#The Law

#Why Are These Law Enacted?

#Scholarship

The Law

Why Are These Law Enacted?

Scholarship

Jenkins notes that:

Although conservative groups are singled out due to their opposition based on moral grounds, opposition to bestiality is found across the political spectrum, including from such liberal groups as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the Humane Society of the United States. Nevertheless, cases occasionally come into public view, such as an Eastbank, West Virginia case in which police allege that they caught a man in the act of raping a sheep at a live Nativity scene (PETA, 2003). According to Pet-Abuse.com (2003), there were nine such criminal cases in the United States during 2002 involving animals as small as a poodle to as large as a horse.

Beetz is useful as a general source with many different opinions. I have not been able to locate full text access to Pierson, Habermas, Dekkers, Noske and Regan but they are referenced in other works and appear to be meaningful contributions to the academic discussion.

Hensley and Zillman extend the theory that bestiality like other forms of animal cruelty is predictive of psychopathy and violence against humans.

Peter Singer is the most prominent advocate for only making it a crime when there is actual cruelty to the animal on a case by case basis, with criticism of him in papers commenting on his work. Critics on the animal cruelty front are largely arguing that animals can't meaningfully consent.

The links, Monter and Rydström, also indicate the linkage of LGBTQ issues to Bestiality, in general, in legal/political motive.

Several look at historical status like Murrin, Monter, Rydström and Liliequist are applicable to the reasons for older wave statutes, basically moral ones motivated by "disgust" and traditional morality.

Hensley, Adams, and Zillman extend the theory that bestiality like other forms of animal cruelty is predictive of psychopathy and violence against humans.

Peter Singer is the most prominent advocate for only making it a crime when there is actual cruelty to the animal on a case by case basis, with criticism of him in papers commenting on his work. Critics on the animal cruelty front such as Beirne are largely arguing that animals can't meaningfully consent.

Rubin, Monter and Rydström indicate the linkage of LGBTQ issues to Bestiality, in general, in legal/political motive.

Several look at historical status like Murrin, Salisbury, Monter, Rydström and Liliequist are applicable to the reasons for older wave statutes, basically moral ones motivated by "disgust" and traditional morality.