first there was infant euthanasia . . .

[Merlin1047]

Now there's this.

I received the following in e-mail, found the link, but not a specific link to this particular article. Isn't it amazing what depths of depravity the fun-loving Swedes will sink to? Although I find it somewhat difficult to believe that your average Swede male has plumbing of sufficient size to hurt his horsie.


http://www.theweekmagazine.com/

from the May 13, 2005 issue of The Week magazine:


"Stockholm. Horsing Around.

Swedes who have sex with horses should be more gentle, Sweden's main animal-rights group said this week. Bestiality is legal in Sweden, as long as the animal is not harmed. But a report released this week that looked at more than 200 cases of human-animal sex— 161 involving horses, 18 with dogs, and 17 involving cattle— found that many of the animals had genital injuries. The government commissioned the report last year after veterinarians noted a rise in sexual abuse of animals. The Swedish Animal Welfare Agency said stricter laws were needed to protect animals from harm during sex with humans, although it stopped short of calling for a ban."

Ah yes, let's not ban bestiality. But somehow I don't think this is what most people have in mind when they refer to animal husbandry.

Sick bastards.

 

[5stringJeff]

Honestly... who the hell does this?!? Can Swedes really not get laid?

 

[Said1]

Now there's this.

I received the following in e-mail, found the link, but not a specific link to this particular article. Isn't it amazing what depths of depravity the fun-loving Swedes will sink to? Although I find it somewhat difficult to believe that your average Swede male has plumbing of sufficient size to hurt his horsie.


http://www.theweekmagazine.com/



Ah yes, let's not ban bestiality. But somehow I don't think this is what most people have in mind when they refer to animal husbandry.

Sick bastards.

 

[Said1]

Honestly... who the hell does this?!? Can Swedes really not get laid?

Now Jeff, you know they can't hep it, they were born that way. Try not to be so judgemental, dear. :lame:

 

[dmp]

link to story..
http://www.theweekmagazine.com/glance_search.asp?id=2981

 

[GotZoom]

"The Swedish Animal Welfare Agency said stricter laws were needed to protect animals from harm during sex with humans, although it stopped short of calling for a ban."

So....the Swedish Animal Welfare Agency feels it is appropriate and normal for animals to receive sexual gratification from humans....as long as it isn't rough sex?

Short of calling for a ban - oh yes...heaven forbid that animals don't get their nookie.

 

[waltky]

UK Supreme Court backs agreed end-of-life decisions...

Supreme Court backs agreed end-of-life decisions
30 July `18 - Legal permission will no longer be needed to withdraw treatment from patients in permanent vegetative state, the Supreme Court has ruled.

It will now be easier to withdraw food and liquid to allow such patients to die across the UK. When families and doctors are in agreement, medical staff will be able to remove feeding tubes without applying to the Court of Protection. Lady Black ruled there was no violation under the Human Rights Convention. Relatives who have faced the court process in the past said the ruling would help families dealing with a "tragic situation".

Cathy Rentzenbrink said the court process was painful for families​

But anti-assisted dying campaigners said vegetative patients are "effectively going to be starved and dehydrated to death". Previously the Court of Protection has ruled on cases but the process can take months or years, and it costs health authorities about £50,000 in legal fees to lodge an appeal. The ruling could have an impact on the thousands of families whose loved ones are in a vegetative state. There is estimated to be 1,500 new cases each year in England and Wales which would be affected, with about 3,000 of these patients alive at any one time.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Hillsborough victim Tony Bland was in a vegetative state for four years until a landmark case allowed doctors to withdraw his feeding tubes​

The case was brought to the Supreme Court after a banker in his 50s suffered a heart attack, resulting in severe brain damage. The man, known as Mr Y, was unresponsive after his heart attack last year and there was no chance of recovery. His family and his doctors agreed it would be in his best interests to allow him to die by withdrawing his feeding tube. The NHS trust asked the High Court to declare that it was not necessary to apply to the Court of Protection for a decision when the doctors and the family all believe it is in the patient's best interests. The judge agreed, but the official solicitor appealed on behalf of Mr Y - an appeal which has now been dismissed. Mr Y has since died but the case continued so that a court ruling could be made.


Analysis: 'Judgement will divide opinion'

 

[PK1]

That is sick stuff.
When i pleasure a horse, i make sure it enjoys the event.