Um ... No.
The opinion, released just yesterday for publication, includes the dictionary definition of "individual" as a "single human being" or "person," along with a claim that the definition of "victim" from the Crime Victims' Rights Act is "an individual" capable of having a spouse or guardian and the panel of three's leap of legal analysis, "Only human beings are able to marry and have spouses." [Note to self: apparently gay men and women are not considered human beings in Michigan either.]
The purpose of this decision? To determine whether a defendant convicted of an “abominable and detestable crime against nature” with a sheep, i.e., bestiality boys and girls, should be required to register as a sex offender. The answer, unfortunately, is also ... No.
Now, I understand the reasoning of the panel and the need to following the law as written; however, the thought that individuals showing such a willingness to harm animals in this way, a way that demonstrates their sexual depravity and violent, sexual predatory natures, are not required to register as sexual offenders rings wrong.
Mary had a little lamb ... run little lamb, RUN!!