You seriously think that an entire civilization was built on sexual slavery, and the emancipation of it women will bring it down?

Boy this place sure does attract the dark underbelly.

Well, now women have full civil liberties, and that is that.

Civilization will survive husbands not being able to rape their wives. And yes I support a spouse's right to leave a marriage. Women are not chattel, which was the underlying argument for spousal assault.

Why indeed. I have no issue with multiple spouses, though I wouldn't want to be part of such a group.

But one step at a time.

One class: consenting adults

Extrensing marital rights to gay couples is no more creating a new class than overthrowing anti miscegenation laws created a new class. From my point of view, allowingf same sex marriage in fact creates fewer classes.

Sodomy with an infected person is a transmission risk for almost all diseases.

As does vaginal intercoursw. And, of course, many heterosexual coup!es have anal intercourse as well.

In most common law jurisdictions, a religious ceremony has no legal standing at all. The magic in a marriage ceremony isn't "by the power invested in me by God", it is " by the power invested in me by the State of Massachusetts."

Churches' attachments to marriage is historic and I doubt there is anywhere in English speaking North America where a religious ceremony was ever required.

Actually in many jurisdictions thee lack of marital status means even attempting to duplicate the full powers of a spouse in regards to incapacity can be all but impossible to replicate. Even powers of attorney and living wills don't quite deliver you the power in the event of your spouse's incapacity that a marriage license does.

Up until recently beating the shit out of your wife and forcing sexual intercourse on her against her will (spousal rape) was considered lawful and appropriate. Some traditional views just plain suck and we should welcome their demiwey.

This has nothing to do with Marxism, any more than throwing out laws banning miscegenation had anything to do with Marxism.

Historically what constituted a marriage varied from place to place, and even in Medieval times there was no mandate in England requiring a church ceremony. In most jurisdictions in Europe where canon law governed marriage, all that was in fact required was for a couple to declare that they were married, and so long as they lived in that fashion, no ceremony was required at all. Marriage in ancient tienes, save where it involves the aristocracy, where marriage had political implications, wasn't that formalizeds an affair.

Type erasure was the pragmatic way to add generics to Java by ensuring backwards compatibility in the byte code. You'll find that computer language academics almost universally despise type erasure.

Can a goat grant consent?

Macs had cooperative multitasking since 1984. Windows 3.0 also had cooperative multitasking. It didn't need dos emulation and weird graphics hacks as it was built from the ground up rather than an add on hack for Windows. Mac II was color in 1987.

My point is Windows was a low grade hack until Windows 95 where it became a pseudo OS with more hacks upon hacks to get anything to work until XP came along and kicked the nasty model to the curb for all pcs

You know just because you all hated the leather background in the Mac address book does not mean you need to get rid of shininess, chrome, depth perception, and other features which actually helped the user distinguish which Window was active.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Give me my damn skuemorphism back. It works fine. I know NO ONE and I mean NO ONE besides hipster graphic designers afraid to have anything modern looking on their portfolio as other hipster artist look at them before hiring them. It creates a cycle of race to the bottom of less graphics, less detail, blinding white, 72x text.

SKUEMORPHISM != REALISM folks and MS appearently thinks it does.