Begging For A Boycott: Google's "Legalize Love" Campaign Forces The Right To Take It's Medicine

From: The Christian Post:Google Pushes Gay Agenda Worldwide With 'Legalize Love' Campaign
Search engine titan Google announced Saturday its new "Legalize Love" campaign to pressure countries where it has offices to give gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders more rights and recognition.

Titan? More like Goliath, at least to the Christian Right. And any stones thrown will be to little avail:


The analogy of Goliath will no doubt be used by social conservatives, but a more apt analogy might be one of a mother forcing bad tasting medicine on a petulant child: Google's stance as a the"new" corporation (and one in opposition to ones like Mitt Romney's Bain Capital) has been one of a young parent nurturing the future of global corporations.* And when those corporations need to have a stern hand regarding their health in social issues, the powerful mother Google is there to see that steps are taken to remedy ills.

Google, long known for their pro-LGBT business practices, has a clear goal. The company's Mark Palmer-Edgecumbe says: ‘We want our employees who are gay or lesbian or transgender to have the same experience outside the office as they do in the office. It is obviously a very ambitious piece of work.’Google will join forces with other non-government organizations (NGO's) to lobby the governments.

Countries troubled with systemic gay rights problems and in which Google has offices: Dubai, Poland, Singapore, Russia, Ukraine, Beijing, Malaysia, Taiwan, Kenya, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Egypt. It has started unleashing ads in Poland and Singapore.





The Legalize Love Spillover

The formal scope of Legalize Love may be enough to cause nightmares to social conservatives, but the real scope is like an Armageddon to those who have made inroads in exporting hate: countries like Latvia, Moldova, Uganda, Kenya, Ghana, Russia and the Ukraine, where rabid "evangelicals" have made inroads may find themselves out in the cold on this one. African nations eager to embrace Rightwing Christianity but who also want to enter into the 21st century with technology may find their allegiances shifting: "treat all our employees with respect and allow them their rights." The campaign may slowly undo the work of such preachers as Rick Warren, Scott Lively and Lou Engle (the last two highly involved in Uganda's "kill the gays" bill).

Boycott Blues
In the past, social conservatives have taken on the likes of JC Penney, Starbucks, and Home Depot. Those boycotts have been almost fruitless. By contrast, however, Google has more assets and equity than the three retail giants combined. And their international scope is astounding: it processes over one billion search request per day and runs over one million servers. In other words, the sun never sets on the Google empire.

Buster Wilson, the general manager of the AFA’s radio network, said on AFA Today that a Google boycott “is going to be a hard one for a lot of us” but will “test the meat of our convictions.”

After boycotts of JC Penney, Starbucks, Girl Scout Cookies, JC Penney, Lowe's, Home Depot, Nabisco's Oreo cookies, and the GAP, there surely is no meat - only gristle.




* Fortune magazine ranked Google as number one on its 100 Best Companies To Work For list for 2012.

Putting The "FUN" Back Into Retailing Means Telling The AFA To Go F*ck Itself

And that's FUN!


The American Family Association's campaign to have J.C. Penney "fire" Ellen Degeneres as its spokeperson has backfired. Of course, they're uber-pissed.

A Pre-emptive Strike In The Christmas War: AFA's List Of "Anti-Christmas" Companies. Guess Who Made It!

Banana Republic is doomed. So is The Gap, L.L. Bean, Foot Looker, Office Depot, Old Navy, Radio Shack, Barnes & Noble and... Victoria's Secret!! They're all doomed to perdition by the American Family Association (spearheaded, of course, by the ever-righteous Bryan Fischer) because they've been deemed to be AGAINST "Christmas." (Their emphasis, not mine)


The AFA hardly waited until the first "Happy Holidays" after Thanksgiving was uttered to deem these retailers unfit to carry the "true" Christmas spirit. Like some angry neighbor in a property dispute, it has fired a warning shot over an imaginary fence, telling people that their wrath will be appeased sooner or later. Their "criteria" for "good"  "marginal" and "bad" retailers is supposedly based on "print media (newspaper inserts), broadcast media (radio/television), website and/or personal visits to the store." But a closer examination to the "naughty" list produces another criteria: "gay friendly."
For example, Old Navy launched a "gay-friendly" line of clothing for Gay Pride and teamed up with It Gets Better for a t-shirt promotion. Banana Republic and The Gap (all owned by Gap, Inc.) are all considered to be "gay friendly." So is Barnes and Noble. And we all know what Bryan Fischer thinks of Home Depot ("Homo Depot"). And with the exception of Walgreens, Best Buy and Macy's, the "nice" retailers aren't too overtly pro-gay. If they were, they wouldn't be given the Bryan Fischer/AFA stamp of Christmas approval.


