© 2016 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Bestiality is a topic that evokes much revulsion and disdain. In jurisdictions where bestiality is a criminal offence, the legislation has as its focus the protection of public morals. It is seen as an abasement of the person. At common law, the offence was enveloped in religious terms, words such as ¿unnatural¿ and ¿abominable¿ were used to highlight the perceived immoral nature of the crime. Bestiality was juxtaposed with sodomy; both were viewed as moral equivalents that had no place in polite society. Those that engaged in either act faced execution. Over time societal attitudes towards homosexuality changed, however, bestiality remains a heinous offence. The criminalisation of bestiality has nothing to do with animal welfare. The fate of the animal is of little concern to the legislature. The laws are drafted from anthropocentric context; the offender in some ways becomes the victim as they are often viewed as psychologically unwell and in need of treatment. Bestiality is also viewed as a gate way crime, one that leads offenders to sexually abuse children and vulnerable adults. Animals are used for many purposes from food to clothing to entertainment and thus not seen as having an existence outside the needs of humans. Humans have dominion over animals and so long as the animal does not suffer unnecessarily, the law does not intrude. While legislation may purport to protect animals from unnecessary harm and suffering, the proprietary status of animals permits harm so long as it is not gratuitous and constitutes good reason. Why should bestiality be singled out? This chapter will examine the justifications for the criminalisation of bestiality and will argue that bestiality should be placed within the confines of animal welfare legislation and the focus should be on the animal and respecting the animal and its need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns and its need to be protected from sexual abuse.