Judge Rejects Insane Kansas Couple's Bid to Intervene in Marriage Case

The Unruhs - mentally ill?

With state bans on same sex marriage having fallen like a chain of dominoes over the last few weeks, the reaction of self-prostituting Republicans in a few states - e.g., Kansas, Florida and North Carolina are examples - as well as  "godly Christians" has helped underscore just how deranged most these individual are in fact.  Among the most bizarre examples, however, was the effort by Phillip and Sandra Unruh (straight godly Kansas Christians) to intervene in the case, Marie v. Moser, pending in federal court in Kansas.  According to the couple's batshit crazy petition to intervene, 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.  I am NOT making this up!  Here's some of the lunacy from their petition:

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.

Thankfully, the federal court recognized the Unruh's for the loony bin escapees that they are and rejected their bizarre and insane claims.  The Bilerico Project has details on the Court's drop kicking of the Unruh's claims.  Here are highlights:

The Unruhs have identified no federal statute giving them an unconditional right to intervene in this case and the Court has identified no such statute. In addition, the Unruhs have failed to satisfy the four factors established by Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2). Specifically, the Court doubts whether plaintiffs can show that their marriage constitutes a protectable property interest under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution or that this case’s disposition will impair their ability to protect that interest.

[T]he Unruhs assert that “an injustice would be done by leaving out the very individuals whose marriage is affected by the marriage laws and decisions regarding their constitutionality.”  But the Unruhs do not identify any reasons the Kansas Attorney General’s  Office cannot or will not represent those interests adequately. The Court concludes, therefore, that the Unruhs have failed to make a “compelling showing” sufficient to overcome the presumption of adequate representation. Accordingly, the Court denies the Unruhs request for intervention as a matter of  right under the first alternative of Rule 24.

As I and others have noted before, the best argument for not being Christian is the "godly Christians" themselves.  Fortunately, the younger generations are seemingly watching them closely and walking away for institutional religion entirely.