NN

Dave – because a subject has a specific right with respect to the governing authorities does not necessitate that this subject thereby has equal authority to the government over him. That is, my claim to trial does not thereby make my authority toward the US equal to the US’s authority over me. Nor does (for instance) the fact that a subsidiary company has an equal right to sue its parent company make the subsidiary company have equal authority over its parent company.

Once again, I think passage does imply that the husband does not have “absolute” authority over the wife (he is instructed specifically not to deny her conjugal rights thus limiting the possible scope of his authority), but I’ve never heard any thinking complementarian claim that anyways. However, this stricture of limitation does not thereby negate any possibility of authority.

(Thought I’d clarify for the new person commenting – consider me again bowed out)