Why Should Bestiality Be Against The Law?

[McBell]

animals are incapable of giving consent.

I disagree with your statement as presented.

 

[Viker]

Montana, North Carolina, and Kansas are the exceptions.

I'm just relieved that again Kentucky was not on this kind of list.

It comes down to my constant harping about mutual legally consenting partners and what I mean by legally consenting. Animals can not legally consent to anything.

Plus, bestiality is gross and creepy.

 

[McBell]

Animals can not legally consent to anything.

This statement I agree with.

 

[Skwim]

How have I been proven wrong?

um...
I fail to see the "been proven wrong" outside of your post....

Gentlemen, I was quite careful to say, "Said like someone recognizing . . . ." However, F. H., if you feel that whipping horses on a race track, putting them under the yoke to plow fields, harnessing dogs to sleds to pull people around in the cold of winter for pleasure, keeping cows in neck stocks for their entire adult life, and penning up wild creatures in cages for our amusment is some how less abusive than someone occasionally having sex with them, I'm all ears. If it's no worse, then I have to assume you concede the point, and are wrong in your objection.

It comes down to my constant harping about mutual legally consenting partners and what I mean by legally consenting. Animals can not legally consent to anything.

Yup, but that certainly hasn't stopped us from using and abusing them for our benefit.

Plus, bestiality is gross and creepy.

Now that I agree with.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Yes it should, and it's not because I'm "species-ist"... the hatred of other species... but they aren't necessarily willing, so it is technically rape. I don't support rapists.

If animals could speak english would I approve? Well, I wouldn't do it myself but I'd support the right as long as it isn't rape...

 

[Iti oj]

I disagree with your statement as presented.

what does that mean? as presented? go ahead ask you dog if you can have sex with it. then in the same voice ask it if it wants its head chopped off. it will probably wag its tail in both cases.

 

[Madhuri]

Bestiality should be illegal because it is rape.
Although maybe it's ok if the animal is doing the romping and you are into it. That's gross, but hey not my call.

 

[McBell]

what does that mean? as presented? go ahead ask you dog if you can have sex with it. then in the same voice ask it if it wants its head chopped off. it will probably wag its tail in both cases.

It means exactly what it says.
I disagree that animals cannot give consent.
Ever seen a dog humping a persons leg?

So as presented "animals are incapable of giving consent"is demonstratively wrong.

Animals cannot give legal consent.

 

[Darkness]

For me, we have to ask "what purpose does bestiality serve for society?" Honestly, it serves no manifest or latent functions at all; besides perhaps giving some guy or girl an orgasm, which is not so much an end in itself. Since there are no positive arguments in favour of it, and a whole list of potentially valid arguments against it, we should maintain its status as illegal.

 

[Skwim]

For me, we have to ask "what purpose does bestiality serve for society?" Honestly, it serves no manifest or latent functions at all; besides perhaps giving some guy or girl an orgasm, which is not so much an end in itself. Since there are no positive arguments in favour of it, and a whole list of potentially valid arguments against it, we should maintain its status as illegal.

So your basis for the legality of any action is it's value to society. I guess we should start organizing protests against games of solitaire ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦ Let me know when you issue marching orders.

 

[Reptillian]

It means exactly what it says.
I disagree that animals cannot give consent.
Ever seen a dog humping a persons leg?

So as presented "animals are incapable of giving consent"is demonstratively wrong.

Animals cannot give legal consent.

It should be noted that in dog "society" humping is a sign of dominance. Its a dogs way of saying to another dog "I'm superior to you. Deal with it". Even female dogs will hump "lesser" dogs. If your dog is humping your leg, he or she thinks it is superior to you.

I'd say bestiality is in the same category as pedophilia. Animals are not beings capable of understanding human morality or consenting to sex any more than children are. Since an alligator isn't held responsible for "murdering" a human with malice aforethought, I don't think it should be considered capable of consenting to sex.

On another note, beastiality creates a potential source for new human diseases. Laws preventing animal sex protect our species as a whole. So mull over that a bit.

 

[dawny0826]

Interesting that you ignored horse racing. Not to mention dog racing and dog sledding. And how about cooping up wild animals in cages for the entire life (zoos). Think they'd choose these cages over the open wild if they had their druthers?

