Might want to meet with a mathematician instead of a priest before marriage

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: dawheat

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Basically I'm saying in the end there is no "financial benefits" longterm. Some short term gains perhaps but if shit goes south....the women always wins. Short term financial benefits aren't a very good reason to get married.

Basically I'm saying that you know nothing about the bolded portion. The woman gets far less than you think. And it isn't the woman who "wins" alimony. It is the person without a job that "wins" alimony. The man could be in the opposite position at the time of the divorce and then the man gets the alimony.

The good reasons to get married is for the commitment, the societal acceptance, the legal rights. Plus, there are short term benefits. The chance of a small financial hit far in the future is a bad reason to not get married.

Its a 50/50 chance and I feel your grossly underestimated the financial hit. Cars/homes add legal fees can easily be tens of thousands alone w/o alimony or whatever else.

We can wear rings and tell people we are married what does it matter.

your whole underlying assumption is that you *WILL* get divorced. people need to figure out what they really want and take their time - marriage isn't just a statistical event like drawing a marble out of a bag.

No my assumption is that I am only ever in control of my commitment to her and not her commitment to me.

A "lifelong committment" as long as it doesn't put you at risk or potentially cost you a lot. Not the kind of "lifelong commitment" I want to have.

I do think far too many people get married - with the wrong expectations or simply unprepared. However IMO getting married means you're willing to trust the other person with everything you have, not even just half.

If people can't commit to a person at that level, not being married sounds like the right option.

blind trust. look how well its worked out for everyone else :roll:

 

[Born2bwire]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: leftyman

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Saga

Originally posted by: leftyman
Ive been married 24 years and lived with her for a year or two before that. Its hard, but if you want to make it work it will.

With our current generation the resilience to "make it work" is long gone to self-gratification, selfishness, and just plain greed.

No we just realize there is no advantage or purpose to being married.

Marriage isnt for everyone, and there are plenty of people that enjoy life being single, but to claim there is no advantage or purpose to marriage is wrong.

*edit..or are you just claiming the religious aspect of marriage?

You can have a lifetime commitment with an SO without being married.

As long as your down for the lifetime commitment, then what's the problem with taking advantage of the tax breaks and other benefits married couples receive?

Ding Ding! I don't get this myself. It's not like you need to attach any ceremony to it, you can just go down to city hall and get it done like my parents. But getting married does show an outwards expression of commitment and gives societal benefits. Not that everybody should or has to get married that live together, but there are reasons to. What gets me is when people live together and have a child and do not get married. I think that can make for a really sticky situation down the road.