The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Should I have sex with my small dog?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/24/2017 Category: People
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,319 times Debate No: 100284
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)




I think dogs are cute, but like, nice a.s.s cute.

I want to try and rape my dog. I should be able to over power her easily.

When I see her lick her mouth with that big tongue, it sends a sensual tingle down my spine.
I really think it will do me good if I explode my load into my dog. I really think I have some good reasons why I should rape the thing.


Pro must show how it can be right to sexually abuse his dog.

Pro states that he wants to try and rape his dog so clearly he has no concern for the welfare of his dog, he even calls his dog a thing like it is an object with no feelings. Dogs definitely do have feelings, they wag their tail when they are happy, and are very affectionate.

I understand there are many zoophiles, quite possibly over a million, who will argue that cows and other animals don't give permission to be slaughtered and turned into burgers yet that's okay, despite killing being the worst thing you can do, however it is necessary to kill animals to feed people, whereas abuse is not necessary and benefits no-one.

Surely your dog would prefer to have sex with the same species, and even if your dog did enjoy sex with humans it wouldn't mean it would want to be abused, nobody wants to be abused, even if at the time it may seem like an animal doesn't mind, later on in life it might be seriously bothered by what happened.

You can't benefit from abusing your dog, there is no high goal to be achieved from doing so, by seeking a low goal you only make it more difficult for yourself to achieve happiness.

You don't love your own your dog, if family treats your dog really well, how would that make you feel? I imagine you'd feel terrible and believe your dog belongs somewhere else, with someone else, and not you. Wouldn't you want a bond with your dog? Feel loved, and feel you have a lot of love to give?

If you don't value your dog, why not simply give your dog to someone who does and make them happy?
Debate Round No. 1


Look mate. I just wanna stick my pe.nis inside my dog. I will grab it from behind and begin to hump like a hero, until I rocket out my white glue into its doggish vagin.a.
It's perfectly morally justifiable, because If I do not rape hump my dog, I'd just rape a black girl, until she dies instead. Jokes I love black women they got nice puss n budging

I just wanna take inter species sex. Cant we make love, not war? and dog eh? I like to little things n me dog got a super tight puss puss. I just f.u.c.k.e.d her n I think she love it. I even tonged her pussie. tasted like dog biscuits
*gooble gobble*
As I lick my dogs n cried cus I loveded it so much. I played dead cus I was spazumming with sensation. yum


You're not thinking about how your actions affect the lives of others including your dog, and thus seeking a low goal, you can only reach your full potential if you strive to achieve a high goal i.e. a goal which is both selfish and selfless but since it is clear you are not thinking of anyone but yourself you should not have sex with your dog.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by whiteflame 4 years ago
>Reported vote: paintballvet18// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Conduct, S&G, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Better conduct is won by Con for not entering the sodomy and rape debate. I thank you for that. Better spelling is also won by Con. He doesn't randomly put periods in words... ( Better arguments also won by Con. Instead of giving us a play-by-play like the pro, Con provides actual arguments against intercourse with dog, and therefore carries the points.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Conduct is insufficiently explained. Choosing not to enter into a debate on certain topics is not sufficient reason to award this point. This may only be awarded in instances where someone is insulting, forfeits, or breaks the rules. (2) S&G is insufficiently explained. The voter can only award this point in instances where one side"s arguments are difficult to understand. (3) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both sides. Merely stating what one of the sides generally accomplished is not sufficient.
Posted by ShaunTakesOn 4 years ago
Good one. Funniest one I've seen in a long time.
Posted by What50 4 years ago
I meant *your*
Posted by What50 4 years ago
Is you're dog a female or male.
Posted by Masterful 4 years ago
fooking hell im a gross c.u.n.t
Posted by Masterful 4 years ago
Thanks for the advice spex. I will bloat it's stomach full of cum!
Posted by DeletedUser 4 years ago
rape it
Posted by evil_monkey_god 4 years ago
I would accept, but it say that I can't =(
Posted by Masterful 4 years ago
Remade because last opponent wouldn't accept.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by paintballvet18 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I chose not to award conduct points. I also can't award sources points either as neither debate used any. Numerous misspellings and shorthands in Pro's 2nd round do not allow judges to correctly understand some of the arguments presented in the debate. Therefore Con has grounds for S&G points. Arguments: The Pro's entire argument seems to be a series of "play by play" actions that he wants to do with his dog. This isn't an actual argument to show why he should be able to have sex with his dog. The Con, on the other hand, provides a Pro burden in Round 1 that is never met by the Con in the rebuttal round. Furthermore, multiple arguments are also provided (feelings, same species...) that further Con's offense in Round. Therefore, Con wins argument points.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.