Read this article first please.
For those of you who are too lazy to read, here’s a summary:
SB1160 in Arizona would make sex with any non-human vertebrate, dead or alive, punishable by up to a year in prison.
Many of you may not want to read the rest of this post.
Look, I know I frequently sound like a pervert with nothing better to do but continue to be perverted, and pervert-up your daily internet time on your visit to Hello Kitty websites, but the above bill gets me thinking about things.
First of all, for all you haters, let me state that I think bestiality does NOT fall under any guidelines of “sexual freedom” because animals are not capable of consent. Having sex with a living animal is wrong because it’s frequently violent to the animal and the animal has no way of defending itself, especially if it has been drugged or inhibited in some way. I want nothing to do with bestiality. I think it’s revolting.
I know lots of you people out there like to tie each other up, or set yourselves on fire, or give each other mayonnaise enemas, or whatever. As long as you have consent from your partner(s) to do that, that’s fine. You can do whatever sick, perverted crap you can think of, and I would encourage you to do so. But animals are off limits.
But, once an animal is dead, what difference does it make if you bone it or not? What rights does that animal have once it’s dead? If you are upset by this, think about the next time you eat a hamburger, or some bacon. That animal was killed so you could eat it. What’s the difference in a dead animal being used for sex instead of food?
Now, we could talk all day about the morals of killing an animal for food versus killing an animal for sex, but what it really comes down to is that once something is dead, I don’t think it really retains any rights, and I think it’s silly for people to get so worked up about what is done to dead animals. Sure, I wouldn’t want to see my cats being used as someone’s sexual fantasy, but at least I would know that the cats were as capable of feeling discomfort as a pile of rocks would be.
Really, what’s wrong (besides being totally disgusting) with a hillbilly finding a dead deer on the side of the road and said hillbilly taking it back to his shack to have sex with it? It doesn’t hurt anybody, and it’s ridiculous for the government to be able to mandate what can or cannot be done with a dead animal, especially if that animal already belonged to you.
In my opinion, this is sort of the same as freedom of speech. If we don’t protect the speech of the neo-nazis and the Klan, we’re not protecting anyone’s speech. And if we don’t protect the necrobestiality sex-act, we’re not protecting anyone else’s freaky little kinks. Think about that the next time you’re doing your own, personal, freaky little thing. Imagine a law was made saying you couldn’t do your disgusting little perversion any longer. We’ve got to protect the uberfreaks or else they’re going to be jailing us all.
I know this post has totally disgusted and alienated some people, so for those of you who have made it this far, I offer you this as a brain cleanser.
I’d like to be the first to thank you for the brain cleansers.
That is all.
OHMYGODTHATCHINCHILLAISADORABLE
“Look, I know I frequently sound like a pervert with nothing better to do but continue to be perverted, and pervert-up your daily internet time on your visit to Hello Kitty websites”
if it looks like a duck….waddles like a duck…and quacks like a duck…(you know the rest).
You know what grossed me out the most about this post?
Mayonnaise enema. Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Now, we could talk all day about the morals of killing an animal for food versus killing an animal for sex…
I wonder if crotchless chaps come in camoflage.
I don’t know why they included dead animals in the law.
Is it illegal to have sex with a dead human?
Unfortunately I don’t have time to Google this but I just know it’s gonna keep me awake tonight.
I agree with you. The law should be changed to read:
“Sex with a dog is as wrong as wrong can be and if you do it we will beat you with sticks and set you on fire. Unless the dog is dead. Or just really really hot.”
would using a defrosted boneless chicken breast as a masturbatory aid count?
A bold position, sir: bestiality, no; necrophilia-bestiality combo, yes. :) I think you could run on that platform… ;)
Thank you for perverting-up my daily internet time. I don’t know what I would do without you.
Most animals, when they die, are either eaten or cremated. So assuming an animal did have feelings about their postmortem remains, it comes down to whether the animal would prefer be screwed, eaten, or cremated. As far as I’m concerned, getting screwed would be the least of their fears.
Problem is… If you’re allowed to have sex with dead animals, all you have to do to cover the crime of sex with live animals is kill it afterwards. It’s not like time of death would be so exact that if you killed it immediately the cast of CSI would show up and prove that it was alive at the time of the sex act.
They’re just trying to avoid a legal loop hole.
Couldn’t you have used something besides cute animals for the Brain Cleanser? Now I want to have sex with that damn Chinchilla! Great!
