Xref: utzoo talk.bizarre:12654 talk.politics.misc:9985 talk.origins:1753 sci.bio:1184 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!mtunx!mtune!petsd!pedsga!lae From: lae@pedsga.UUCP Newsgroups: talk.bizarre,talk.politics.misc,talk.origins,sci.bio Subject: Re: Are Animals Patentable? Keywords: beastiality Message-ID: <580@pedsga.UUCP> Date: 13 May 88 13:11:41 GMT References: <97500013@prism> <4872@xanth.cs.odu.edu> <9915@tekecs.TEK.COM> <564@pedsga.UUCP> <2087@bgsuvax.UUCP> Reply-To: lae@pedsga.UUCP (Leslie Ann Ellis) Distribution: na Organization: Closet Philosophers Society Lines: 43 In article <2087@bgsuvax.UUCP> edwards@bgsuvax.UUCP writes: >Most people find beastiality repulsive because of health reasons Hmmm, I would expect to have a better chance of catching diseases suited to my chemistry from members of my own species. > or because they have been 'in- >doctrinated' with these Judeo-Christians prohibitions This is the most likely reason. The bible is full of warnings against committing abominations with our less evolved cousins. >Now you might say this is ridiculous no one's going to go out and 'get >it on with chimps' I wouldn't make such a sweeping generalization; I can only speak for myself. > To that I >say don't forget Carl's concern about the chimp's emotional needs. Bravo, Bravo! Spoken as a true animal lover! >At what point, saying the gene tinkering works, would the chimps be >sufficiently 'human' to allow for meaningful sex (assuming you accept >the concept). The prime requisite for meaningful sex is to have similar mating rituals, meaning that the individuals involved are capable of recognizing that the other is, indeed, attracted to them. >Save the whales, Free the chimps! > > Ken Jenkins as guest of edwards@bgsu Leslie -- ******************************************************************* * Kent for President. The Stars are our Birthright! * * Join us at USEnet:news.talk.bizarre. * *******************************************************************