People are capable of treating animals utilized in sports, quite well. Siberian Huskies for one, are designed for exercise. If loved, well nourished and not pushed past their limits, a life of dog sledding is a life well lived for certain breeds.

Zoos also serve the purpose of assisting with the preservation (and research/study) of animal life as well.

There are of course exceptions, where people poorly treat animals within these auspices, but I find it quite hard to compare beastiality, in whole, to the aforementioned.

Even if animals are being utilized for the selfish whims of humans in the above given scenarios, there's a sick element, in my opinion, to utilizing an animal for sexual gratification and I imagine any such act would be abusive. As animals are incapable of giving consent, beastiality should be illegal.

 

[Me Myself]

As animals are incapable of giving consent, beastiality should be illegal.

I must say I truly find it amuzing that people use this argument.

We are far worst than that to animals.

Far. Worst

 

[Skwim]

People are capable of treating animals utilized in sports, quite well. Siberian Huskies for one, are designed for exercise.

No, they were bred for work.

If loved, well nourished and not pushed past their limits, a life of dog sledding is a life well lived for certain breeds.

I assume this info comes straight from their mouth, Arf . . . arf, arf . . .arf, arf, arf . . . arf, ...arf.

Zoos also serve the purpose of assisting with the preservation (and research/study) of animal life as well.

Research and study does not occur among animals kept in zoos.(zoo: A park or an institution in which living animals are exhibited to the public.)

Even if animals are being utilized for the selfish whims of humans in the above given scenarios, there's a sick element, in my opinion, to utilizing an animal for sexual gratification and I imagine any such act would be abusive. As animals are incapable of giving consent, beastiality should be illegal.

Yet you don't consider the examples I presented as abusive:

Raw paws are just one health hazard for sled dogs, which can
run across hundreds of treacherous miles of rough ground over
the course of a race -- not to mention the training they do beforehand.
Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

A "modern" farm in America in 2009​

 

[Drolefille]

Research and study does not occur among animals kept in zoos.(zoo: A park or an institution in which living animals are exhibited to the public.)

Yes it does. Have you worked at a zoo? While they have a past as a "keep the animal in the cage for gawkers" they're now a huge part of the preservation of species, breeding programs and repopulation in the wild are part of their goals and research most certainly occurs there as well as education to the general public.

Yet you don't consider the examples I presented as abusive:

A "modern" farm in America in 2009​

Not particularly, no. I'm not a huge fan of horse racing or sled dog racing but I have no problem with animals working. I don't think a crop is equivalent to a whip so i think that's a bit emotionally manipulative. Whipping horses was a cruel way to scare them into moving faster, it left scars if done brutally, and a good horse handler would never actually have to use one, or would be able to snap the whip without touching the horses. A crop by a race horse is more signalling method than abuse.

If I had to come down on a side, I'd probably allow both types of racing but press to eliminate abuses that still exist. You'll note that the picture that actually has the dogs racing have the booties on their paws, to prevent the harm to the paws that your second paw photo shows.

Having sex with animals outside our species is pretty much a human only trait. Dolphins would be the only exception I know about, and they tend to injure humans in the process. But there's no way to know how much they 'know.' Anyway, other animals don't have sex with each other for any reason other than instinct. There's no rape in the animal world - or it's all rape, one or the other.
Our standards as humans are to require that someone be capable of giving consent. That's why we don't allow sex with children, corpses or animals.

Claiming that it is fundamentally identical to farming animals seems dishonest to me. Even if the animal doesn't know the difference, we do.

 

[Skwim]

Yes it does. Have you worked at a zoo? While they have a past as a "keep the animal in the cage for gawkers" they're now a huge part of the preservation of species, breeding programs and repopulation in the wild are part of their goals and research most certainly occurs there as well as education to the general public.

