This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Anti-gay marriage equality opponents have always been extremely fond of the slippery slope arguments against marriage equality. However, until now, I've never known of anyone taking it to this level. A Florida man has actually filed a motion to intervene in the federal marriage equality case out of that state, saying that he has fallen for his porn filled Apple computer. Yes, he actually filed a legal brief to that effect. The judge in the case, Judge Robert L. Hinkle (federal district judge for the Northern District of Florida), was not amused by the motion, and unsurprisingly denied Chris Sevier's motion.

Mr. Sevier apparently filed a similar motion to intervene in the Utah marriage equality case as well.

I'll reproduce some of the briefs' quotes below the famous orange design.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

From Right Wing Watch:

Recently, I purchased an Apple computer. The computer was sold to me without filters to block out pornography. I was not provided with any warning by Apple that pornography was highly addictive and could alter my reward cycle by the manufacturer. Over time, I began preferring sex with my computer over sex with real women. Naturally, I 'fell in love' with my computer and preferred having sex with it over all other persons or things, as a result of classic conditioning upon orgasm.
Judge Hinkle responded:
Chris Sevier has moved to intervene, apparently asserting he wishes to marry his computer. Perhaps the motion is satirical. Or perhaps it is only removed from reality. Either way, the motion has no place in this lawsuit. Mr. Sevier has alleged nothing that would support intervention.
The following is with regard to his motion in the Utah case:
In a 50-page motion, he claimed he was there to make the court "put up or shut up" on the gay marriage issue. In his motion in the Utah case, Sevier laid out his totally air-tight argument, warning that marriage equality and the “slippery slope” he warns will ensue will result in Americans “becoming salves of our glands, not slaves of virtue."
Mr Sevier writes in the brief:
Either (1) we will be reduced to a Nation that hypocritically enforces the equal protection and due process clause to suit the interest of the largest minority, which yields discrimination against the true minority classes of sexual orientation, causing hypocrisy to undermine foundation laws, yielding instability; (2) we will remain a Christian Nation that protects traditional marriage, as a relationship set apart because it has the potential of bearing life between two people, who are in a legally binding relationship, who have naturally corresponding sexual organs with the exclusive potential to produce children with DNA that matches theirs; which, of course, makes that relationship both scientifically and factually distinct from all others-religious aside; or (3) we will progress into a Nation that gives equal protection to all classes of sexual orientation allowing everyone to marrying anyone and anything to suit their appetite in the name of tolerance, equality, and love -becoming slaves of ourglands, not slaves of virtue. There is no other possible alternative.
I suppose it's a clever (and funny, to some extent) way to protest marriage equality. However, such antics are quite unlikely to succeed with federal judges who take these issues and the US Constitution much more seriously.


Additional quote from Judge Hinkle's order:

More egregiously, Mr. Sevier has tendered but I have directed the clerk not to file a document that purports to amend the plaintiffs’ amended motion for declaratory and injunctive relief. The tendered document purports to be a “second amended motion for declaratory and injunctive relief,” and it purports to betendered not just by Mr. Sevier on his own behalf but by the original plaintiffs through their own attorneys. Mr. Sevier should take note: he has no authority to tender a document on behalf of anyone other than himself. Filing a document in someone else’s name without the person’s authority is a serious offense; electronically signing or otherwise reproducing an attorney’s signature on a document without the attorney’s authority is a serious offense; and doing any of this again will have substantial consequences.
Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to librarisingnsf on Mon May 05, 2014 at 09:18 PM PDT.

Also republished by Kossacks for Marriage Equality.

Your Email has been sent.