Way to sensationalize something that's law everywhere else in Canada. It's called common-law marriage.

The difference is that Quebec has a different legal code, so it has to catch up sometimes.

Funny to see the parallels between this and the objections to gay marriage - what next? It's the end of the world!

I don't think you have to file income taxes as a couple to be considered a couple in the eyes of the law.

For example, two roommates live together in college, but are not "cohabitating". When they go their separate ways, one does not have a claim against the other for supoprt unless he/she can prove that they were "cohabitating". Income tax forms help, but it's not the end of the world if you still filed as single.

And any claim for support or division of assets is viewed in the light of what property each person brought into the relationship, and their earning ability outside of the relationship. Less support is given to the ex-spouse these days, since women can get jobs and don't need to be paid for, but custodial parents still receive support for the children of the relationship.

That makes no sense. The doctor doesn't have The Spanish form of malpractice insurance?

I agree that she should probably give up the child if she doesn't want it. However, it might be a social thing. Where she wanted to quietly get rid of the unwanted pregnancy before anyone found out, now she has carried the child to term. Everyone she knows now knows she had a baby. The damage to her reputation has been done.

When the child was only a few weeks old, she could remain emotionally detached enough to consider the abortion, but as it got older, she became more attached to the child as a human being. That would easily make it more difficult to give up.

Nick, I wouldn't say the doctor's actions led directly to the birth of the child - a completely different action led to that. I would say the doctor's actions failed to prevent the birth of the child - still responsible for some costs, but not for maintenance of the child well into adulthood.

Aaron, you have to keep it in context. Every time food is mentioned on Neatorama, and many times when it isn't mentioned, the "Fat Americans" comments come out. Alex was just making a Neatorama pop culture reference.

That sandwich is pretty gross, by the way.

Good thing she didn't get cold feet and leave herself standing at the altar.

This somes like some really bizarre publicity stunt, because what sane person could do this? I imagine the audience is composed of the sort of people who slow down to look at car accidents, or someone would have said, "This is the stupidest idea you've ever had."

Is that Spiderman taking a picture up the skirt of the girl in the row above him? Doesn't seem very Disneyish.

Not really that difficult to do. I agree with the bottom rung comment.

Man-thong?

I like how people are concerned over what lesson he taught the kid. He taught the kid to shut up. It's not his job to teach other people's children anything.

Why was the kid watching Titanic? I'd be climbing the walls in the theatre, too.

Violence: not the right answer, sadly.

I remember shutting up some loud guys at a theatre once by a brilliant retort. The entire theatre applauded, and we didn't hear a peep out of the talkers for the rest of the movie.

Not an image made out of smoke, but an image of virtual smoke. In other words, digital manipulation. Not that it isn't artistic, I suppose, but not terribly impressive.

Is it just me - why are all the grammatical errors in the anti-tax comments?

I hope the artists were paid in kind, i.e., invisible currency.

That Bee-Gees chest hair will haunt your dreams for a while, eh?

But two of them were related.

That's a whole lot of hoohah over a yearbook photo.

2001 is hardly a "new" take on anything.

I don't know if I'd drink anything out of some guy's sleeve. Sounds like BillB's on to something. Ick.