Bestiality should be illegal in all cases in the United States

In Round 2 my opponent makes claims that are blatantly false, which undermine her second main argument of her two main arguments.Her second main argument is this:"Even if animals cannot consent, sex with animals is morally permissible"She defends this position with these five general assertions:1) "Rationality is a necessary pre-requisite for a being to have moral rights because to be morally considerable, a being must have (1) knowledge of its moral rights, and (2) the freedom to exercise those rights."(She then goes on to argue that this means animals do not have rights, which is of course a falsehood. They very much do in virtually all nations that have now been industrialized for several decades and their rights are presently expanding [1].)2) "Animals cannot be moral agents because moral obligations are reciprocal. If you have a moral obligation not to kill me, then I must have a moral obligation not to kill you."(Okay. But animals still have rights because numerous human societies have enacted Animals Rights, which protect animals from gratuitous human harm and abuse. Since humans are moral agents, their moral compass necessarily extends to their interaction not just with each other, but with the Earth, with the animals, and with resources. Animal Rights are there to place restrictions on what humans can do to animals and to their habitats! The concept of Animal Rights does not require animals to enunciate and defend their rights to humans. In fact, numerous federal laws within the United States and a multitude of International laws make it a crime to treat animals in certain abusive ways; the penalties range from a simple fine to incarceration [2].)3) "Social contract theory...posits that humans give up certain rights when they become part of a society....However, nonnon-humans are not part of the social contract...because they are not part of 'society' [since animals are property, not members of society] and in part because they do not themselves agree to be bound by the social contract (i.e., they never 'signed' the contract)."(Here my opponent fails to fully understand what social contract theory is. In the United States and virtually all other democratic countries citizens are obligated to follow public laws not because they "sign onto them", as she frivolously asserts, but because they are bound to them by either being citizens or residents of the said country. In the United States [as most other countries] people are required to follow laws no matter their opinion of them or their citizenship status. No signature required. And when a law is broken, a penalty is almost always imposed. This legal principle is called "The Rule of Law" and its a cardinal foundation for the U.S. Constitution and other legal frameworks around the globe [3]. Humans are obligated to follow Animal Welfare Laws or they risk being prosecuted for breaking them.)4) "Animals are not morally considerable beings, and therefore humans can do anything they want to animals."(No; not true. The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 restricts how animals can be treated by dealers, in exhibitions, during transport and for scientific research. The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978 requires the proper treatment and handling of all animals to be slaughtered in USDA slaughter plants plants. Numerous U.S. federal laws exist to protect wildlife, endangered, domesticated, and farm animals from gratuitous harm, mistreatment and neglect; this doesn't include the hundreds of states laws throughout the country that protect pets, wildlife, and endangered species from human neglect and harm, nor various international laws that exist, which the US conforms to, to protect animals and provide them with rights [2].)5) "Animals rape each other all the time and are never held to account . . . humans facilitate animal rape all the time. When humans breed animals, they often lock the female animal in a cage with an extremely enthusiastic male, and she is forced to copulate with him."(Yes. Many animals do rape within their own species. This is a theme found within nature. However, even this forced copulation is intended for the purposes of reproduction and generating progeny. And it's commited within a species capable of producing viable offspring. The sexual organs involved were meant to compliment each other. However, surveys consistently indicate that most human practitioners of bestiality are males, with sexual organs not intended and designed for sex with non-human animals [4]. As a consequence, harm to the animal [and the human] is of great public concern. Besides physical and emotional harm inflicted to the animal [something which sessions of bestiality have a high prevalance for [5]], there is also occassional harm inflicted to humans, which includes being impaled, trappled, and bitten by the animal, and disease transmission is also very common; bestiality is therefore regarded as a high risk activity [6].)My opponents primary argument in ROUND 2 is that animals can (though not always) consent to sex, and therefore this justifies bestiality - sex between human and animal. What she completely fails to mention is that most sessions of bestiality are initiated by the human, often a male, without regard for the safety and wellbeing of the poor defenseless animal. In the legal sphere this is called "Sexual Assult" on animal [7], and it is presently illegal in 37 U.S. States; the number of states criminalizing bestiality has increased over the last decade [6]. Now CON is undermining her argument by suggesting that because some animals do consent to sex with humans this makes bestiality okay. But of course it does not, because most cases of bestiality are initiated by the human against the will of the animal; this is essentially rape.Yes, many animals do rape their own kind, but this is natural and human laws cannot be extended to interactions between a pair of non-human animals. However, human sexual organs are not intended and designed for non-human animal sexual interaction. Sex between human and animal is simply ill-fated to be gratuitously harmful and emotionally disturbing to the animal.As I explained earlier in this ROUND, my opponent is wrong to assert that humans are free to do whatever they wish to animals. We cannot. As of March 14, 2014, ALL 50 U.S. STATES have now made it a felony to inflict egregious abuse on an animal [8], which in many cases is also interpretted to mean sexual assault. That means that gratuitous, malicious abuse against animals is punishable with more than a year of incarceration in all states. Animal Welfare Laws and Animal Rights legislation is forcing humans to respect animals and treat them with dignitiy even though they cannot personally enunciate their rights and defend them.And even in cases where animals do initiate sex with a human, they do so out of ignorance, not realizing what to fully expect or the possible longterm sexual abuse that might be inflicted on them by a more powerful human. This is why all bestiality should be outlawed. If animals do "consent" to sex with a human on occassion, it's only done in playful ignorance . . . but the damage that can follow is real.Animals have been killed and injured because of sex with humans. Horses have died from being impaled by the limbs of sexually-aggressive men [9]. Goats, horses, dogs, sheep, chickens, cats, deer, cattle have endured the sexual advances of humans, the vast majority unwillingly, and have been injured by these sessions [10].For specific case histories, see here:http://www.pet-abuse.com...These relations are fundamentally unequal. If the human wants to have sex with an animal, the animal is more often than not helpless to prevent it. Bestiality is necessarily an abusive, suppressive kind of sex. If the more powerful, more smarter human wants sex, what can the animal do to stop him? The defenseless animal is at the mercy of sexually aggressive human.This is not a partnership of equals.And these partnerships cannot be realistically and socially consummated because animals don't understand the notion of human rights. So if an animal bites a human, trapples him, impales him or otherwise injures him what can the human do? Take the animal to court?Beastiality is simply something that society cannot approve of, because of the incredible complications involved. Therefore, with respect to law, it's best that human and animal go there separate ways sexually, and find amourous satisfaction within their own species.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] http://awic.nal.usda.gov...[3] http://dictionary.reference.com...[4] http://www.zoophilia.net...[5] http://www.animalsandsociety.org...[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...[7] http://aldf.org...[8] http://aldf.org...[9] http://www.homosexinfo.org...[10] http://www.pet-abuse.com...