Are gay rights analogous to beastiality rights?

by Susan

This is a common question often asked by people not accustomed to thinking in a rational manner. Even a modest amount of clear thinking will demonstrate the logic of your analogy to be completely off the mark.

Because you make the analogy that having sex with animals is equivalent to homosexuality, you must have a thoughtful basis for your analogy. Here is the logic which MUST underpin your analogy for it to be true.

1. You must argue that beastiality - having sex with animals, is a legitimate, immutable and innate form of sexual expression. I am quite certain you would never make such ridiculous assertions.
   
   
2. You must argue that beastiality - having sex with animals, is a form of sexual expression God will bless because He designed humans and animals to accommodate that possibility. I am quite certain you are unwilling to assert that as truth.
   
   
3. You must argue that beastiality - having sex with animals, is recognized by the medical, religious and social sciences communities as a legitimate sexual orientation. I am quite certain you know better than to make such a ridiculous assertion since there are only two recognized sexual orientations, heterosexuality and homosexuality. Beastiality is not a sexual orientation. It is a paraphilia.
   

   "Paraphilia: One of several complex psychiatric disorders that are manifested as deviant sexual behavior. For example, in men the most common forms are pedophilia (sexual behavior or attraction toward children) and exhibitionism (exposing one's body in public setting). Other paraphilias include compulsive sexual behavior (nymphomania and priapism), sadism, masochism, fetishism, beastiality, and necrophilia."

   
   
4. You must argue that beastiality - having sex with animals, deserves equal treatment under the law in spite of the fact that animals are incapable of informed legal consent. I am quite certain you are too honest to make such a ridiculous assertion.
   
   
5. You must argue that God and Moses intended in Leviticus 18, to analogize homosexuality with beastiality, a tin-foil hat belief that is not supported by any rational analysis of the cultural, doctrinal, historical, linguistic or religious context of Leviticus 18.
   
   I hope you are honest enough to admit that there is no historical evidence of any kind which suggests that loving, committed same sex relationships were a problem in ancient Israel which God and Moses felt it necessary to address in Leviticus 18.
   
   More answers to questions
   

   Susan's Original Question:
   
   "You say on your site, and rightfully so, that beastiality is wrong. But what if a person were to contact you pleading that they love animals for sex, have tried so hard to not do that, have tried to date both men and women and it makes them feel sick, that they have felt attracted to animals from the time they were a child, gone to counseling, mental hospitals, that they have prayed for deliverance from this but nothing works, etc etc and after tearfully pleading with you, what would you tell them? According to your site, I would guess you would tell them that their lifestyle is a sin, show them scripture, tell them Jesus will heal them, and send them on their way. Is this not the same scenario that before these sites, was experienced by gays and lesbians? Will these types of people who want bestiality have no recourse but to petition congress for laws that allow marriage to animals, march in the streets for the right to be recognized as normal and accepted for what they are?"