So if you're gay-friendly and don't say "Merry Christmas" in your ads and to every man, woman, child, dog and cockroach that comes into the store, you're going to hell. Well, maybe YOU won't go to hell, but your company will, because the tone of the AFA's ongoing articles on the subject is a loud whisper: "boycott."


On the other hand, maybe you WILL go to hell... after standing in the unemployment line.


Who will be on THE LIST in any of the three columns is anyone's guess - depending upon who encounters "friendly" or "unfriendly" retailers and reports them to the AFA. Will the Scottsdale Gun Club be on it? Hard to say since it depends on who the guns are pointed at when they say "Merry Christmas."


OWNING CHRISTMAS


Each year, the "War on Christmas" brings up one salient point: who owns Christmas? The Christian Right hammers away at the CHRIST part of the holiday name as proof that they and only they can lay claim to it. And any misuse or omission is a sign of sacrilege or worse ... persecution. There will be a three-part series on the subject for OpEdNews readers within the coming weeks, but for now, we can safely say that the Christian Right refuses to regard the Spirit of Christmas as transcending the holiday: Christmas, in all its goodness and holiness and charity is theirs and theirs alone. Righteous arrogance rears its ugly head during the season, overshadowing the essence of humanity that the season tries to embody.


And speaking of bodies...Victoria's Secret DOES mention Christmas in its ad - just not in the convention way that Bryan Fischer wants (see below) because it also says Happy Hannukah and Kwanza and all those other sacrilegious things that the AFA doesn't want you to know about. 


While the link to the list is HERE, it's just too good to pass up reprinting it along with this article.
Here is the actual list updated as of 11/30 (from the AFA website)


AFA's 2011 listing of top retailers and how they recognize Christmas


Color Code:
GREEN: Company uses the term "Christmas" on a regular basis, we consider that company Christmas-friendly.

YELLOW: Company refers to Christmas infrequently, or in a single advertising medium, but not in others.
RED: Company may use "Christmas" sparingly in a single or unique product description, but as a company, does not recognize it.   

 List updated on 11-30-11

Companies FOR "Christmas"  AFA Online Store ACE Hardware Amazon.com Bass Pro Shops Bed Bath & Beyond Belk Best Buy Big Lots Books-A-Million Cabella's Collective Brands Costco CVS Pharmacy Dick's Sporting Goods Dilliards Dollar General Dollar Tree H.E.B. Stores HSN.com Hallmark Hancock Fabrics Harris Teeter Stores Hobby Lobby Home Shopping Network JC Penney JoAnn Fabrics & Crafts Stores Kmart Kohl's Kroger Lowe's Macy's Marshals Meijer Menard's Michael's Stores Neiman Marcus Nordstrom Office Max Petsmart Pier One Imports ProFlowers.com Publix QVC.com Rite Aid Sears Scheels Sporting Goods Super D Drug Stores Target TJ Maxx Toys R Us True Value Walgreens Wal-Mart/Sam's Club Zappos.com

Companies marginal on "Christmas"  1-800-Flowers.com Bath & Body Works Cooking.com Dollar Tree Hy-Vee Stores Limited Brands Safeway Starbucks UncommonGoods.com Whole Foods

Companies AGAINST "Christmas"  Banana Republic Barnes & Noble Family Dollar Foot Locker Gap Stores L.L. Bean Limited Brands Office Depot Old Navy Radio Shack Staples Supervalu Victoria's Secret

The American Family: Sacred or Profane?

I've often asked myself what kind of organizations with the words "American" and "Family"* support someone like the Christian Right's Bryan Fischer: Fischer fulminates against gays Muslims, feminists, Native Americans and, of course, immigrants. So that begs the question: what is the American Family?

The portrait of today's American Family is not exactly Norman Rockwellian (at least not one of his earlier works). The American Family** still sits down to dinner together (over 85% do), reveres "family time" and even communicates with each other more than ever before. The problem the AFA has encountered: the American Family is more diverse than anything the AFA could have imagined. And even though groups like the AFA have taken up hate-broadcaster Michael Savage's mantra, "Diversity Equals Perversity," it looks like diversity is here to stay. 


