=askmoses&q=honor+parents
for the actual ins-and-outs of "honoring" one parents.
Not to encourage you, but a much better defense of your position would be to argue that, as a goyim (I presume), you have never been under the Law of Moses, but rather the Law of Noah, so Leviticus has no application to you.
(This argument would not apply to Christians, however, as they are, in their belief, also Jews, in that they become adopted descendants of Abraham and heirs to the promise, by the acceptance of Christ.)
Who knows, this may actually make the Islamics LIKE them (that is if camels and goats are among the choices).
Just damn.
They will have to pay extra...
I doubt I will ever be able to buy Danish-made Havarti cheese again. Who knows where that cow's been? (slightly sarcastic, mostly serious!)
is that the action where bearded man put vaseline on a cane and then...
"I have to go out now but I will find and send you the biblical reference when I get back."
I am presuming you are refering to Deuteronmy 21: 18-21.
"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother ... all the men of the city shall stone him with stones, that he die."
There are two problems with your interpretation.
First, the person in view is a not a small child but a grown son or daughter.
It applies only when the parents have tried to restrain their son, but all their efforts have failed (vv. 18, 20); specifying that he is physically beyond their control. Furthermore, the parents bring their son to the magistrates to judge the matter (v. 19); hence, the son would have opportunity to speak on his own behalf.
In short, The law is not talking about naughty children but about seriously delinquent young adults.
Second, the problems associated with this son are severe. This is not the case of a child who has failed to do his chores, spoke back to his parents, or even committed a serious act of disobedience, but of a son of dissolute character who is in full rebellion to the authority of his parent--she holds them and their word in contempt. Thetext says that the son is "stubborn" and "rebellious" (vv. 18, 20).
Both of these descriptive terms are active participles, thus indicating habitual action. The son does not display a stubborn streak now and then, or act rebelliously from time to time, but is continuously stubborn and rebellious.
The word "stubborn" is a bit of a mis-translation. In the original Hebrew, it refers to one who is obstinate in his resistance to authority.
It is used in the Old Testament of a wild, untamed heifer (Hos. 4:16); of a immoral woman who has cast off restraint and indulges in lust (Pr. 7:11); and of Israel as a stubborn people who will not submit to God's authority (Ps. 78:8; Is. 1:23).
Similarly, the word "rebellious" means, literally, to strike or lash, and is used of those who contend against authority and refuse to heed their words. The "rebellious" individual lashes out in contempt against those who have authority over him verbally and physically.
So, what does the Law REALLY say?
In the case of such rebellion and riotous living, and after all attempts at discipline and control have failed, the parents are to bring their son before the magistrates for judgment. If the magistrates concur in the parents' estimate of the situation, they are to order the men of the city to stone the rebel with stones so that he dies (vv. 20-21).
I think your interpretation is ONE possible interpretation. At least you are willing to interpret the words. On the other hand even within the context of your interpretation I still think stoning the kids is a bit harsh.
Speaking of Leviticus
"All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)"
LOL
"Can't you get diseases from animals?"Unless i'm mistaken....syphilis was a disease prevelant in sheep that "somehow" jumped from sheep to humans back in the middle ages.AIDS,green monkeys to humans?Anyone on this thread with a background in biology?
Did your sheep girlfriend tell you to say that? Man, you are whipped.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Seriously though, you're throwing around the word "titillated" pretty casually. Could you provide any evidence that laws against bestiality and such are motivated by people who are aroused or "agreeably exited" by locking people up? Given that jailing these people has gone on for hundreds of years, you should have a remarkable body of evidence to draw from. It might even be thousands of years if they were jailing or stock-binding these folks before the rise of the penitentiary, though my money is on summary execution.
Oh, and for extra credit, can you provide any estimate (backed by research) of the number of people who are aroused by incarcerating others? After all, such a quirk would have to be quite common to explain the bestiality laws in every state and most countries.
That's just wrong.
...And people try to tell me that Neanderthals and Homo-sapiens didn't 'mingle.' Rubbish!
Lev 18: 22 'You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
23 'Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.
24 'Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you.
There ya go, -- they still use public caning in the middle east.
I think Robert Heinlein made an excellent case for the return of corporal punishment, and I think you know he was no Bible thumper or repressive Islamist. It can even be argued that it's more humane in the long run and would reduce recidivism significantly, especially for juveniles. After all, what do we do with Juvie kids now? Put them in a cage where they learn to be better criminals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.