A man named Chris Sevier (pictured above) has filed a motion to intervene in the Florida gay marriage case of James Domer Brenner et al., v. Rick Scott — a case seeking state recognition of Mr. Brenner’s Canadian same-sex marriage, because Sevier wants to marry his porn-filled Apple computer.
Sevier ostensibly filed the motion “on behalf ‘of other minority sexual orientation groups,’ and argued, “if gay couples have the right to marry their object of sexual desire, even if they lack corresponding sexual parts, then I should have the right to marry my preferred sexual object."
In his filing, Sevier continued:
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.
But before you go thinking that Sevier represents that next wave in sexual freedom and human-computer relations, you should know that “in the filing, [“Sevier states] ‘sexual orientation’ never existed as a classification until President Obama came along to advance his ‘social agenda to make America a 'gay nation.'"
The Broward/Palm Beach New Times reports:
This seems to be part of his MO, clogging the legal system with ridiculous claims and troglodyte thinking. Chris Sevier sued Apple because it sold him a computer without telling him about the evils of porn. Chris Sevier sued A&E after it fired Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson after he was caught spewing antigay talk. And just recently, Chris Sevier tried to butt his way into Utah's gay marriage legal 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.
The federal judge overseeing Florida’s marriage case has tossed Sevier’s motion stating, “the motion has no place in this lawsuit.”
