It's talking about cruelly killing a pet, which has some pretty severe moral implications and it's one third of the Macdonald Triad. The rabbit one depends on context. If it was being killed to show how food was prepared and the body was used afterward, it's instructional. However, killing animals either way can have moral implications.
For pets, there's a guardianship issue where it's not merely a question of ownership but also stewardship. We have a whole slew of welfare laws built around that precept, as well as other laws to discourage inhumane suffering even when killing the animals.
MICHALECOLE posted...
AS LONG AS youre using it as a way to prevent you from making inappropriate advances
tbh, I'm not sure you should even attach a condition to that. It's a kinda fucked up thing to do, but it's not a real person. The only argument against it would be if they could somehow demonstrate that it made people more likely to act on those behaviors for real, but supposedly medical professionals believe the opposite may be true.
Yeah I have no option on the sex doll thing. If it proves to help people not take out their urges on real people I'll be ok with it. As the dragon in Skyrim says. Is it better bro be born good or overcome a evil nature through great effort. ---
Cid- "looks like that overgrown lobster just got served!" Bartz-"with cheese biscuts AND mashed potatoes!"