Including humans. I’m not going near the person launching pinecones at my head from their yard.
The article has a paragraph later on that says:
In rejecting the plaintiffs’ claims for damages, the court said, “It cannot be said that discussions at the Diet…regarding provisions not allowing same-sex marriage are clearly in violation of the Constitution.”
I suspect the plaintiffs are only appealing that aspect of the judgment.
All dinosaurs are lesser to spinosaurus.
Forge Exquisite Armour Reproductions
I thought it must be too garbled for someone to have honestly thought it was a sensible message, but hadn’t seen it before. Thanks for the extra context.