Supreme Court Ruling: Apples better than Oranges 

Supreme Court Ruling: Apples better than Oranges

Some have said such a comparison could not be made, but in a hasty decision made today, the supreme court has ruled that apples are better than oranges. Sandra Day O'Conner explains this important ruling:

"The Justices of the Supreme Court feel that apples clearly defeat oranges on several grounds: they have a crisp bite to them, unlike the overwhelming citrus of the orange, they can be eaten without being pealed, an important benefit in our digital society, and they come in a variety of colors unlike the orange which constantly displays, well, orange".

Critics feel this ruling is unjustified. Escher Mcaffrey, an ardent fruit-equality activist explains: "Apples and oranges should be the same, right? I mean, all fruit are created equal, man. Aren't we living in America, the land of the free? Plus, they aren't even on the same playing field. Hasn't anyone in this country heard of the phrase 'you can't compare apples and oranges'".

The justices respond with an enthusiastic "No! Apples and oranges are exceedingly different. An orange a day keeps no doctors away. They are simply made differently. We can even say that they are born differently. Therefore, we, as the primary and utmost judicial body in The United States of America, feel we are justified in our declaration that apples are superior to oranges".