150
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
150 points (100.0% liked)
Today I Learned (TIL)
6147 readers
141 users here now
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.
Share your knowledge and experience!
Rules
- Information must be true
- Follow site rules
- No, you don't have to have literally learned the fact today
- Posts must be about something you learned
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ah it's different from what I originally assumed
https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4072&context=smulr
(See page 509)
knowledge isn't necessary, just assumptions
"need not be committed while in the heat of passion"
"The statute also uses the phrase "before the parties ... have separated." This has been interpreted to mean only that the parties are still in each other's company, not that they are still united in the act of copulation"
"while the husband may justifiably kill his wife's paramour," he may not [...] inflict serious bodily injury (mutulation) upon the paramour without an intent to kill"
"Further, the wife is not justified in taking the life of her husband's mistress"
Boy, rules for thee but not for me. The wife can’t kill a woman she finds sleeping with her husband?
Given all I know of modern Texas history, politics, and conservatism this isn't surprising in the slightest.
I'd say there's a 50/50 chance the GOP try to bring it back.
So just the husband then
Yeah they are oddly progressive when it comes to the rights of sex workers. And no, men are not allowed to be sex workers.
Always cool when the law's like "yeah, you better be trying to kill him when you fuck him up"
"No, you cant take your time!"
Wow, that's significantly worse than I thought at first blush. Basically straight up permission to murder any man in the company of your wife.