It's only natural--in an unnatural way, of course--that the shattering of taboos against promiscuity, adultery, and homosexuality have led to the shattering of other, more taboo taboos. "But not every taboo has crumbled," complains Princeton's Peter Singer in a 2001 article. "Heard anyone chatting at parties lately about how good it is having sex with their dog? Probably not. Sex with animals is still definitely taboo." Apart from the obvious, vomit-inducing reasons, the physical harm that interspecies sex results in should be persuasion enough for a utilitarian such as Singer. But it is not. Acknowledging that sex between men and hen is "cruelty, clear and simple" because of the fatal consequences (FYI: for the hen), Singer mocks society's revulsion of bestiality. Society, thankfully, still reciprocates.

The story of a teenager from South Carolina copulating with his neighbors' dog, resulting in the animal's death from internal bleeding, may give Singer and other weirdos pause in their advocacy of tolerance for animal lovahs. Then again, it might not. If we understand that we are all animals then "sex across the species barrier," contends Singer, "ceases to be an offence to our status and dignity as human beings." Speak for yourself, fruit loop.

I guess I don't see this as much of a leap from society having to accept transvestites as women/men or whatever the hell they want to call themselves. I mean, really...If I'm a man, but say, "Now I'm a woman, and everyone has to agree that I am in fact a woman", why can't I say, "I'm a gorilla, and everyone has to treat me as such, regardless of whether I'm wearing the monkey suit.". If they persist in treating me as a man, it's an affront to my special (as in OF the species) identity.

If I then say that another gorilla is a legitimate sex partner, who is left to disagree with me?

Please get on with another post today, SOON. This is sick and I'm going to faint if it stays as the top post all day . . .

Recently, I was looking to breed my female Golden Retriever and was searching the net for tips on Canine breeding when I came upon, what I thought, was a legitimate entry. Took a few seconds but it became clear that the female (human) author was describing how to best have sex with a canine male partner.

Although I “sort of” know this stuff goes on, I was blissfully naïve about it and was somewhat shocked at the casual manner in which she explained in detail how her “date” with the pup went.

I will assume that these types of people are in the minority and I frankly wish they didn’t exist at all. Sick $hite man!

With regard to the numb nuts in the reference story: if there is a better reason to have someone castrated, I’d like to know what it is.

Sick as this article is, it pales on the surface compared to its true repulsive capacity until one puts it into the context of who Peter Singer is - what rank he holds in our deteriorating society.

If he were just some mumbling eccentric who has lived off of Daddy's corporate largesse, it would be almost ho-hum. But, in 1999 he was appointed Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics of Princeton's Center for Human Values, and relocated to the United States.

If Sanger is past tense, Singer is present and future tense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer

As Chesterton observed in 1932 regarding abortion, "Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like."

Let us drown Peter Singer first.

In the words of "Road Trip" (one of the great movies of our time): "It's not cheating because it's your dog. Get it?"

I was just enjoying a delicious lunch of chicken salad. I am no longer enjoying it as it is sitting on my office floor in the form of vomit and stomach acid. Thanks.

It's a sick world out there Sarge.

Hey, what is this? Back to back posts on PAC man and beastiality?

This must be what happens when you spend too much time in Cambridge.

Thanks for keeping all of us Flynnfile.com readers up to speed on the sick, demented subculture of animal bangers. Thanks, thanks allot.

Ditto Feck. Let us draw the line. If someone wants to go to fifth base with a chicken, goat, cow, construction worker, indian or cop they are not, as Pete Singer would have us believe,crossing a tabboo. They are F*&**&g sick.

An animal cannot give it's consent to sexual relations with a human. Therefore 100% of human-beast sexual relations are rape.

Most of this is women with male dogs and consent usually involves the dog starting it, so... I mean, I have seen cases of dogs screwing sheep too and dolphins will make it with pretty much anything if horny enough. But frankly, there is a big difference between women trying it and some moron guy humping a poodle (for example), just logic wise, never mind the other aspects of it. But still, on a similar note, recently one of the major fundimentalist religion types who is pushing for banning gay maraige, etc. made the crazy statement, "on a farm, your first girlfriend is probably going to be a mule. If it is wet, warm and vibrates, most men will experiment." This, imho confirmed to me quite clearly the long held perception that religious fundimentalists are apposed to everyone else having even remotely normal relationships, without traditional religious baggage, precisely because their own perversions are 5,000 times worse and they can't comprehend how 'normal' people wouldn't experience the same desire to perform them.

This goes to show what happens when one doesn't follow a deontological system of ethics.

I wonder what PETA has to say about all of this?