What is it with the right wing and the "It will protect bestiality" argument?

[ck4829]

The Religious Right generally has two standard explanations for its opposition to hate crimes legislation. The first is that such legislation will outlaw criticism of homosexuality and end up getting pastors tossed into prison. The second is this odd claim that such legislation will somehow provide legal protection to people who engage in bestiality or pedophilia:

The main purpose of this “hate crime” legislation is to add the categories of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” “either actual or perceived,” as new classes of individuals receiving special protection by federal law. Sexual orientation includes heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality on an ever-expanding continuum. Will Congress also protect these sexual orientations-zoophiles, pedophiles or polygamists?

Considering that the purpose of such legislation is to "provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes," how exactly would such legislation end up protecting pedophiles or zoophiles? Those things remain illegal.

Hate crimes legislation is aimed at, you know, prosecuting hate crimes, and targets anyone who "willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person."

http://rightwingwatch.org/content/robertson-will-hate-crimes-protect-someone-who-likes-have-sex-ducks

PFAW raises a good point later on in the article. There are Christian Right groups dedicated to going after gay people and they use scare tactics all the time. These groups often use bestiality as an argument, so why then are there no Christian Rights dedicated to fighting bestiality?

[Frank Cannon]

1. Insanity? What else?

I believe the term "consenting adults" effectively negates all such foolishness.

[guitar man]

2. It's bullshit

If it actually would protect bestiality, I bet the right wing would be all for it :P

[msongs]

3. because they are afraid of their closet bestiality urges coming out? nt

[leftofcool]

4. Don't you know by now that all gays, lesbians, and transgenders

have a thing for animals. (Thus speaketh the GOP) Especially the gays, lesbians, and trans that hang around the PETA crowd. You obviously didn't get the Bachman/Limbaugh memo on this. <sarcasm>

[baldguy]

5. Like same-sex relationships, bestiality is "unnatural".

Just like miscegenation, polyandry (but not polygamy), left-handed people, people with deformities, Europeans and other city folk.

[blueclown]

6. Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Marriage is a legal contract.

A legal contract must consist of at least two parties that are legally of age and are mentally stable.

You cannot enter into a legal contract with property, which is what animals are under the law.

So how does this bestiality argument make sense?