John M. Becker

Kooky Straight Couple Claims Same-Sex Couples Want to Steal Their Marriage

Filed By John M. Becker | October 23, 2014 11:00 AM | comments

Filed in: Fundie Watch, Marriage Equality, Politics
Tags: Christianists, gay marriage, Kansas, marriage equality, privilege tantrum, same-sex marriage, wingnuts

scared-lady-1950s.jpgPhillip Unruh, a lawyer from the tiny city of Harper, Kansas (population 1,473), filed a rather astonishing, typo-ridden motion in federal court yesterday.

Phillip and his wife Sandra ask to be allowed to intervene in Marie v. Moser, the ACLU's marriage equality case in the Sunflower State. On what grounds, you ask? Why, because they say that allowing same-sex couples to marry is "deeply disturbing," "inflicts profound harm" on them, and is tantamount to a literal theft of their own marriage.

Because marriage is a finite resource, of course. There is only so much marriage to go around, and if the gays -- who can't even make babies -- get their hands on it then STRAIGHT CHRISTIANS WILL HAVE LESS MARRIAGE!

No, seriously, that's the argument they're making.

From their motion:

Clearly the Plaintiffs seek to redefine the marriage word the Unruhs and thousands like them in Kansas use to describe their relationship in order to extend marriage to them. If Plaintiffs are successful marriage will no longer be as it has been defined... can a word exist without a definition? What is marriage after the Kithcen [sic] Court's fundamental restructuring of the concept? ... Should the proper application of principals [sic] of equality have such a result?

Plaintiff's [sic] are not content to behave as they wish or to find their own name for their relationship without taking the name Unruhs use for their relationship. The Unruhs do not want to share the marriage name and neither did 70% of the Kansans when they voted to pass the amendment...

Got that? The Unruhs don't want to share with others -- they're going to take their toys and go home. More, after the break.

It gets even more hilarious:

If the Plaintiffs are successful in their causes of action the meaning of marriage will be so fundamentally and profoundly changed that the Unruh's [sic] will experience a taking of their property rights in marriage without due process of law. The Unruhs claim a property right in marriage that is the subject of this action and is so situated that disposing of this action may as a practical matter impair or impede Unruhs' ability to protect their interest in the institution of marriage that forms the substance of their relationship...

The extension of marriage to same sex relationships inflicts profound harm on the Unruhs. For the courts to say that from this day forward marriage in Kansas must be extended to a same sex couple is and for ever [sic] will be deeply disturbing to the Unruhs and undoubtedly to those that cared enough to pass an amendment to protect it, a departure from the joy and celebration normally associated with the word marriage.

Because same-sex marriages literally make opposite-sex marriages less joyful. Just ask the hundreds of thousands of married opposite-sex couples in marriage equality states who are... every bit as happily married now as they were before their state cast off the shackles of marriage discrimination.

The full epic privilege tantrum motion is below, via Equality Case Files. It's worth reading in its entirety, as there are quite a few other deliciously ridiculous nuggets inside.

For example, the couple questions the standing of the plaintiffs in the case, a lesbian couple, to argue for marriage equality on behalf of both lesbians and gay men. And they even cite the Bible. Literally. As in, the book of Genesis.

Check it out and enjoy the laughs:

2:14-cv-02518 #13 by Equality Case Files

I'll say to the Unruhs what I always say to crackpot arguments like this: if same-sex marriage threatens your own marriage, don't fight equal marriage rights. See a therapist instead.

h/t: Kathleen Perrin


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.