It’s often said that “A picture tells a thousand words.” Well, as Miranda Devine commented about the photo from the New South Wales Police Facebook page — that the Spectator couldn’t find yesterday when we went back to get a better screenshot (removed?) — used to illustrate her column in The Sunday Telegraph and this article, “This is not a new-look K-9 unit but apparently the costume for a particular sadomasochistic fetish known as “pup play”.
As Devine correctly identifies, Human Pup Play Pride is a form of bondage and sadomasochism. What’s more, it involves attaching and using the puppy tails on themselves in ways that are personally and morally degrading.
If you think what I have just outlined is drawing on obscure sources, then you might want to take a look at the following clip from season four, episode five, of the ABC show, Rake, from 2016. Cleaver Greene, the main character, attempts to legally justify sexual intercourse between humans and animals.
In regards to the police photo, Devine commented “It used to be that if a police officer brought the uniform into disrepute, he or she would be in big trouble…These days, it seems, anything goes.” It’s actually more subversive than that. It represents a challenge to the existing criminal law by the very authority that is charged with enforcing it.
What were once the key bastions of our society— the ABC (the supposed gold standard of journalistic reporting), the Australian Defence Force and the NSW Police Force — who have been the guardians and protectors of Australian values, have been taken over by the Left. As Devine states:
Sadly, like every other Australian organisation in the public and private sector, the NSW Police Force has been infested by diversity mavens who are paid not to fight crime, but to tie up frontline police in minefields of politically correct blandishments, organise International Women’s Day breakfasts for top brass to display their neo-feminist credentials and direct police to march in uniform in the Mardi Gras parade to show their commitment to the LGBTIQ lifestyle. They replace old taboos with their own made-up ones which make no sense other than to entrench their power.
Since it’s not necessary to change the law in order to change people’s opinion, activists have seized on the idea that all they need to do is hijack key cultural institutions to promote their agenda, and in so doing, it has given its implicit endorsement. Sociologically, what happens next is that it assumes the functional status of law.
Just take for instance the following example which occurred back in 2013:
Squadron Leader Vince Chong received a VCDF commendation…in recognition of his efforts as Chairman of the Defence Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Information Service (DEFGLIS).
So now, CDF Air Chief Marshall, Mark Binskin, presented an officer with an award for organising a march for ADF personnel down a street where the only threat he faced was getting hit by glitter. However, the officer’s real goal is so much more than a parade. It was part of a much longer strategy of the Left to normalise aberrant sexual behaviour as a way of undermining traditional marriage and the place of the family as the bedrock of our society.
Incredibly, those most engaged in the prurient crusade currently being enacted against Cardinal George Pell are the very same people endorsing all manner of sexual immorality, even of the most lurid and depraved expression. The hypocrisy on display here is stunning.
Consider once again the photo involving a number of senior officers—two of whom are Senior Leading Constables, the rank under Sergeant—in the NSW Police Force. On the surface, what does it matter that they engage in sadomasochism and behave, quite literally, as animals?
What’s more, how what they are doing is different to something like, zoophilia (sexual attraction to animals) or bestiality (sexual activity with animals), I’m not entirely sure, as the following example from overseas illustrates.
It was just over five years ago that Cory Bernardi warned the Australian Parliament about where redefining marriage would ultimately lead. In particular, he argued that if “love is love,” then why is a sexual relationship with an animal necessarily immoral? In response, Bernardi was forced to resign as the opposition parliamentary secretary.
But what many people don’t realise, is that ‘zoophilia’ (and bestiality) were only banned five years ago in Germany, —where it had been legal since 1969—and in Denmark as recently as 2015. However, it is still legal in the European countries of Hungary, Finland and Romania.
In an interview with The Guardian, Michael Kiok, the head of the Zoophile Engagement for Tolerance and Information (ZETA) – not to be confused with PETA, who are focused on a very different form of love for animals – said:
“Central to the beliefs of zoophiles is that we don’t do anything that the animal doesn’t want. We do not treat them cruelly. An animal is quite capable of showing precisely what it wants and does not want. When I look at my dog I know immediately what it wants. Animals are much easier to understand than women,” he said.
Then in a separate interview, he declared: “We want to inform the public that we are not cruel, we see animals as equal to people, and we want to stop the hate.” He was then asked:
Q: You claim to defend consensual sex with animals – how can they consent?
A: It’s simple. If you know your pet, you can know if it wants to have sex or not. Animals can communicate their needs.
Peter Singer, the Australian born Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, has written a short article entitled Heavy Petting, where he argues that since human beings are not made in the image of God, then sexual contact between humans and animals should no longer be a cultural taboo. Singer believes that:
Sex with animals does not always involve cruelty. Who has not been at a social occasion disrupted by the household dog gripping the legs of a visitor and vigorously rubbing its penis against them? The host usually discourages such activities, but in private not everyone objects to being used by her or his dog in this way, and occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop.
Just exactly what these ‘mutually satisfying activities’ involves, Singer does not specify. That said, I’m not really sure I want to know! Singer then makes this shocking assertion:
This does not make sex across the species barrier normal, or natural, whatever those much-misused words may mean, but it does imply that it ceases to be an offence to our status and dignity as human beings.
Not only were Huxley and Orwell prescient in their predictions about developments in human sexuality in the twentieth century, but Bernardi was too. Once you redefine marriage it opens up a Pandora’s Box of sexual possibilities. It should be a cause of grave concern that state-funded institutions with a duty to protect and disseminate truth in our society are now harbouring activists with an agenda to destroy the foundations of our community and overturn our standards by bypassing our elected parliaments.
Mark Powell is the Associate Pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church, Strathfield.
Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.