Jump to content

Bestiality in Canada?


betsy

Recommended Posts

Canada’s Supreme Court Legalizes Some Sex Acts with Animals
Canada’s highest court has just ruled that some sex acts between humans and animals are legal.

In a quixotic ruling, the country’s high court ruled that a man who was on trial for raping and sexually exploiting his own daughters wasn’t guilty of “bestiality.” The man reportedly, “smeared peanut butter on the genitals of his victims and had the family dog lick it off while he videotaped the act.”

The convicted man took his case to the Canadian Supreme Court, demanding that the bestiality charge be nullified. In the end, the court agreed.

As a result of the rape case, the court ruled 7 to 1 that humans having sexual contact with animals is OK if there is no “penetration” involved in the act.

The high court’s lone dissenter, though, said the ruling would mean open season for the sexual exploitation of animals.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/09/canada-supreme-court-legalized-humans-sex-animals/

It's okay to abuse your animal, that's the point here, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I can't believe this actually needs explaining.... But here it is:

Found "not guilty" of something is not the same as "legalizing" that same something.

People are found not guilty of murder all the time.... That doesn't mean murder has been legalized.

What an absolute stupid article by an absolutely stupid source. Doesn't this tell you something about your sources Betsy? When they go to these extremes to lie about something like this?

Edited by The_Squid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the courts got it wrong here. The interpretation relies on the historical codes that placed bestiality and buggery together. In this way, the court interpreted beastiality, as parliaments had codified it, to mean sexual penetration of animals. Why they got this monumentally wrong is because a woman, not having a penis, can never penetrate an animal but any reasonable person will acknowledge that it's possible for her to engage in non-penetrative sex acts with an animal. As a result this interpretation now undermines the parts of this law that pertain to these acts in front of children or forcing children to engage in them. Very poor ruling, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe this actually needs explaining.... But here it is:

Found "not guilty" of something is not the same as "legalizing" that same something.

Here. It's all in the first sentence.

Canada’s highest court has just ruled that some sex acts between humans and animals are legal.

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every dog I have had would willingly lick peanut butter off of anything without feeling any remorse or embarrassment.

Yeah. Same with a toddler! Or a mentally retarded person. They'll probably think it's a game! Licking, getting licked by a dog.......vice versa! They wouldn't know if they're being sexually exploited.

Would that be a crime if it's just watching and taking videos of these licking that gets a pervert's jollies off? How do we even say for sure that it's meant to be sexual at all?

If these people participating in this doesn't see it as sexual (because they have no idea about it)........then, there shouldn't be anything wrong about that, right?

These liberal judges had opened up another can of worm here, folks.

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. Same with a toddler! Or a mentally retarded person. They'll probably think it's a game! Licking, getting licked by a dog.......vice versa! They wouldn't know if they're being sexually exploited.

Would that be a crime if it's just watching and taking videos of these licking that gets a pervert's jollies off? How do we even say for sure that it's meant to be sexual at all?

If these people participating in this doesn't see it as sexual (because they have no idea about it)........then, there shouldn't be anything wrong about that, right?

These liberal judges had opened up another can of worm here, folks.

What does any of that have to do with animal cruelty?

It was just the bestiality ruling that was overturned, not the rape and sexual exploitation charges.

What the guy did to his daughters was sick but in no way was it animal cruelty. Animals leave moral, sexual and religious hangups to us humans. All the dog knows is that it likes peanut butter and is getting some. The only downside for it is that it may now be trained to stick its nose in peoples crotches looking for peanut butter but again, that is mostly the humans problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...