Today's American Family may consist of various combinations: mother-father-biological children; single-mother-children; single-father-children; divorced-parents-children; single-gay-father-biological-children; gay-couple-biological-children; gay-couple-adopted-children; lesbian-couple-in-utero-children; mother-father-dependent-grandparent-children; single-man/woman/caregiver-parent. 


Add to any of the above, families with close extensions of aunts, uncles, cousins and life-long friends. Now mix it all up with different races, ethnicities, philosophies, sects and religions: now THAT is the American Family.  It's turned from the mythical nuclear rock to a snowflake: each having the same bonding of love, yet each being distinctive in its form and diversity. 


Unfortunately for America, however, the AFA and its compatriots are unable to see the beauty of these snowflakes (the new family units) and are hammering away at pockets of Right Wing America with such vitriolic determination that some people may come to believe in the superiority of being part of a rock, albeit the kind that never really existed in the first place.


If you go to the AFA's website, your first question usually is: so why isn't it called the Christian Family Association? Simply because a dynamic exists between the Right Wing concept of Christianity and the Right Wing concept of Family: they are too interdependent - one cannot live without the other. Yes, there are Right Wing Jewish families, but if we're playing a numbers game here, their number is very small; with the exception of CUFI (Citizens United For Israel - a Zionist organization founded by Pastor John Hagee), the Christian Right rarely concern themselves with Jewish (family) matters.


On the AFA website:

OUR MISSION

The American Family Association exists to motivate and equip individuals to restore American culture to its moral foundations.

To achieve their lofty goals, the AFA:

1. "Restrains evil" in the media, particularly film. 

Sort of a latter-day Catholic Legion of Decency.

2. Convinces "men of sin" to be driven to Christ. 

And that means absolutely EVERYONE. America MUST be a Christian-only nation.

3. Encourages Christians to live-out their new "holy identity."

Bludgeoning your co-workers with biblical passages and righteousness around the water-cooler is definitely OK.

4. Strengthens families and protects them from "government intrusion" and "preserves the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of a husband and wife." 

In other words, we're anti-liberal and virulently anti-gay, get over it.

And Above all, "AFA defends the rights of conscience and religious liberty from infringement by government and from subjugation in popular culture."

Since we defend RELIGIOUS liberty, atheists aren't protected by any law and it's OK to hate Muslims because, as Bryan Fischer put it, they're not really protected by the First Amendment. Oh, and Lady Gaga is our sworn enemy.

That is the AMERICAN FAMILY Association: an anti-gay, anti-Muslim, Christian-only organization that wants to mold everyone into virginal TV sitcom characters using, as Rick Warren puts it, "Whatever It Takes." 

And these days "it takes" one weapon to achieve what the AFA defines as The American Family: fear. A quick look at its website can show us disdain and fear-mongering.

Yes, their definitions are skewed in the extreme, but groups like the AFA don't realize just how many people they turn off with their UN-American, ANTI-Family (and anti-reality) stances. America has progressed (horrors! such an ugly word!) into greater acceptance and greater love of mankind through its diversity and the diversity of it core family units. In its own way, the AFA is trying to destroy the American Family.

So will Uber-Christians like Bryan Fischer ever go too far and be chastised? 

Probably not. The failure of the Christian Right to ever effectively monitor their own resulted in the unfettered rise of Fred Phelps. The damage done by Bryan Fischer has only elicited a lofty and disingenuous "we are not responsible" dismissal to such thoughts. 

So the real American Family is now under attack by organizations with "American" and "Family" in their titles; under attack by groups dedicated to the motto of "whatever it takes." And if we want to defend the sanctity of its beautiful diversity, we might have to start being as profane as our enemies. 

Sad, but true.

*E.g.: Family Research Council and American Family Association 

** The Pew Forum research done in 2008 of the "Networking" of the American Family shows just how much and how little the American Family has changed: the majority of families still eat dinner together and prize family time over all other activities. However, the makeup of the family has changed: single mothers with children, grown children with elderly parents, gay couples with children, extended families. Groups like the American Family Association will always denigrate these groups by saying that they not "real" families. 

