Actually I’ve met two people that live on 10 and 15%, spectively, of their income and donate the other 90 and 85%. totally possible.

Part of the problem is that the laws have evolved, with layers being added on, and half the time without actually replacing the old laws, so then you have to decide, do the new laws supersede the old? Most would say yes, but what if they don’t directly conflict- might both laws be valid? Also, sometimes a part of the law is in one section, but another part of the law in a second section, and only the first was amended. Sometimes this is an oversight and the second section still has the force of law.

For example, if there is a section that deals with the normal path to marriage- the requirement of a marriage license might have been added- but as pointed out, what if elsewhere there are special rules for Justice of the Peace weddings? What about clergy?

When I was in Oklahoma (1999) I was issued an ordained clergy card, and told that it meant I was legally entitled to preform marriages. Does that mean I can only preform marriages after a license is obtained? Are there other laws/sections that give me the authority to marry, just that it isn’t “registered” until they file for a license?

Was the person who told me this exaggerating? Or maybe referencing an out of date and obsolete practice that no longer had legal force?

No one ever asked me to marry them so I don’t know the answers to these questions. One of my colleagues was, but the couple filed for the marriage license first, so…

Now the clergy card was issued by my church organization… but the form and context made it clear that it was to prove my clergy status to the local government authorities- it was not just a inner-faith issue.

People have commented about why this detail is, while seemingly low in significance compared to what is probably the more telling one about the relationship between her and her father, been focused on so much. However it is important if for no other reason then because so many people made note of it.

As for the “Daddy doesn’t give advise. He gives orders.” line, that could go a lot of ways too. In early comics, Stasia has also commented on him, so I’m eager to see a bit more about her dad and find out what his motivation behind that, the autobiography, and even the bit on the plane (which I think was just funny) is, as well as what else he’s going to be doing. If he’s motivated by making a more profitable endeavor out of his daughter, then things could go one way. If he’s motivated by trying to help his daughter balance her talent and fame with trying to be “normal,” then that’s a whole other direction. If he’s motivated by… well, you get the idea. My guess is that he’s a bit of an overbearing force in her life, and seems to keep her publicity and public image in an iron grip.

And a comment about the marriage license: what about a Justice of the Peace marriage? My understanding was that folks could just show up for those, I didn’t know you needed a license in advance. I could certainly be wrong of course, I’ve never really looked into it myself. However, if a Judge can get ya hitched without a prior application for a marriage license, then I don’t see why a priest couldn’t. Of course, I don’t think there was a license present at the time either, which could be a problem…

Anyway, I’m enjoying the comic and hope to see the next page soon. The zany randomness of it appeals to me, as do the characters.

And this comic…

I wish I had some cookies…

…and that the comic kept a schedual.

So really, I don’t think it matters much whether Stasia’s dad is in character or not. I mean, think about it.

Your daughter just got married to a stranger in front of an audience. Parents care a lot for their children to begin with, but there’s more pressure when that child is beautiful, rich, famous, and has a reputation to worry about.

So, of course, you’re worried that:
~* She’s going to get hurt.
~* This guy could be some whackjob.
~* This guy is a complete stranger to you AND your daughter.
~* Is he marrying her for her money?
~* Is it because he plans to exploit her?
~* How’s this going to affect the girl?

The list goes on.

So, to me, Mr. Tyler’s actions make perfect sense…
But every reader is going to percieve things differently, I guess.

Ghosty: Yeaaah, I get what you’re saying about the fever… I still don’t get why the discussion about the number went on for so long though. XD But hey, it happens.

“His own safety, and the safety of those around him, is secondary to getting laughs from his actions.”

I completely disagree with the premise of your criticism. You don’t have to be the antagonist or the comic relief in order to want to go as fast as possible to get somewhere, no matter how dangerous it is. Ever see “Adventures in Babysitting”? I haven’t in many years, but near the end the babysitter asks how fast their parents drive and I think they say 65, so she says “We’ll go 90″ (or possibly 80, I forgot — either way, it’s very fast and way above the speed limit) and she’s the hero of the story, the protagonist, and she’s got a bunch of KIDS in the car with her. And you know what the audience reaction is? It’s to LAUGH and like her more. So I don’t even understand your concern.

“Another argument against comic relief status is that Stasia still works with him. If he were bad at his job, if he caused her too many problems, she’d have simply replaced him sometime after reaching her majority. She hasn’t, therefore he can’t be too bad.”

I one million percent disagree with this. He’s her FATHER. She’s not just going to “simply replace him.” Some daughters might, but not Stasia, who we’ve already shown to be clearly SCARED of him.

“Good luck with today’s tournament.”

Thanks, but I’m going to the Dodger game instead.