Poochmaster wrote about an attempt in Massachusetts to soften the laws on bestiality. As something so pervertedly backwards, I had to research this for myself.

Senate Bill 938 does exactly that.

Here's the existing law on bestiality...

Section 34. Whoever commits the abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than twenty years.

Here's what they want to change it to...

Section 34. Whoever commits a sexual act on an animal shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or in a house of correction for not more than 2 1/2 years, or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

There are effectively two changes:

1. To remove the phrase, "abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast". Notice that "mankind" was in this phrase. This removes the adjectives from the law, and makes it non-judgemental.

2. Give judges more discretion on how to punish convicts.

If you consider that liberals have been relying more heavily on judges to enforce law, then you can understand their rationale here.

But the message that's really being sent is that bestiality is something people should not judge across the board. But rather, let a judge decide if an act of bestiality was "not that bad", or "was very bad".

If you regularly take your dog to a groomer, and one day discover that an employee has been copulating with it, the new law can let that person go, almost scott free. The absolute most minimum punishment is a fine of $1.00. It all depends on the attitude of the judge. Take a look at it, and tell me if that's not true.