Fischer: The Constitution Allows Us To Be Absurd

When Bryan Fischer REALLY gets to fuming about gays, Obama, Muslims, etc. etc., he becomes a talking head telling everyone what he thinks is "absurd."* The irony is that Obama's "DOMA Dump" has made Bryan Fischer look "absurd." He is also obsessed with the word "animus" in Obama's statement about DOMA. Given how much he thinks the Constitution, like the Bible, was mandated by God, Fischer argues for our God-given right to hate people if we want to. 

*The comedian Steve Allen was also a philosopher with some substance and he wrote a book about the Bible. With clarity and reason, he criticized most of the Old Testament with his favorite word - "absurd." There's an irony there somewhere as well.

What Do You Call 410,000 Lawyers And A Federal Judge In Favor Of Marriage Equality?

A Start?

No, Just Serious Wounds to the ADF, the FRC, the AFA, the ACLJ 

(and all the other homophobic acronyms you can think of )

"RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges state, territorial, and tribal governments to eliminate all of their legal barriers to civil marriage between two persons of the same sex who are otherwise eligible to marry."

First, the ruling of Judge Vaughn Walker, now this! OMG! The American Bar Association has just de facto legalized same-sex marriage! The largest and most influential group of legal eagles in the nation (and possibly the world) has come out with a resolution urging all governments to legalize gay marriage. It's mind-boggling! And the timing must have been intended (the Right will call it "conspiratorial"). 410,000 members! How many will resign in protest/disgust?

According to the ADF, that group of bumbling legal eagles (more like legal chickens) people are already starting to turn in their memberships, but, after all, it doesn't speak for many lawyers. Huh? ONE THIRD of U.S. lawyers are members.

“The fact that ADF and other lawyers disagree with ABA on a number of controversial issues demonstrates the gross inaccuracy of ABA’s claim that it speaks for the U.S. legal profession,” remarked ADF Senior Legal Counsel Doug Napier, who resigned from the ABA because of its stance on controversial political issues.

It must have been the word "urges" that got to them.

Anyway, the ABA is still the largest professional organization for lawyers in the country -- and the largest voluntary professional association in the world. And the ABA has one tiny modicum of clout: it accredits law schools. Did the ABA accredit Liberty University School of Law (Jerry Falwell's pet project) or Regent University Law School (Pat Robertson's territory - which buried over 150 of its graduates in George Bush's Department of Justice)? Yes, both are accredited by the ABA.

BUT (and it's a big one) the goal of the ABA is to "Eliminate bias in the legal profession and the justice system" and "Work for just laws, including human rights, and a fair legal process." 

The ABA also requires that all students at ABA-approved schools take an ethics course in professional responsibility.*

Ooops. It may be hard to prove that, say, Regent University Law School's graduates are not professionally responsible or ethical, but the ADF doesn't look like it has that kind of reputation. Especially if it is willing to have "junk science experts" testify in an important trial.

And in endorsing the right of gays to marry, the ABA is stating that it is working toward its goals of "eliminating bias" and working laws concerning human rights. So what will the ethics courses at Liberty and Regent look like from now on? They'll have to practice their rhetorical skills in finding some loophole.

It has just recently been discovered, for example, that Matt Barber, an ever-enlightened dean of Liberty will go to extreme lengths to demonize homosexuality: below is his seminar on arcrotomophilia (sexual attraction to amputees) and its evil link to ENDA. If you're amazed at what Barber can get away with, write to the ABA about Liberty's accreditation.

Hmmm, I wonder how many "philias" they'll be teaching that ALL/MOST gays have? How about: 

Nasophilia (noses) Somnophilia (sleeping people) Macrophilia (giants) Lactophilia (breast milk) Emetophilia (vomit) or the ever popular Ursusagalmatophilia (teddy bears).** Of course, Barber probably figurers that if you can spell it, you must have it. (Teabaggers are so very dull)

The California Seesaw

Considering the up-'n-down situation of same-sex marriage in California, it ought to qualify as a ride in an amusement park: it's on again...well, sort of. It's not clear. Walker declared the stay to be voided on Aug. 18th, PENDING no ability to appeal. If you've been following the trial and its decision, you know that the ABILITY to appeal is in question. The supersonic dimwit defense team of ADF will try to finagle the appeal, but they must have a solid reason, like allowing gay marriage will cause bloodshed (maybe theirs, from Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer, etc.). Personally, I would love to see them appeal if not for anything but to see them make idiots out of themselves again. I could sell tickets! But an appeal could draw things out for another year, making SSM a hotbutton issue for November. Besides, just how much authority does a "proponent" for a group related to the state proposition have? The Christian Right will make it look like another needless nailbiter and another cause to outs "activist" judges.

