In 2010 Singer appeared on the ABC’s Q&A where he explained, “A woman has oral sex performed by her dog. I know women who have said this is something that pleases them. The dog is free to do it or walk away. There is no dominance over the dog. That seems to me harmless.”
If you think that the LGBTQ is not going to add a'P' for pedophile, you are very much mistaken. Pedophiles have already
rebranded themselves as MAPS, and their inclusion under
the LGBTQ+ umbrella is all but assured. But the train is not planning at stopping at
that point, either. Why, you ask? Because at some point they are going to have to add protection for people who enjoy having sex with animals. Think it won't happen? Think again. A Princeton professor is already making the case for it.
"Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself." 1 Timothy 6:5 (KJV)
Meet liberal professor Peter Singer. Prof. Singer wants you to know that sex with animals is fine and dandy, just as long as the animal consents to it. He feels the same way about adults having sex with 10-year olds. He writes books on the topic which can be bought on Amazon, and he is a hero of the Far Left. Parents, these are the types of people who teach your children when you send them off to college. The videos are below, watch as much as you can stand without puking or smashing your own monitor.
Princeton University professor says, sex with dogs is harmless: ‘I know women who say it pleases them.’
FROM THE CALDRON POOL: Video has resurfaced, thanks to
Mark Powell at The Spectator, of Professor Peter Singer, moral philosopher and ethicist from Princeton University, suggesting sex between humans and dogs is harmless provided the animal essentially consents.
In 2010 Singer appeared on the ABC’s Q&A where he explained, “A woman has oral sex performed by her dog. I know women who have said this is something that pleases them. The dog is free to do it or walk away. There is no dominance over the dog. That seems to me harmless.”
When asked in another interview if he had similar thoughts regarding sex with children, Singer refused to call the act itself wrong saying, “The issue here is whether this harms the ten year olds and will harm them in their sexuality later on… My view is not that anything is just wrong full stop.”
Mark Powell rightly said, “The fact that anyone in the community—let alone a ‘moral philosopher’ from Princeton University—is arguing for something like this should be a cause for public outrage.”
Strangely, the public have been rather quiet on this one. The video of Singer’s appearance on Q&A has only received just over 3,000 views in more than eight years.
READ MORE
Animal Rights & Vegan 'Ethicist' Peter Singer Thinks Sex With Animals is No Big Deal
The twisted Peter Singer declaring he honestly can’t understand why anyone would find sex with animals such a disgusting concept. So long as the animal isn’t overtly harmed, then he thinks bestiality is no big deal. When the interviewer points out that, using that kind of logic, one could justify paedophilia, Singer again argues if there is no evident ‘harm’ in adults having sexual relations with ten year olds, then he can’t see why such paedophilia should be considered morally impermissible. “I have no intrinsic moral taboos”, boasts Singer.
No comments:
Post a Comment