h a l f b a k e r yWhere life irritates science.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Who likes messy, nasty, traumatizing divorces? Does it always have to end up this way? Not if we choose otherwise...
Introducing the Marriage Licence Agreement: "Till April 9th 2004 do we part..." The institution of marriage should be flexible enough to recognise different needs and allow for
creative solutions by mutual consent. Not perhaps as complex as employment contracts, but with sufficient flexibility and options for both parties. That way, we'll avoid all the expensive divorce proceedings that nobody wins (except divorce lawyers).
The basic model is a marriage that lapses after x number of years or months, renewable for further periods by both parties' consent. That way, both parties are pressured to make their relationship work within the limited time, and will value their precious time together. It will also discourage adultery and other unfaithful acts.
Both parties have the option to seal a permanent marriage at any time subsequent, once they are sure. That way, they have more time to make certain they've found the right partner for life. Of course, they can also make it permanent from the start, but it's good to leave more options open.
The anticipated parting date will make one psycologically prepared, and an eventualy parting will be more acceptable in the eyes of families and friends. After parting ways, each will be 'single' again, rather than a 'divorcee' with all the negative stigma attached to that word.
But where children are involved, we need to give them adequate protection. So we need a law that says if a child is born from the marriage, then not only is the marriage period compulsorily extended for another twelve years, but divorce is also strictly forbidden.
Celtic Handfasting
http://www.religiou...ce.org/mar_hand.htm
Somewhat baked by Godless pagans :^) [Jeremi, Apr 10 2002, last modified Oct 17 2004]
TheMarriageLease(tm) Blog
http://www.TheMarriageLease.blogspot.com
Join the discussion and drive the Evolution of Marriage with TheMarriageLease... making marriages last longer [EOMTML, Nov 20 2007]
[link]
|
| |
For sale: Spouse. Lease-return with low mileage. |
|
| |
baboo, I'd think this would actually encourage adultery and other unfaithful acts, rather than discourage them. |
|
| |
So, essentially, why bother with the marriage at all? dictionary .com defined marriage as "The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife; wedlock; matrimony." Which brings to mind the line from Meatloaf "...so now I'm praying for the end of time to hurry up and arrive....." |
|
| |
Imagine the tension near the end/renewal date? Would be like the last day of a job.
Personally I'm in favor of serial monogomy. |
|
| |
Never mind that this idea has been posted here before. Read the annotations on the "marriage option" idea at the top of this page. |
|
| |
I concur that this is a duplicate idea. [m-f-e], please. |
|
| |
Which is it a duplicate of [phoenix]? |
|
| |
There was an Earth II episode where this concept was explored. |
|
| |
Call me conservative, but I am very much against this idea. If you want to make excuses up about the validity of the marriage, then don't marry the person at all. Divorces are meant to be messy, because you aren't supposed to get divorced. Choose carefully who you want to be married to; if you're not sure, date them until you are. |
|
| |
I used to think like that too. |
|
| |
First off Pagans are not godless as Jeremi says We just have more than one god like the american Indians, We worship the earth as our mother and is it not? Without it, god or no god, we would all be dead. Handfasting (the proper term for this kind of marriage) has been practiced for centuries and it is not the end of the line. Most people use it as a trial period such as engagements. The vows are renwed in a year and a day with the consent of both adults.Couples who enter into these marriages usually have excellent communication with each other and it is a decision they make toghether. At the end of the trial period most couples chose to make the marriage legal. But what does that mean? It simply means the state or country now recognizes the union. A piece from my handfasting ceremony " It is their marriage and not something created by religion or the state. It is theirs to define,theirs to make real, their lives." and during our vows "Be us close although seperate,Each possesing the other thru will not thru law". The point being , couples that go through the handfasting process legal or not are usually more commited to each other than most other couples. The entire ceremonies are usually written by the couple so it will mean more to them than one coming out of any old book. We are not godless or looking to use anyone. We are consenting adults and are very aware of what we are getting into. In todays society where divorce is all to common Handfasting is an excellent idea. There has to be a much deeper commitment to each other for a handfasting to take place. Zara 2-8-03 |
|
| |
My partner and I have actually discussed this on several occasions, and think this may be the way to go. Adding children to the mix automatically extends the contract until the youngest child graduates high school. The big issues for us at this point are finding a state that will grant this type of renewable marital contract, and also trying to figure out how health insurance would work during the time in which I am at home raising said child. The best we've been able to come up with is--not surprisingly--a very well-stated pre-nuptial agreement. Go figure. |
|
| |
I am Certain Heinlien mentioned 1, 2 year, or lifetime contracts multiple times in multiple books. Is my memory wrong? |
|
| |
I think this has been a feature in some of Larry Niven's Known Space stories too. but in the context of a society where humans live for centuries. |
|
| |
I belive that marriage should continue to be marriage, and if people want a time-limited relationship, they can just draw up a contract to that effect, or do a handfasting, or any other ceremony that they feel is right for them. This is something people already can do, it just isn't called a marriage. |
|
| |
I feel that this is a case of both eating and keeping the same croissant, so none from me. |
|
| |