A free daily digest of the biggest news stories of the day - and the best features from our website
Thank you for signing up to TheWeek. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.
Florida legislators passed a law banning bestiality last week, but they might have been more restrictive than they thought, according to a population-genetics graduate student blogging as Southern Fried Scientist. His theory? The law bars people from having sex with "animals," so — since humans are animals — technically it will be misdemeanor, "effective Oct. 1, 2011, for anyone to have sex in Florida." Unless, in keeping with the wording of the law, they follow "accepted animal husbandry practices." Is there anything to this?
No, tell your grandparents to carry on as before: Florida has not banned sex, says Daniel Foster at National Review. "If you read the bill — and, if exhaustive clinical descriptions of the several methods of interspecies coitus is your thing, I highly recommend you do — you'll see that 'persons' are distinguished from 'animals' early and often." There is "absolutely zero reason" to think any judge would interpret this as anything but a ban on bestiality.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Scoff at your peril: Detractors insist Southern Fried Scientist is being too literal, says Robin Marty at Care2. But if your best defense of a law is that it's almost certain that courts would interpret it properly, there's a problem with the wording. And in Florida, where politicians have proposed nearly 20 different abortion bans and chastised a colleague for saying "uterus" on the chamber floor, anything is possible.
OK, you have had your laugh: The wording of the law is actually pretty clear, says Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog. And if any person is ever prosecuted under this law for having sex with another human — it will never happen, but say it does — the court will say "animal" means "non-human animal" to "avoid absurdity" and respect the intent of the law, not to mention the "commonly used (if scientifically inaccurate) understanding of the term 'animal.'"
Continue reading for free
We hope you're enjoying The Week's refreshingly open-minded journalism.
Subscribed to The Week? Register your account with the same email as your subscription.