The Brain Cleanser was almost too sickeningly sweet. I need to go back to the necro-beastiality to get rid of the horrible images in my head of smiling teddy bears. Damn you.
thank you scum.
also, didn’t you say at some point in an earlier post that we can deny consent for necrophilia? that i could say right now, i don’t want my body used for necrophiliac sex and so it would be safe?
animals can’t say that, so isn’t that a penumbra of the can’t give consent thing?
plus, sex with dead things, whether human or non, just seems disrespectful. i dont’ like to drive over roadkill though, so maybe i’m “sensitive.”
i can’t even begin to express how wrong this whole line of thought is. just leave the animals alone! dead or alive. i am sure there are lots of ways for people with ‘less than normal’ sexual predilections to get off.
i agree with miss kendra, disrespectful and just…eeewww.
the thing i wonder is what the hell happened in arizona that prompted legislators to put forth the effort of creating a new law?!?
i have to go give some money to peta now
ok, never mind the “what happened sentence” in my previous comment…i just realized there was a hyperlink at the top of the post to the article. yes, i qualify as ‘too lazy to read’
I’ll bite….
What’s the difference between killing them for sex and killing them for food? Simple…eating is a means of survival whereas sex is not. All laws were created to prolong life first and foremost and then to take care of the quality of said lives second.
Eating is primarily for survival and secondarily for enjoyment. Sex is primarily for enjoyment and isn’t necessary for survival. Lawmakers are all about controlling how we enjoy ourselves but they give us a lot more elbow room when it comes to deciding how we choose to survive.
Sex isn’t necessary for survival?
Wow.
mokiejovis, good one!
I’ve seen then in Safety orange, tfg — but the animal won’t; stupid animals with their different sort of vision. I mean, no wonder you live out in the woods in a hole — you can’t even see bright fucking orange, you stupid ungulate!
It does make you wonder, though. I once new a guy who was an avid hunter… his nickname was reacharound. Hrmm. Curious.
“Honey, this turkey looks delicious. . .I wonder what it’d taste like with a dick in it.”
What exactly does this law have to say about a case where you fuck an animal to death? Is that beastiality, or Necrophillia? I guess both if you keep humping it after it expires.
If you find out anything about that specific instance, please email me c/o the Baltimore City Jail. Sooner would be better than later.
mokie…the two people having all of the sex will not die if they don’t engage in a sex act or two (or three or four). It’s true! No matter what guys think…going without won’t KILL you.
MIL- You were warned.
Mokie- Chinchilla perv.
Zenchick- THAT is what grossed you out? Sicko.
tfg- I don’t know, ask eebmore.
Serra- In California it is illegal to have sex with a dead human.
Wombat- You know who has a hot dog? Neckbone.
eebmore- Under this law, I think it would. Who is the government to tell you that you can’t fuck a chicken breast? Jerks.
Bliss- Glad to know I have your vote.
DL- Exactly.
scum- Well, I hadn’t thought of that. But it’s not like people aren’t being slaughtered after being raped. Problem is, you can prosecute a people murderer.
CBK- Well, their hair is so soft. So very very soft.
KC- Wow, and I thought I had problems.
Kendra- Disrespect is relative. However, you bring up an interesting point in your first question. Hmm…
Puck- Yes, it’s all very disgusting, but I worry about the eventual erosion of our less disgusting sexual rights. Also, for you, RTFA. ;)
Patti- Also, an interesting point. However, animals in this country don’t really have rights, especially food animals like cows and pigs. I think it wouldn’t be legally problematic to set up a factory that kills animals for sexin’.
Mokie- You know that’s not what she meant.
eebmore- so do you.
Hink- I don’t even know where to begin here…
Stick- “mmm! delicious!”
Wombat- Actually, it’s bestiality, then necrobestiality.
Patti- Obviously, you’ve never been a guy. We NEED it.
What about people who would use the “but dead is okay” loophole to kill animals solely for the sake of violating them?
So the act of fucking miniaturized dead animals would be micronecrobestiality?
And would the act of organicaly growing miniature dead animals for the purpose of fucking them be considered agromicronecrobestiality?
And would doing all of the above in a simulated 3-D environment be thought of as holoagromicronecrobestiality?
This is the stuff I think about.
Wombat- And if you grew the minature dead animals without the use of water it would be holohydroponicagromicronecrobestiality.
There’s just so much wrong with those last couple comments… I can’t collect all my thoughts well enough to comment.
You had me at holohydroponicagromicronecrobestiality.