"Zoos claim to educate people and preserve species, but they frequently fall short on both counts. Most zoo enclosures are quite small, and labels provide little more information than the species' name, diet, and natural range. The animals' normal behavior is seldom discussed, much less observed, because their natural needs are seldom met. Birds' wings may be clipped so they cannot fly, aquatic animals often have little water, and the many animals who naturally live in large herds or family groups are often kept alone or, at most, in pairs. Natural hunting and mating behaviors are virtually eliminated by regulated feeding and breeding regimens. The animals are closely confined, lack privacy, and have little opportunity for mental stimulation or physical exercise, resulting in abnormal and self-destructive behavior, called zoochosis."
source

"Very few good zoos can afford to devote realistic sums of money towards defined programmes of research."
source​

Our 10 Most Endangered Animals

1 Ivory-Billed Woodpecker
A North American bird so endangered it may actually be extinct

2 Amur Leopard
The world’s rarest cat: Only 40 left in Russia’s Far East

3 Javan Rhinoceros
No more than 60 of these swamp-dwelling Asian rhinos exist

4 Greater Bamboo Lemur
Here’s the scarcest of Madagascar’s fast-dwindling lemur species

5 Northern Right Whale
Hunted to near extinction, 350 right whales still swim the Atlantic

6 Mountain Gorilla
Their habitat is shrinking, and fewer than 700 remain

7 Leatherback Sea Turtle
The population of the world’s largest turtle is dropping at an alarming rate

8 Siberian (or Amur) Tiger
The world’s biggest cat weighs as much as 300 kilos (660 pounds)

9 Chinese Giant Salamander
Humans are eating the world’s largest amphibian into extinction

10 Hawaiian Monk Seal
Scientists don’t know why this seal’s population keeps declining
source
​

So, with over 1,000 zoos in the world* what percentage of any one zoo's animal population contains one or more of these? My bet is less than 1%, the other 99% being comprised of "amusement" animals. And it's a good bet that many zoos have none at all.

Yet you don't consider the examples I presented as abusive:

Not particularly, no.

Can't argue with your opinion.

Having sex with animals outside our species is pretty much a human only trait.

While not common, it isn't unusual. Wolves and coyotes do it, as well as dogs and coyotes. Different species of sea slugs do it. The false killer whale and bottlenose dolphin do it. Lions and tigers do it. Polar bears and grizzly bears do it. And various species of frogs have been known to do it.

There's no rape in the animal world - or it's all rape, one or the other.

"It has long been noted that behavior resembling rape in humans is widespread in other animals, including ducks and geese, bottlenose dolphins [1] and chimpanzees.[2] Indeed in orangutangs, close human relatives, copulations of this nature may account for up to half of all observed matings.[3] Such behaviours, referred to as ‘forced copulations’, involve an animal being approached and sexually penetrated whilst it struggles or attempts to escape.
Source: Wikipedia
​

*"The number of major animal collections open to the public around the world now exceeds 1,000, around 80 percent of them in cities.[2]"
Source: Wikipedia

 

[bobhikes]

Unfortunately, or maybe, fortunately, we don't make laws based on what you or anyone else considers stupid behavior. Harmful, yes, but not just stupid.


From what? And as for harmful, there are countless things we do every day that are potentially harmful, yet we don't make laws against them.
quote]

How is it harmful,

First your dealing with animals, even the most trained animals have acted out against there trainers when trained properly. Most of these people have not trained these animals properly

Who knows what controls are being used or what diseases could be passed to other humans from the people that do this.

No we don't have laws against every potential harm yet. But give the liberals more time and there will be. No smoking anywhere, you have to wear a seatbelt while driving, its a law to have a CO2 dectector and smoke dectector in your house.

Why is it a law. It is a harmful act. 97 percent of the population has problems with it majority rules.

 

[dawny0826]

No, they were bred for work.

I assume this info comes straight from their mouth, Arf . . . arf, arf . . .arf, arf, arf . . . arf, ...arf.

Research and study does not occur among animals kept in zoos.(zoo: A park or an institution in which living animals are exhibited to the public.)

Yet you don't consider the examples I presented as abusive:

Raw paws are just one health hazard for sled dogs, which can
run across hundreds of treacherous miles of rough ground over
the course of a race -- not to mention the training they do beforehand.
Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

A "modern" farm in America in 2009
​

Seriously? You wasted time pulling pictures, to prove a point, that I'm well aware of. I stated that mistreatment of animals occurs within these very settings.

I also stated that people are fully capable of treating animals quite well in these same scenarios.

But you can incorporate and find ethics within any of these scenarios - utilizing animals within sports, work support, research, etc. Even when animals are raised for slaughter, humans can raise and slaughter them humanely.