Speaking of which...

Walker said on Thursday that ban proponents didn't convince him that anyone would be harmed by allowing same-sex marriages to resume...

Finally, Walker said it also appeared doubtful that the opponents of the ban have any right to appeal his decision striking down a state law that he said should have been defended by either Schwarzenegger and Brown, who both refused to do so.

Judge Walker has taken it on the chin from critics before (even from gays - consider the "Gay Olympics" fracas), but this time he is to be commended just for hanging in there and not stooping to react to critics, like Tony Perkins of the FRC:

The decision to shove Proposition 8 aside so quickly only heaps more outrage on a judge who should have never been allowed to consider the case in the first place. By lifting the "stay" on marriage licenses, he's attempting to plunge the state- and, by extension, the country--into deeper legal chaos just to satisfy his own radical agenda.

...and the following who practically considers him to be the Anti-Christ:

Suzyrice.com:

How Walker’s animus about Christ and Christianity was relevant to his considerations, as to the Constitution, of Proposition 8 shall be left to psychiatrists to determine, but, clearly Judge Walker used the opportunity before him to launch his personal hatred of “society,” about “heterosexuals,” about “the majority (in his ruling, Walker defined “the majority” as society and heterosexuals) and about Christianity.

But let's look at the situation this way: we scored the ABA, a federal judge (appointed by Reagan, btw), the governor of California and the Attorney General of California in a matter of weeks. Our side is beginning to look a bit heavier than theirs right now. 

They don't like it, but...tough.

* wikipedia: Typically, this is an upper-level course; most students take it in the 2L year. This requirement was added after the Watergate scandal, which seriously damaged the public image of the profession because President Richard Nixon and most of his alleged cohorts were lawyers. The ABA desired to demonstrate that the legal profession could regulate itself and hoped to prevent direct federal regulation of the profession.

**For a list of some more "philias" go to wikipedia's page.

The Tale of Clay and Harold: The Type Of (Ill) Treatment The AFA Can Believe In!

A Story So Righteously Vicious Only Bryan Fischer 

And His Followers Could Love It!

The story of Clay and Harold of Sonoma Co, CA has made the rounds on the web, so you might have already experienced the shock of the story. The 78-page suit (complaint) against the County of Sonoma makes for even more shocking reading. In a nutshell: Clay Greene, 78, was separated from his long time partner, Harold Skull, 88, after Harold was hospitalized. BOTH men were placed in nursing homes, all of their property sold off (even the cats were taken away!), Clay was prevented from seeing Harold and purposely kept unaware of his partner's condition. 

Even when Harold died. 

The County of Sonoma is now alleging that it was acting on behalf of Harold because there was domestic violence involved. Yeah, right. Look at the Bilerico Project response to the case. The county also described Harold and Clay as "roommates." Are disturbances between roommates considered "domestic" violence? How stupid is the County of Sonoma in saying that this was NOT a case involving gay partners? Do mere roommates have co-joining powers of attorney? Do mere roommates leave all of their property in each other's will? July 16th will be a date for everyone to mark: the case SHOULD receive a great deal of attention. The MSM, however, has failed to report on it at all. Hopefully, the power of the blogosphere will help to produce enough attention.

And the ties to the American Family Association?

The roots of the AFA's rabid homophobia go back as far as 1998, with conservative columnist Don Feder's rant in AFA's magazine, AFA Journal:

This is still (barely) a democracy. How many times do we have to say "no" - to domestic-partners ordinances, gay marriage, efforts to coerce the Boy Scouts and public school indoctrination - before the elite takes this resounding negative as an answer?

Enter Bryan Fischer:

It might be worth noting that what I actually suggested is that we impose the same sanctions on those who engage in homosexual behavior as we do on those who engage in intravenous drug abuse, since both pose the same kind of risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. I'd be curious to know what you think should be done with IV drug abusers, because whatever it is, I think the same response should be made to those who engage in homosexual behavior.

