Wesley J. Smith, First Things
April 2010
[Ed. Note: We are hoping Mr. Smith will one day see that the eating of animals besmirches human dignity as much as bestiality.]
Some things are not defensible. It seems to me that abusing animals sexually, which simultaneously debasing one’s own humanity, falls clearly within that category.
As the coup de culture progresses, hedonism increases, leading to some
decadent behaviors that are destructive to intrinsic human dignity.
Bestiality is one such behavior, and in Washington State, a man has alleged
to have, in effect, pimped his animals for sex. From the disgusting story:
Douglas Spink, 39, a one-time dot.com millionaire, convicted drug smuggler
and horse trainer, was quietly living on rural property south of Sumas when
he connected with James Tait, who was in a Tennessee jail on a bestiality
charge… The two men’s communications set in motion an investigation that
resulted in Spink’s arrest Wednesday at the Sumas farm for suspicion of
violating his federal probation for drug smuggling. Federal prosecutors and
Whatcom County sheriff’s officials say Spink also allowed people to come to
the farm and have sex with animals. He was “promoting tourism of this nature
for bestiality,” Whatcom County Sheriff Bill Elfo said Friday. When county
deputies and federal investigators searched the property they found
videotapes that included images of a man, who was visiting the property,
having sex with several large-breed dogs.
I bring this up only because whenever bestiality hits the news, some people
have trouble defining precisely what is wrong with having sex with
animals–and some don’t seem to think it is wrong at all. Peter Singer, for
example, notoriously defended bestiality in a book review (“Heavy Petting,”
warning crude language), essentially shrugging off bestiality as merely two
animals rubbing body parts. Meanwhile, the Huffington Post’s resident
bioethicist, Jacob Appel, wrote that he didn’t see it as significantly
different from tossing a dog a Frisbee, ignoring the powerful intimacy and
profound symbolism of sexuality in human culture. This is why rape, even
when it doesn’t cause physical injury, is a profound personal violation and
will be punished far more severely than punching and breaking somebody’s
nose.
Of course, most people still object to bestiality, but many seem to have a
difficult time expressing why they believe it is wrong. Some speak of the
animals not consenting, for example. But that isn’t it. After all, steers
don’t consent to become steak and sheep don’t consent to let us have their
wool for clothing.
Rather, by definition, bestiality is abuse. Animals did not evolve, were not
created, and/or were not intelligently designed–take your pick–to be mere
outlets for our lust, and using them in this way denigrates the respect we
owe them as living beings with intrinsic value. And yes, it is not
disrespectful to eat a food animal–food chains, after all, being part of the
normal cycle of life–but it would be to use it as a sexual vessel or outlet.
Connected to this, but even more importantly, bestiality undermines and
besmirches human exceptionalism. As I wrote in the wake of a man who died
after sexual intercourse with a stallion, and in the wake of resistance in
some quarters in Washington to legislation to outlaw the practice,
bestiality is a frontal assault against human dignity. From my Weekly
Standard article on the issue, ”Horse Sense:”
Bestiality is so very wrong not only because using animals sexually is
abusive, but because such behavior is profoundly degrading and utterly
subversive to the crucial understanding that human beings are unique,
special, and of the highest moral worth in the known universe–a concept
known as “human exceptionalism.”…
Nothing would more graphically demonstrate our unexceptionalism than
countenancing human/animal sex. Thus, when Roach’s legislation[to
criminalize bestiality] passes [it eventually did], the law’s preamble
should explicitly state that one of the reasons bestiality is condemned
through law is that such degrading conduct unacceptably subverts standards
of basic human dignity and is an affront to humankind’s inestimable
importance and intrinsic moral worth.
Some things are not defensible. It seems to me that abusing animals
sexually, which simultaneously debasing one’s own humanity, falls clearly
within that category.
Return to Animal Rights Articles