The Zeta Chronicles - A pro-active comic for the zoo community

Equitatus6 said:
Didn't you hear? Bestiality was just legalized the world over!

Hallelujah, amen!

Edit: Ah, I read over the comic once more. So the endgame is to decriminalize bestiality? So basically you don't get hauled off to prison, you get a slap on the wrist instead? Still doesn't seem all that likely, though.
Click to expand...
Germanys decriminalization law is the ideal situation. Its not illegal if it isnt forced and the comic explores more the social impacts if the law is respected to its full extent.
 
Last edited:
ZTHorse said:
Germanys decriminalization law is the ideal situation. Its not illegal if it isnt forced and the comic explores more the social impacts if the law is respected to its full extent.
Click to expand...
It's more ideal because the animal gets to choose as well as punish those who take away the animal involved personal rights with harsh penalties.

Zoophilia will be encouraged while anything other will take a nosedive after identified.
 
Reconscope said:
It's more ideal because the animal gets to choose as well as punish those who take away the animal involved personal rights with harsh penalties.

Zoophilia will be encouraged while anything other will take a nosedive after identified.
Click to expand...
Prove it isn't forced in a court of law.


Before you put a hoof in mouth, consider that "conditioning and training" can be seen as force in legal circles (review cases where girls are used as sex slaves, so conditioned to it that they act like it's consentual)
 
Gunslinger1X said:
Prove it isn't forced in a court of law.


Before you put a hoof in mouth, consider that "conditioning and training" can be seen as force in legal circles (review cases where girls are used as sex slaves, so conditioned to it that they act like it's consentual)
Click to expand...
You can't prove something in the court of law that's from the mind. The court of law acts like robots not people. Just a bunch of unnecessary political BS. That's like saying mental illness is fake or other stuff that can't be easily identified

Conditioning and training is considered Force if it's not their natural intentions.
 
Reconscope said:
You can't prove something in the court of law that's from the mind. The court of law acts like robots not people. Just a bunch of unnecessary political BS. That's like saying mental illness is fake or other stuff that can't be easily identified

Conditioning and training is considered Force if it's not their natural intentions.
Click to expand...
Well, until Fido can testify, guess what the courts will decide?
 
Gunslinger1X said:
Well, until Fido can testify, guess what the courts will decide?
Click to expand...
That's still humanizing animals to our human standard of communication. It's fundamentally flawed to expect this kind of communication on a totally different Evolution branch. Every Creature progress differently they're for their evolution of communicating is different.

If we are comparing animals to children in terms of intelligence in the eyes of society. Does that not justify Banning meat Industries as a whole. If they can justify being slaughtered then they know their communication methods are different.

In the end it's just a way for them to make money if they closed off that entrance they would lose profits that's the reason why they keep minimum on animal rights for the money.
 
Ruben said:
The accused doesn't have to prove his innocence – the prosecution has to prove that the accused is guilty.
Click to expand...
Yeah, all the court has to do is say it happened and say how it happened and guess who's going to be believed?
it's certainly isn't the accused going "but no, she consented to it, she likes it"
So yeah, you'll lose that one every time
 
Gunslinger1X said:
Yeah, all the court has to do is say it happened and say how it happened and guess who's going to be believed?
it's certainly isn't the accused going "but no, she consented to it, she likes it"
So yeah, you'll lose that one every time
Click to expand...

Because all it comes down to is a bunch of people and their bias
 
Gunslinger1X said:
Yeah, all the court has to do is say it happened and say how it happened and guess who's going to be believed?
it's certainly isn't the accused going "but no, she consented to it, she likes it"
So yeah, you'll lose that one every time
Click to expand...
If you assume the justice system won't follow it's own rules of course the only outcome is injustice, but that was not the context of the original point. You asked "how can you prove she wasn't forced" and that is legally never a problem that would arise in a common law system (or other western systems).

The corruption would take the form of pretending it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not consent.
 
ADreamOfLiberty said:
If you assume the justice system won't follow it's own rules of course the only outcome is injustice, but that was not the context of the original point. You asked "how can you prove she wasn't forced" and that is legally never a problem that would arise in a common law system (or other western systems).

The corruption would take the form of pretending it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not consent.
Click to expand...
You're correct, in most non-western Justice systems you would simply be put to death or jailed for life
 
What you fail to realize is they will use the same logic that they use for children they cannot consent because they are not fully aware of what's going on
And I can guarantee you, the more you push for this to become "normalized", The more you will see laws popping up with the term "unnatural acts" in it
 
Gunslinger1X said:
What you fail to realize is they will use the same logic that they use for children they cannot consent because they are not fully aware of what's going on
And I can guarantee you, the more you push for this to become "normalized", The more you will see laws popping up with the term "unnatural acts" in it
Click to expand...
what logic even is there
 
xbotzkillerz said:
what logic even is there
Click to expand...
I believe that's part of his point... There is none. But "they" will scream bloody murder, and keep pushing the idea anyway, and it'd be political suicide to speak up against anti-human/animal-sex laws. Can't you just see the result when "Senator Blowhard objects to law designed to prevent people raping puppies!" starts getting splashed across the headlines? I may be crazy, but I'm thinkin' that Senator Blowhard is gonna become "Ex-senator Blowhard" in short order. They learn fast with something like that, and the stuff just slides on through...
 
Bloodwolf said:
Way too many with this idea think like a zoo. Not the general public. Y’all need to learn how to live 2 lives.
Click to expand...
The irony is, they want to assert "human characteristics" like consent to justify their actions to the normies, but can't seem to realize that same mindset is what normies will use when prosecuting them, comparing animals to children mentally.
 
Gunslinger1X said:
The irony is, they want to assert "human characteristics" like consent to justify their actions to the normies, but can't seem to realize that same mindset is what normies will use when prosecuting them, comparing animals to children mentally.
Click to expand...
That’s what I mean. A lot of people don’t seem capable of separating our mind set and think like a normal person.
 
UR20Z said:
That assumes as best case that it doesn't blow up into a witch hunt and end up making things even worse - the way this sort of idiocy has done multiple times already...
Click to expand...
pretty much this.
gotta mention donation money likely going into this on the "why care" list as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top