Two year marriage contract

(1/4) > >>

Faerie (September 30, 2011, 13:30:15 PM):
Quote
Mexico City - Mexico City lawmakers want to help newlyweds avoid the hassle of divorce by giving them an easy exit strategy: temporary marriage licenses.

Leftists in the city's assembly - who have already riled conservatives by legalising gay marriage - proposed a reform to the civil code this week that would allow couples to decide on the length of their commitment, opting out of a lifetime.

The minimum marriage contract would be for two years and could be renewed if the couple stays happy. The contracts would include provisions on how children and property would be handled if the couple splits.

“The proposal is, when the two-year period is up, if the relationship is not stable or harmonious, the contract simply ends,” said Leonel Luna, the Mexico City assemblyman who co-authored the bill.

“You wouldn't have to go through the tortuous process of divorce,” said Luna, from the leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution, which has the most seats in the 66-member chamber.

Luna says the proposed law is gaining support and he expects a vote by the end of this year.

Around half of Mexico City marriages end in divorce, usually in the first two years.



http://www.iol.co.za/news/back-page/til-2013-do-us-part-1.1148021

My first initial reaction was "Cool!" but then I got myself thinking about this, and wondering whether it is really such a good idea. Perhaps two years are a bit short in my mind, from experience with family and friends (not based on any realistic statistics), marriages generally fold around the 7 - 10 year mark. Two years will generally produce a baby amongst the younger married couples and damn, that first year with a baby is a bummer, and having an easy way out and leave when the screetching is at the pitch and not following through to the more "relaxed" and "fun" part of kids might be an option for many.

Thoughts?
Superman (September 30, 2011, 20:19:02 PM):
Hello Faerie,

Interesting topic and I agree with you that this is not the answer either.

I have never been married and would advise anybody in love not to get married either.
Marriage carries with it so much baggage. Most divorced people seem to be worse off in the end.

Perhaps some sort of cohabitation agreement is the answer.
But even these agreements have their own baggage.

We need some rational answer to this question.

But I stick to my guns on *Don't get married*

Regards,

Superman
Zulumoose (October 01, 2011, 09:00:04 AM):
GCG (October 03, 2011, 08:57:42 AM):
i read somwhere, that one should not co-habit, get married/engaged, before two years of the relationship has passed.
thus, all the hormones have petered out, and you are more likely to make more rational decisions.
sounds like good science to me.
for marriage... i dont know if it's a needed thing anymore. and i heard this morning, someone referring to some guy 'making an honest woman out of her' by proposing to his gf. so there is still the stigma that you are being immoral by having an adult relationship without the ring on the finger.
after my narrow escape with the ex, i will be VERY lax to get hitched again. i even bought loads of stuff to pimp my cottage this weekend, because i plan to live there for many years still. eventhough my bf and i are heading for the the 2 year mark. the thought of co-habiting, sounds nice on paper, but when i think about having to deal with his small continent of comicbooks and games and late night bloodbowl games and endless soccer/cricket/motorsport, the fun of having someone to come home to, withers.
JoanA Arc (October 03, 2011, 10:19:25 AM):
Superman: sorry, but I think your advice to those in love to not get married is crap. I believe its a matter of personal preference and choice. If you love each other enough to feel that going through a ceremony, wedding rings and an official piece of paper is what brings you closer together, then what's wrong with that? Or if you think and feel differently and prefer not to take that kind of step and rather live together - nothing wrong with that either. Either way, whatever choice you make, the decision is yours and you should (hopefully) be realistic enough to know that life is not perfect, circumstances change, you/partner may change, and unfortunately sometimes it goes sour for whatever reason. Spend a longer period of time together before getting married, a year or two of engagement maybe, and by then surely one should be able to gauge how you both would handle married life, or decide to live together.

I have been married for 8 years - a year's engagement beforehand. Hubby had been married before. We have our issues with each other now and then, he pees me off with some of his habits and I irritate him with some of mine. At the risk of sounding corny - hell, I AM being corny - I love my hubby (despite him constantly leaving the toilet seat up) and he loves me. I strongly believe in commitment, I take my vows seriously because I love my partner, and he feels the same. However, if the sh*t hits the fan somewhere down the line then we will just have to deal with it - life is not perfect. It would be nice though!

The Mexican method is just a cop out - divorce rates worldwide are already alarming, what difference is this method going to make?


Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page