Yes, these are all benefits of marriage, but not neccessarily incentives to marry that would be considered over, say, whether you wanted to be married to that person. That was the point I was making.

I don’t really think that applies. People getting married for tax purposes is not much of a trend. Health benefits, maybe, but not tax benefits.

Only if we can renew at a home depot or pottery barn.

This feels more like an argument against long-term monogamy, rather than having to do anything with marriage.

I pasted the link and it just auto-embeded.

I have to disagree

Riff Raff owes at least one person $68,000. [Page Six]

So street harassment is now a reality show format?

Someone wanted then the eat dicks

We call it “The Couv”

And which of those purposes does this fit under?

What about Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc. ?

Following a plot and premise and commenting on them are not the same thing, and non-commercial use does not = fair use.

How does it comment on the original work?

Fair use as a parody requires “at least in part, comments on that author’s works”

How is it fair use if it’s used for marketing?

Penny Ray is a man

What I find interesting (infuriating) is that in the pictured chairs, boys are told why they shouldn’t kick and playing rough (it hurts, no one likes their face in the dirt) while girls are simply told to think twice about what could upset others.

That rips off a line from Fools Rush In

double post