But to utilize them for sexual gratification? You've posted pictures depicting (supposed) abuse. I imagine utilizing animals for sexual gratification would have every bit the damaging impact on an animal and thus, it should be illegal.

As I'd mentioned, the aforementioned scenarios, don't have to have abusive impact on animals, if people choose to treat animals humanely.

But I fail to see how an animal can benefit in any way from being screwed by a human.

Research absolutely takes place within the auspices of certain zoological and wildlife preservation settings.

 

[Drolefille]

"Zoos claim to educate people and preserve species, but they frequently fall short on both counts. Most zoo enclosures are quite small, and labels provide little more information than the species' name, diet, and natural range. The animals' normal behavior is seldom discussed, much less observed, because their natural needs are seldom met. Birds' wings may be clipped so they cannot fly, aquatic animals often have little water, and the many animals who naturally live in large herds or family groups are often kept alone or, at most, in pairs. Natural hunting and mating behaviors are virtually eliminated by regulated feeding and breeding regimens. The animals are closely confined, lack privacy, and have little opportunity for mental stimulation or physical exercise, resulting in abnormal and self-destructive behavior, called zoochosis."
source​

"Very few good zoos can afford to devote realistic sums of money towards defined programmes of research."
source

Yes, the anti-zoo website doesn't like zoos. I challenge you to find a zoo in the US that chains its animals. Even the small children's zoo in my hometown has changed drastically over the past 20 years improving significantly from a past of concrete floors and bars to far more natural environments. Zoos are not accredited without high standards, and non-accredited zoos cannot keep most endangered species or a whole lot of other thing.

Our 10 Most Endangered Animals

1 Ivory-Billed Woodpecker
A North American bird so endangered it may actually be extinct

2 Amur Leopard
The world’s rarest cat: Only 40 left in Russia’s Far East

3 Javan Rhinoceros
No more than 60 of these swamp-dwelling Asian rhinos exist

4 Greater Bamboo Lemur
Here’s the scarcest of Madagascar’s fast-dwindling lemur species

5 Northern Right Whale
Hunted to near extinction, 350 right whales still swim the Atlantic

6 Mountain Gorilla
Their habitat is shrinking, and fewer than 700 remain

7 Leatherback Sea Turtle
The population of the world’s largest turtle is dropping at an alarming rate

8 Siberian (or Amur) Tiger
The world’s biggest cat weighs as much as 300 kilos (660 pounds)

9 Chinese Giant Salamander
Humans are eating the world’s largest amphibian into extinction

10 Hawaiian Monk Seal
Scientists don’t know why this seal’s population keeps declining
source
So, with over 1,000 zoos in the world* what percentage of any one zoo's animal population contains one or more of these? My bet is less than 1%, the other 99% being comprised of "amusement" animals. And it's a good bet that many zoos have none at all.

You're right, zoos probably don't have many animals that are so rare as to be believed extinct. The fact that they are so rare indicates that most zoos won't have any. Also I doubt any zoos keep Right Whales, this is probably very relevant to your point.

Zoos don't do everything and they're not perfect, but to deny that they do any research or any conservation is ignorant. And to ignore the significant changes in environment enrichment and standards is to present a very shaded view.

While not common, it isn't unusual. Wolves and coyotes do it, as well as dogs and coyotes. Different species of sea slugs do it. The false killer whale and bottlenose dolphin do it. Lions and tigers do it. Polar bears and grizzly bears do it. And various species of frogs have been known to do it.

And humans did it with neanderthals, but humans and dogs are slightly further removed in the gene pool. We can't produce offspring with any living primate

"It has long been noted that behavior resembling rape in humans is widespread in other animals...
​

Behavior resembling rape doesn't equal rape. It doesn't even equal rape in humans, someone could just really enjoy rough sex and roleplaying but if consent is truly given, it isn't rape. Bad standard to measure by.

 

[Viker]

What I meant by legally able to consent has to do with an ability to consent solely by legal decree. It doesn't mean bestiality is wrong or bad and has nothing to do with basic consent ( yes, no, wagging tail or jumping in glee). It means an animal can't sign their own signature or testify before a judge. It's a formality in law not a rule of morality that matters. And there are also safety concerns but, meh. The perceived grossness or vileness of bestiality does aid in making it illegal, but they really are irrelevant.