[The following is a true story.]
A young lawyer, recently admitted to the Georgia bar, learns that he’s been appointed by the court to represent a man in jail on a misdemeanor charge.? The lawyer is handed a folder containing the criminal complaint as he heads to the jail.? Sitting across from his client in the jail’s attorney visiting room, the lawyer opens the file and read the criminal complaint.? His eyes widen as his jaw undiplomatically drops to the floor.
“Mr. [Smith], this criminal complaint says you’ve been charged with bestiality in that your neighbor and her young daughter saw you in plain sight in your backyard having sex with your dog… What do you have to say in response to these charges?”
“It’s my dog.”
And that, my friends, is my retort to Matt Naugle’s absurd notion that the Constitution gives an absolute right for people to treat animals as property as they wish.
The law should reflect that animals are property, and thus the only crimes against animals should be those which currently exist to protect property? Anything less involves taking away rights from man. And more importantly, the same people who blur the difference between harming humans and animals also seem to be perfectly OK with murdering unborn babies.
In other words, because Naugle presumes that most animal rights activists are Pro-Choice, he’s allowed to depart from his religion’s belief that all life is sacred and if you wish to torture, screw, or kill your dog, if such an act would not already constitute as a crime against property (crimes involving damage to inanimate objects), then it should be hunky dory.
Naugle reveals the clich? of slippery slope argument.? Used against his own argument, he presents not a slippery slope but a readily available rational to permit bestiality.
Naugle’s undeveloped thought process is in criticism of a bill that would increase the penalties for cockfighting.??? In other words, the “absolute property rights” argument has already been rejected by the General Assembly and no court in the land has found that such a criminal statute violates the property rights of individuals under the Constitution.
It’s only been a law since 1980 – you know, when Reagan was President and Jim Rhodes was Governor.? Yeah, Naugle is now officially to the right of 1980s Ohio Republicanism.
Categories2018 2020 Activism Budget Civil Rights Congressional Races Economy ECOT Education Environment Fair Elections Federal Governor's Race Governor DeWine Guns Health ICYMI Justice Labor LGBT Ohio Legislature Ohio Legislature Plunderbund Plunderbund Action Portman Presidential Safety Senate Race State State Government Statehouse Races Statehouse Races Swing State Voices Taxes and Spending Trump Women's Rights