A beast does not condone being slaughtered and used for food. Why should a beasts consent be necessary for sexual acts?
This is the argument that will be used by perverts and pervert defenders (like yourself) in the future.
By the way, I’m glad to hear that you like the word satanic being used in conjunction with Libertarian.
“A beast does not condone being slaughtered and used for food. Why should a beasts consent be necessary for sexual acts?”
Who does consent to being used for food? Your argument is irrational.
How about this: If two men, or a party of 1 man and 3 women declare themselves as married, just how exactly are you injured by that?