YOU COULDN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP IF YOU TRIED…

This week’s shoot-the-shit topic comes from one of our readers. We encourage reader suggestions because it means we don’t have to burn up a massive amount of brain cells to come up with a our own topic. We’re also traveling so we thank Tom for the suggested topic. As with all shoot-the-shit topics, readers are free to make unsupported comments, use uncensored profanity, insult anyone you wish or change the subject altogether. We provide this service free of charge because we recognize that behavioral science practitioners are living proof that free market economies produce sufficient surpluses to support them.

Canada’s Top Court Ruled That Oral Sex with Animals Is Legal

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that a person must actually penetrate an animal or vice versa in order for the act to be considered bestiality.

In a judgement released Thursday, Canada’s top court ruled in agreement with a lower court that overturned a bestiality conviction.

The graphic ruling explains the case like this: A man, known in the judgment as D. L. W., tried to make his teenage stepdaughter have sex with the family dog, but that proved impossible, so he spread peanut butter on her vagina and made the dog lick it off while he photographed it. Later, he asked her to do it again, so he could make a video.

The judge presiding over the man’s first trial ruled bestiality “means touching between a person and an animal for a person’s sexual purpose,” and penetration isn’t required. He was convicted of numerous sexual offenses, including bestiality. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison.

But when the man appealed that conviction to the Court of Appeal, he won his case, and the bestiality conviction was dropped. The Crown then appealed that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.

In today’s decision, a majority on the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal.

The ruling goes into the history of the crime of bestiality, which was once categorized as “buggery” and/or “sodomy.” But bottom line, in all cases, someone had to be penetrating the animal or vice versa.

“The term ‘bestiality’ has a well-established legal meaning and refers to sexual intercourse between a human and an animal. Penetration has always been understood to be an essential element of bestiality.” The courts, they ruled, are not in a place to “broaden” the scope of liability for the offense—that’s the parliament’s job.

“Parliament may wish to consider whether the present provisions adequately protect children and animals. But it is for parliament, not the courts to expand the scope of criminal liability for this offense.”

It points out that although sexual offenses against humans have seen many revisions over the years, the definition of bestiality has remained the same.

The dissenting judge, Justice Rosalie Abella, who thought nightmare stepdad’s appeal should be dismissed, argued it’s common sense to assume that parliament intended to protect children and animals from abuse, including that which doesn’t involve penetration.

“Parliament must have intended protection for children from witnessing or being forced to participate in any sexual activity with animals,” she wrote.

“Since penetration is physically impossible with most animals and for half the population, requiring it as an element of the offense eliminates from censure most sexually exploitative conduct with animals.”

Camille Labchuk, executive director of Animal Justice, which acted as an intervener in the appeal, told VICE the ruling shows the criminal laws for protecting animals are out of date.

“Sexually abusing animals is completely unacceptable, it is contrary to our values. Canadians care deeply about protecting animals from this type of cruelty and sexual abuse,” she said, adding that “people who abuse animals often sexually abuse children as well, as the accused did in this case.”

In February, Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith introduced a private member’s bill to close loopholes and expand Canada’s animal protection laws.

 So, in an effort to be more inclusive should we change LGBTQ to LGBTQB for “Beastie” and whose bathroom should they use? Maybe the fire hydrant!

Have a great weekend all! Be safe and enjoy some quality time with your buds and family. As always, we love to hear from you and value your opinions and participation.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Shoot-the-shit and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s