PASS THE MOUSE D'OUEVRES, MARTHA, STATES' RIGHTS SAY
IT'S OK!

Van Nuys, CA, March 17, 2004:  As reported in "The New York Times" today, how we view the issue of gay marriage rights goes back to how we have viewed interracial marriage in America.  In essence, if a couple wants to go for same sex marriage, as long as their state doesn't get hissy fits over the practice, the law can be interpreted to mean they are free to join paws.  And, the union should be recognized in any other state as long as it's OK with that state. However, according to legal scholars quoted in the article, the Administration's fears are unfounded; a Constitutional amendment is not really necessary, even for those only wanting heterosexual muttrimonials.  If a state dislikes the same sex idea, it doesn't have to recognize the union. This was the same for interracial marriages, until the Supreme Court did away with all bans on them in 1967.

With the potential for same sex marriages to get back on track, given this news, we contacted couples who had e-mailed to let us know they had reluctantly put their NIPtuals on hold. In a telephone interview today, Harriet Plover and Phyllis Kelly of Philadelphia meowed in unison,  "We have not been able to stop purring since we read 'The Times' this morning!" Having now reinstated plans for their own NIPtual ceremony this June, they reported their tails are in the full upright position, and they are inviting all the cats in their lives to join in the feline-tivities. Mouse d'oeuvres will be served along with tuna treats, and we are sure all will have a splendid time.

How do you feel about the news from legal beagles?  Speak out! Get behind the laws of our great nation! Sign the FUPPPS pet-ition today.