woof woof whimper whimper

an interesting question arose tonight. a friend and i stumbled upon a picture, the caption of which was "every time you stick something up your ass god kills two puppies." we were discussing this canine euthanasia, but we were perplexed by one situation. maybe you can help us out, faithful reader.

if person A were to stick something up person B's ass, which one is responsible for killing the puppies? the one who sticks it up the other's ass, or the one in whose ass the item is stuck? (we are taking for granted that god, though performing the killing, is not responsible for the killing.)

we came up with two possible answers:

1) an equitable solution. since one stuck the object up there, and the other donated the ass, maybe they're each responsible for killing one puppy. this seems to be more of a policy argument than a fault argument. the thinking is probably that even one puppy should not be killed, and so people would be detered both from sticking things up an ass and from lending an ass.

2) you have to look to intent. within this option, there are still several situations:
a) if B asked A to stick a broom up B's ass, then B is clearly at fault and is responsible for the death of both puppies. A simply helped B achieve B's goal. but this also raises the question of A's consent. clearly, when A takes part in the activity, A is contributing to the action, the ultimate consequence of which is the death of two puppies.
b) however, if A snuck up on B and just shoved it up there without B's intent/consent, then it seems A is responsible for the death of the puppies, even though B's ass holds the object.
c) a more difficult situation is if A offers "hey, B, do you want me to stick the remote up your ass?", then B accepts, and it is done. though A had the original intent, it is not A's ass that is penetrated. furthermore, it seems as though B also has the requisite intent upon consenting. this situation might offer more strength to the equitable argument.

so who killed the puppies? and i only hope, dear reader, that you'll think twice from now on.