Aaah, Washington State.

Gave birth to Glenn Beck.

A leader in a new kind of action vacation -- bestiality tourism.

And soon to be home of Aryan Nations.

People fuck things. Get over it.

Oh yeah, and the definition of a hypocrite is any meat eater who has the gall to call THIS abusive. That we're more shocked by a few people screwing animals than we are about the wholesale slaughter of animals says a lot about our prudishness.

"That we're more shocked by a few people screwing animals than we are about the wholesale slaughter of animals says a lot about our prudishness.

So let me get this straight, when my 6 yr ol enjoys a hot dog, in your mind, that's the same than a grown man fucking a horse?

You must have a hard time in restaurants if all you can 'see' are is the equivalent of people blowing horses.

". It is as though these institutions supposedly concerned for the well-being of animals can only see these animals as "tainted" or "ruined."

Well, I don't wanna eat a horse steak that you may have fucked.

"than phobia about a non-normative sexual practice"

There's an Evergreen State college run amok.

Seriously, it's horse fucking, not 'non-normative sexual practice".

What's next, are you gonna call baby raping 'non-normative sexual practice'?

Moral relativism run amok....totally amok.

"I even attempting to address a reasonable argument to you when you insist on deploying tautological concepts of "natural" and "right" which, incidentally, are the SAME concepts used to justify homophobia."

I don't think drawing parallels between horse fuckers and homosexuality is a path you want to go down. If you think accepting homosexuality means society has to accept horse fuckers, you'll put the gay movement back about 10,000 years. Just a word to the wise there.

@20-21. That's cute. I'm simply suggesting that our notions of "harm" are effected, in this case, by our notions of "normal" sexuality. That you use the example of your 6 yr old is telling because you want to present eating meat as an innocent and harmless activity. Okay, fine. Let me use a different example: the process by which veal is produced. If you don't know what I'm talking about, look it up; it's not so innocent and harmless.

Look, these sensationalized stories of bestiality are dangerous to anyone who practices non-normative sexuality in any form. I would direct you to the comment section of this article where I believe someone inevitably suggests that this is another sign, along with gay marriage, that our culture is going down the toilet. The point is that most of this moral outrage and supposed concern for the well being of animals reflects general fear about sexuality, fear that only ever works to incarcerate people and impose heternormative standards on everyone.

Finally, no, I don't see your 6 yr old eating a hot dog as the same thing as fucking a horse, but I don't see it as innocent either. Nor, for that matter, do I see it as very healthy or appetizing.

and why resort to the tired anti-intellectualism apparent in your crack about "evergreen college." Morality is relative. Indeed. So the question becomes what are certain moral agendas accomplishing. IF bestiality rings are being broken up only to euthanize or castrate the animals involved, I don't see the point. The only thing this seems to accomplish is the production of a sensational story around which we can all preform our self-righteous indignation.

Finally, I find your equation of bestiality with baby raping very curious as it ignores an entire history of legal, scientific and anthropological discourse through which the category of the human was constructed. By definition, animals do not enjoy the same rights as do humans. They can be legally subjected to all manner of exploitation. Humans, of course, are subject to a different set of rights. Legally speaking, animals are more on the order of objects, with the tricky distinction that they've been afforded certain rights. It is this undefined area of animal rights where moral battles are fought. It's my position that if these animals are being otherwise treated humanely -i.e. fed, properly taken care of, etc. - then CERTAIN sexual practices are no more harmful than milking or certainly than butchering. Note, by the way, that I never claimed to be a vegetarian. That said, there are certainly reasons to be a vegetarian that have nothing to do with certainly hazy notions of compassion for animals.

"why resort to the tired anti-intellectualism"

Because it's horse fucking, not time for Roland Barthes and a semiotics debate.

" Let me use a different example: the process by which veal is produced."

Dude, when I tenderize a couple of organic, artisanal veal cutlets and cook them up for côtes de veau for the family, it is not the equivalent of horse fucking. It's not the same ballpark. In fact, its not even the same game.