[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The question is if a character in ST:NG decided to have relations with an
alien, where that alien would be considered closer to a dog or cat (or even
a dolphin), than to a human, would it be considered bestiality if they had
sex with a human? Is the definition of bestiality "to have relations with
another that is not of the same species"? Is it bestiality if the 'beast'
was sentient? Taken from the sentient beast's (Dolphin or NeoChimp) view,
would the human be considered the "beast"?
This scenario appears in _Startide Rising_ (man/woman/dolphin threesome). I
realized that if we do some "uplifting" these questions will become an
issue. I believe that this question changes the definition of Sentience, as
it related to humans.
Any other observations?
I will be glad to provide input here. First and foremost, intelligence is
not a factor. There are no laws against someone marrying and/or having sex
with a mentally retarded person provided the mentally retarded person can
understand what is taking place, and openly gives consent. Those are the
only two universal issues blocking interspecies sex (there are moral
questions beyond that connected to religious beliefs, but I am assuming a
seperation of church and state, as foolish an assumption as that is). If we
were to discover that, for example, dolphins had a language that we could
translate, or taught dolphins a language that we could understand/translate,
then if the dolphin can understand what is taking place (which, considering
the very sexual nature of dolphins, I would imagine they would understand it
quite well) and openly express consent, then there would be no rational
reason to bar a person f! ! ! rom having consentual sex with a dolphin (or any
other animal that meets those criterion).
Now back to my parenthetical comment about assuming seperation of church and
state being foolish. Rational reasons do not prevail. The laws in the USA
and many other countries concerning personal freedoms are primarily
irrational. Just as there were laws against homosexual sex for decades and
current laws bar the recognition of same sex marrages in 49 of the 50 US
states, laws against interspecies sex (even with all participants
consenting), will remain for decades or even centuries to follow. In fact, I
believe if it did come to pass that we were able to communicate through
language with another species (IE chimps and Gorillas with sign language),
and the public became aware of consenting interspecies couples, *more*
legislation would pass barring it, because it is the irrational majority that
makes the laws, not the rational minority.
Rather sad/humorous tangent, the laws in most states forbid any sexual act
envolving or between a person and an animal, with no clarification of the
definition of animal. As any high school graduate *should* know, humans
*are* animals, so, by these "bestiality" laws, *any* sexual act envolving
people(except solo) in those states is against the law! And in many of those
states, it is a felony! :-)
On changing the definition of sentience... people have a hard enough time
agreeing on definitions of words. Write down your definition of sentience
then look it up in the dictionary. I bet the definition you see will not
even be romotely similar to the definition you wrote down. Even better, look
it up in dictionaries by 2 different companies, and marvel at the differences
in the definitions. Words are what they mean to the individual... (IE
humorous cultural differences, where "bumming a fag" may mean to borrow a
cigarette in the UK, but such a phrase has an entirely different meaning in
the USA) will it change *your* definition of sentience? Only you can
determine that.
Michael Harney
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
