|
Jennifer Pie is mEAN (pg. 12)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Silky Johnson |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
My dad and his girlfriend have been together like 17 years. No plans to get married. Some people just don't see any reason to. |
I think it's just hard for people to examine why they really think they NEED to get married. I bet most people couldn't tell you a rational reason why they thought they wanted to get married. People are drones, just fulfilling whatever expectation is socially ingrained in them. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think people actually truly think about it.
That's the thing about being with someone for so long...it becomes more and more difficult to see any good reason to get married. People used to get married out of necessity, religious reasons, etc. But those aren't the times we live in now.
I know that I don't really have a rational reason. Obviously we have had many years to think about it (lulz), and at the end of the day it just comes down to pure romanticism - and I'm perfectly okay with that. It was legit something we really had to think long (lulz again) and hard about. Divorce is expensive. :p |
|
|
| Swamper |
| Pre-nups should be a legal requirement... imo. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| The spectrum on those makes them generally pretty anemic. Unless you have itemized millions in assets, no they should not be a requirement. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Silky Johnson
Divorce is expensive. :p |
Yea it is. Almost 20 years later and my dad is still paying... Though he isn't legally required to. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
The spectrum on those makes them generally pretty anemic. Unless you have itemized millions in assets, no they should not be a requirement. |
HAHA, as a child of a really brutal divorce, I respectfully disagree. Prenups cover more than just money + assets. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
Did your parents have you children before they were married, though? Finagling custody into the agreement makes sense... though in an overwhelming majority of cases, that'd make it a post-nuptial agreement, now wouldn't it? You cannot divide kids who don't exist yet, and if you tried, I'd bet a judge would just ignore it in lieu of present conditions.
No, they should not be a requirement. The law as it is already addresses a myriad of circumstances. A prenup probably would not have saved you. |
|
|
| Zoso |
| As long as I get to keep my Blu-ray collection and my TA login, I'm good, yo! (and all the alts) |
|
|
| OrangestO |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
The law as it is already addresses myriad circumstances. |
Fixed :p
Sorry, pet peeve. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
I'm not talking about custody as much as I am the provision of benefits on behalf of each parent. Most arguments about custody, I can guarantee it, have more to do with the money than the actual time with the kids, sadly.
I think prenups would make divorces a LOT less stressful, messy, whatever. Although there's really no accounting for crazy, and how ing insane people get when their hearts are broken. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| It can be used as either an adjective or a noun. |
|
|
|
|
