Not The Onion

22524 readers

1712 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

597

The FBI Doubles Down on Easing ‘Bestiality’ Hiring Standards (www.wired.com)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

193 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“Why would you even get into bestiality?” he asked. “We’re not into bestiality,” said Patel.

In a further exchange, Patel explained to Senator John Kennedy, the Louisiana Republican, that previously, regulations had barred anyone who engaged in bestiality “on either side of it.”

“Either side of what, the bestiality?” asked Kennedy. “So you disqualified the animal?”

“We have great canines, but we’re not going to disqualify them,” said Patel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Its hard to understand why they would do this. Some high muckety muck must have hit bestiality (I'm sure they prefer "zoophilia") on their polygraph, or else its a opener/stage setter to ease a broader category of crimes, probably pedophilia and rape.

But no one can claim the GOP doesn't love animals anymore. A Lot. Patels claim that this is aimed at protecting sexual assault vicitims is nonsensical. They could carve out a law specifically for that use case but they didnt. And the FBI pushing a law specifically for an exceedingly rare outcome for victims is out of pattern. Its not about victims, its to protect perpetrators-- as is usual for republicans in the US.

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago

Its hard to understand why they would do this. Some high muckety muck must have hit bestiality (I'm sure they prefer "zoophilia") on their polygraph

Wasn't one of the potential identities of the mysterious "Bubba" that Trump was rumored to have blown a horse?

[–] lawks@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

As weird as it sounds, I assumed there was some logic to this, and there was at least one case where someone had been the victim of sexual abuse and was forced to engage in bestiality. Then someone with half a brain realised that such a victim had no repulsive proclivities, so shouldn't be excluded as a candidate on that basis.

The mere mention of the topic encourages irrational discourse.

[–] Nouvellalia@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

They could have let in those people by adding the word "willingly". They changed this rule to start letting in the more violent people they'll need for the next stage of the reich.