They do have a reason they voted against the bill change. It’s not a good reason, to be clear, but it is a justification not rooted in approval of bestiality.
Here’s the thing: bestiality is already illegal in Louisiana.
This new bill definitely strengthens the law, elaborates on what is illegal conduct (such as the procuring of animals for sexual purposes), and…and here’s the kicker…
Separates out the bestiality-is-illegal section of the law from the sodomy-is-illegal section. They used to be in the same paragraph, now the sodomy-is-illegal paragraph stands alone and a whole new paragraph (with subparagraphs) is there for bestiality.
To be clear, the sodomy-is-illegal parts themselves are null and void and have been since 2003 (Lawrence v. Texas, US Supreme Court). But they’re still on the books.
These ten Republicans are concerned that separating out the bestiality parts from the sodomy parts will make it easier to clean up and eliminate the sodomy provision altogether, and they don’t want to do that. (Again, that would only matter if Lawrence was invalidated somehow. But, well, they could believe that’s possible, too.)
So, yeah. They don’t want to change the law to expand on the illegality of bestiality specifically because that would make it feasible for a future change in law to eliminate a nonfunctional, homophobic section.
pixelskylines
areudirty
blakekathryn
andulkaphoto
2087
