JFC. I read the title and said ‘they cannot be serious’, then saw the community <phew>

Finally, a programmer joke I get!

But I also think that this would be a good enough reason for the other person to want a divorce.

How dare you support rape like this!

/s

it’s wrong for someone to have the right to refuse sex?

In the context of swearing an oath that you would have sex, yes it would be your fault for breaking the oath. Inferring a duty to be raped is taking this to ridiculous levels. If someone doesn’t want to they ofc shouldn’t have to, but, that is why I am asking about the legal consequences of being at-fault.

Saying, ‘you broke your oath’ is one thing. Forcing someone to fulfill their oath under threats of violence, or destitution are another. I wish people on here had a better grasp of nuance.

This article is skipping the whole other side of what’s being ruled on. What are the consequences of trying to get divorced while being ruled at-fault for it? They refer to it as ‘rape culture’, but that seems like extremely inflammatory language without knowing ‘why’. Like, is it a threat of being kicked out of the house destitute as the person at fault gets nothing? I agree that would be coercive. I just want the consequences explained so we know why it is rape culture as I don’t live in France.

Edit: to everyone tripping over themselves to white-knight against rape justifications this is closer to why I asked / the legal particulars

where I should begin researching for the quality of e-bikes?

I would start here.

…

What about ebikes?

This image has been summarily removed in the past for ‘advocating violence’. Based on the bat signal which has been used many times in the past as a general deterrent for crime when Batman was known to be out of commission. The parallel here, when Luigi is currently detained pending trial, is obvious and as such doesn’t advocate violence and yet it is close enough the mods intervene.

reasonably believe to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person.

Unfortunately, the CEO’s threat to life is lawful which would preclude this defence. Not saying I don’t support Luigi. Just that it is a good thing nullification exists.

That’s easy. The moment the news reported the Americans had voted in a felon for president.

… wut? “The personal website of a university”?

What do you think ‘as much as possible’ meant in an era where they were ruled by one of the belligerents? Literacy is important indeed. The support he got was to protect local interests and not simply blind support for the Crown because the populace did not care to actually quell the American Rebellion, nor rebel themselves.

edit: “[Guy Carleton] hoped that his policy of conciliation would bear fruit, but only the Canadian clergy (led by Catholic bishop of Québec, Mgr. Jean-Olivier Briand) and the nobility (lords) responded with any enthusiasm to the call by British authorities. The general public remained relatively indifferent, viewing the war as a ‘battle between the English.’”

It did. We sent American Rebels packing and remained neutral as much as possible