Prenuptial agreements should be required prior to marriage. People should create agreements while they’re at their best with each other, not their worst. Get the courts out of determining how assets should be split. All this can be done beforehand when couples are on their best of terms.
The core problem with ‘prenups’, at least I understand it, is that it assumes that something that is intended to be “till death” is doomed to failure.
1 Like
I think 56% of first marriages end in divorce now. Either come up with the terms when each person is at their best or let the government and lawyers decide and drain you out.
Better plan: fix the divorce issue.
We shouldn’t be encouraging more divorces and embracing prenups, we should be fixing things to drop that divorce rate.
Frankly speaking, the attitude of “You need a prenup if you’re getting married because your ‘till death do we part’ arrangement is probably doomed to be temporary regardless” comes off as a very good reason to never get married in the first place.
What’s your solution? Entering a marriage without a prenups like a 18 yo signing on hundreds of thousands to take out student loans for an art degree
As I said: Fix the divorce problem.
Your plan looks at the problem and thinks the problem needs to be accepted.
I look at the problem and think the problem needs to be actually fixed.
Given that, as I understand it, prenups can just be thrown out anyway, if prenups are basically required for marriage, I have to ask why even have marriage at all at that point?
Why not just abolish marriage as a government-recognized institution?
You have yet to tell me how to fix the problem? The problem that whatever solution you’re providing isn’t working if it’s being done. Please share your solution.
The solution @Janewaydoh is conversion of hearts. It is because of hardness of hearts that divorce exists.
@Perenoel How’s that working out?
Not too well for lots of people, but thats still the solution.
I agree on your premise, I just don’t think it’s possible. I was just trying to offer what I consider a practical solution, not the ideal perfect solution.
That would require an entire different proposal - or set of proposals.
In the meantime, your proposal would make the problem worse and even if it was implemented would need to be repealed anyway.
Do you think marriage is salvageable? If not, why not push to disband government’s role in marriage entirely and propose that government stop officially and legally recognizing all forms of marriage?
What about your proposal is a solution?
You still keep dodging the question on what your solution is. I’m waiting.
You’re either missing or ignoring the point that the actual solution is another debate entirely that would require an entirely different proposal, possibly multiple proposals.
The core of the issue is that discussing actual solutions requires an entirely different discussion entirely.
Since this thread is explicitly meant for discussing your proposal involving mandating that all marriages come with prenups, this isn’t the place for in-depth discussion about actual solutions.
In the meantime, what I can positively say is that your core proposal - mandating prenups - would conflict with any actual solution, which is why I present arguments against said proposal and ask you to defend your proposal against criticism.