Just a sample from Singer's 'ethics' thinking. (From "Heavy Petting")

Referring to a sexual advance from a male Oranghutan towards a female human, he says

"... We are great apes. This does not make sex across the species barrier normal or natural, whatever those much misused words may mean, but it does imply that ceases to be an OFFENSE TO OUR STATUS AND DIGNITY as human beings"

This is horrifying.. it's even diabolical that such a mind, such thinking is embedded in our bioethics dept at Melbourne UNI...

Let's re-affirm that.. "OUR"...not Singers personal ideological playpen.

If something is no longer an offense... what's the next step ?

*think* people.....

Of course..Bestiality is just one from a range of repulsive behaviors which one could easily list...

It seems we are doomed to stand uncomfortably close to the edge of a philosophical and ethical abyss, where all it will take to push us over is a bit of a tap from some well organized socio political connections.

The video's I listed above earlier are very informative and helpful in putting all this in perspective.

But I must confess... strange as the Bible can seem at times.. it's like a breath of stunningly fresh mountain air compared to the smoke filled, foul stench of the philosophical 'bar' where Singer and ilk drink.

AGIR:

One should really be careful in making such personal attacks on an author. You may well be bordering on the edge of libel, with serious consequences. Your own quote clearly indicates that the author does at no time state that sex between species is normal or natural. He's merely initiating an intellectual inquiry into the topic. For your own information if you had done a bit more research into the topic you may have discovered that the author was actually in favour of a Bill to criminalise bestiality. To most people bestiality is a disturbing sexual practice that invites hurried dismissal and is viewed with moral, judicial, and aesthetic outrage. Singer is controversial, there's no denial, - but as I've stated - all he is doing is inviting intellectual inquiry into the topic. You can disapprove of it - that is your right - but you have no right to slander the man - and you should stop doing so.

Lexi confuses 'intellectual inquiry' with perverted thinking. Very similar to those who exploit children and call it art. Anything goes with moral relativist as long as you call it 'intellectual inquiry'.

runner:

Have you ever studied at a university?

Very interesting, thanks for the links AL, social engineering and exploitation at its best. This about Freud:

July 7, 2009 | By Sander L. Gilman, Sander L. Emory University.

>>"In 1908, on hearing about a young man in Vienna who wanted a nose job, Sigmund Freud made a quick diagnosis: The man clearly suffered from an "anti-Semitic persecution" and did not want to be Jewish. When he was informed that "the patient is an ardent Jew" and a committed Zionist, Freud was flummoxed. In the end, he concluded that the patient was conflicted about his father and did not want to look like him."<<

This about Ernest Dichter:

>>" It is the doctor's job to probe the mass psyche for manufacturers who want to know how to sell products. The doctor has, for instance, investigated the "emotional factors" inhibiting attendance at harness races, the significance of the term "home" and the "umpire" as a father figure in baseball, as well as the impact of Esther Williams' personality on swimming pools. Personality is a big thing with the doctor. He once compared the "personalities" of an orange and a grapefruit and found, among other things, that the orange "evokes association of friendliness" whereas the grapefruit exudes "elegant reserve."<<

These schmucks laid the foundations for consumerism to be the focus in modern western life…it’s about me.

All I can say about psychiatry is if you have real problems they can’t fix it, so they use drugs, and psychoanalysts are talk show hosts that charge $500 an hour.

Just like the financial system, social engineering is controlled by a miniscule group who make money from not making anything at all.

Freud’s first law of Psychiatric Management is:
"The number of psychiatric issues always evolves in tangent with the number of practitioners available to service them"

It is all about control then money but not compassion.

It's Al's and runner's

Bioethics Department

Not its Professor's