Remember, this is the same man who advocates deportation of ALL Muslims, American-born citizens or not. This is the same man who thinks that being a "Christian Nation" means being ONLY a "Christian Nation." Intolerance for other religions is considered righteous.

The AFA's campaign against gays goes beyond  the confines of gay marriage,  but suffice it to say that the case of Clay and Harold   would go far in eliciting feelings of elation and righteousness. After all, the case may be against the County of Sonoma, but it could just as well be against religious-based organizations like the AFA.  For example, if the hospital that notified the County about Harold were a faith-based hospital, what are the chances that  Harold and Clay would have been considered  "roommates" and not partners? 

Think about it. 

                                                                                                                               

UPDATE: Fischer's mudslinging ties gays, Muslims and the U.S. Armed Forces together into one evil cabal:

Bottom line: you want to know who's now running the U.S. Army, the U.S. Navy and the Marines and calling the shots where it counts? Fundamentalist Muslims and homosexual activists.

In fact, I'll predict that there will be a day of prayer at the Pentagon on May 6, and it will feature a Muslim imam, a homosexual clergyman, and no conservative Christians of any kind.

This is not your father's military. It's not even your father's country anymore.

The man and the organization are trying every rhetorical trick in the book to make sure that people like Clay Greene and Harold Skull never get justice.

American Putz: Is FOX Going To Hell Riding A Very Happy Horse?

"It's Like Getting Hate Mail From Hitler"

I was scared. All forty of us were. We went from the showers through the foot disinfectant and into the cold, subterranean vault of tile walls and floor. There were no windows, which was just as well because we were all naked. I was fourteen and, with the exception of my father, I had never seen naked men. Or naked boys called “men.”

No, this was not Auschwitz. Instead, it was the first day of swimming class in my Catholic college prep school. It was then that I sadly realized: all men are not created equal. And that keeping this knowledge from young "men" (like me, at least) was criminal.

Likewise for getting a hissy-fit over a male mammal function.

Last Sunday, FOX aired its episode of American Dad, titled Never Look a Smith Horse In The Mouth. The animated program is definitely adult in content in that it has scenes and references that children would not comprehend: its send off of "The Rapture", Jesus meeting Sam in a bar to tell him that the Anti-Christ has taken Francine and an episode titled "Fake Jesus." One of the most notable was when Roger the alien talks about Christianity:

Roger: Oh, I love your religion ... for the crazy! Virgin birth. Water into wine. It's like Harry Potter, but it causes genocide and bad folk music.

But this time, the program really pushed the envelope with a scene implying the masturbation of a horse! The Parent's Television Council is `now starting to get American Dad punished by the FCC since it thinks the episode "depicted scenes of a man masturbating a horse. " Explicit bestiality!! So how does the creator of American Dad and Family Guy, Seth MacFarlane, take all the criticism?

"That’s like getting hate mail from Hitler. They’re literally terrible human beings. I've read their newsletter, I've visited their website, and they're just rotten to the core. For an organization that prides itself on Christian values—I mean, I'm an atheist, so what do I know ?—they spend their entire day hating people."

BTW, a poll was taken and 40% of those polled thought the scene was harmless and very funny.

Now here's the primary attack: From PTC:

A broadcast television network aired an animated program on a Sunday evening when children were in the audience, and the program featured a man masturbating a horse," said Tim Winter, president of the PTC. "Up until now, I never imagined that those exact words could ever be spoken in that particular order. But sadly, here we are.

Fox declined to comment on the backlash.

I wish I had a copy of the aforementioned scene, but the only one you can view is on the PTC's site HERE. Do you see Stan actually touch the horse's penis and stroke it? No. Is masturbation implied? Yes. Implied. And to the people of the PTC, implying masturbation is just as bad as the act itself. Imagining sex is just as bad as the act itself. And with all that imagining and implying going on, the PTC exploits people's assumptions that something wrong happened.

The PTC is trying to penalize Fox and MacFarlane due to implications and not actual fact. They are also arguing that since American Dad airs at 9:30PM, it violates the law that says more adult content must be shown after 10:00PM.

A question: just where does bestiality come in on all of this? The horse may have ended the episode very happy, but did Stan get pleasure out of it? Obviously not. And if Stan didn't derive any pleasure, is there, in fact, any bestiality going on at all?

There wasn't. The PTC wants you to think that. They also do not want you to see a mammalian appendage ever again, unless you have to.

Like when you're in swimming class.