Two zoophile helpers speak support of animal rape

[Guest guest]

Dear rs, activists, and friends of animals

the zoophiles have apparantly obtained the support from two " doctors " who

emailed the below message

in support for sex with animals (bestiality) and in opposition of the bill to

protect animals from this abuse.

 

I will post the email addresses for each representative again seperately,

they should hear from more of you in SUPPORT of HB1658

This is being cross posted and widely distributed, now is the time to start

sending mail, faxes and calls to each and every state representative.

 

As I said before, the zoophiles are trying to fight this legislation, any

wonder WHY? here is the proof of it, and the funny thing is the law is

pro-animal and yes despite what these two claim, it IS enforceable.

 

Frankly I'm a little tired of these crack psychiatrists like this supporting

animal rapists, keep in mind psychiatrists are trained to help HUMAN patients

NOT animals, and as long as the human patient is happy that is their only

concern.

 

We now have the full support for this legislation from the HSUS, MAAlL,

ASPCA, HFA and AHA who have all emailed and contacted these state

representatives in SUPPORT for this bill.

 

I say it's time to start distributing this information to all of the

religious groups, morality in media, the anti-porn groups, anti pedophile

groups and any others who may have a stake at seeing this pass.

Now is the time to bring out some bigger guns and this is your cue to action.

 

The Myers and I also have found a legislator/policeperson in Iowa willing to

look into sponsoring legislation there!

Next I will be obtaining the emails for reps in another state so we can start

it there.

 

It doesnt matter if these two claim zoophiles don't hurt animals, what do

they know but what zoophiles TELL them? and they tell them what they want to

hear because they know these two are doing research trying to find an excuse

to claim bestiality is genetic or like being gay, so naturally they will tell

these two doctors all they want to hear that sounds good.

 

Just remember the Rice/Myers case, the Dan House case, the Paul Milhouse

case, the Juan Alonzo case, Barry Herbeck and the rest of them, plus the fact

that I was a zoophile and know what I saw, read and heard from others and why

I now fight against this.

 

Mike Rolland

ASAIRS Administrator

http://members.aol.com/animalsav/

 

 

Members of the Missouri House of Representatives

Martin S. Weinberg, PhD and Colin J. Williams, PhD

 

As sociologists and sex researchers at Indiana University for over

30 years, and as professionals who are researching zoophilia, we submit to

you our views of the proposed House Bill 1658 which prohibits engaging in

sexual conduct with animals (bestiality). We believe that given our academic

disciplines, we write with the benefit of extensive knowledge regarding the

consequences of attempting to legally control unconventional forms of sexual

expression and the failure of legislators to distinguish between the

objective harm resulting from these sexual acts and the displeasure they may

feel with regard to them.

 

No one can argue about the objective harm resulting from a behavior

like rape. Such harm arises from the absence of consent and the trauma that

accompanies and follows from the act. Opponents of a human having sex with

an animal use a similar standard. While what constitutes an animal's

consent is difficult to define, people are well aware when an animal is

non-consenting. Our research suggests that forcing sex on an unwilling

animal is rare among adult zoophiles (as well as being seen as a behavior

that would be extremely unsafe since the person is not dealing with a

defenseless being).

 

The question of consent is usually conflated with the question of

harm, which we believe to be the better question. Zoophiles appear to be

extremely caring and concerned for their animal(s) and people who know them

would be hard put to claim abuse. Implicit in HB 1658 is that sex with an

animal in itself constitutes abuse. We believe that this merely reflects a

negative attitude toward such a non-traditional form of sexuality. Disgust

should not be a criterion for legislation; only objective evidence of harm

should be, and there are sufficient laws against cruelty to animals to

handle such cases.

 

We can confidently say that if laws such as HB 1658 are passed, they

cannot be enforced. Further, they have the potential for creating witch

hunts, and of ruining the lives of random individuals unluber that less than

half a century ago, all states

but one criminalized homosexual acts because many people were uncomfortable

with the idea of sexual behavior with members of the same sex. This

destroyed the lives of many citizens. Please do not make this same mistake

by pursuing HB 1658 any further.