Comments on: Prenuptial Agreements Are Romantic

By: Curiepoint

Curiepoint — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:04:48 +0000

I agree wholeheartedly about kids getting the most out of a financial arrangement, be it during a marriage or after it’s breakdown. But, to this end, the custodial parent had damned well account for every dime of child support that is being spent. It should be demonstrably proved to be for the child’s benefit directly. As it is, arbitrary numbers are set by the courts, and the non-custodial parent has no recourse. I’d rather give half my paycheck to my kids rather see one dime of it go to the ex.

By: Clark

Clark — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:52:34 +0000

Actually, in this day and age, if you marry a woman who makes more than you, prenups are not a good idea. Nothing will make the laws more fair and equitable than if a woman has to pay out like a man.

Aside from that, nothing will get rid of child support. A man will always have to pay this and keep the kids at the level of comfort that they were enjoying during the marriage (ie this is just ploy so even the man who has covered all the bases will still get screwed by the system, since the woman will enjoy most of the benefits of “child support”).

Isn’t it just like womyn that they have to comment on this stuff here and not leave us men alone to do our own thing. Who is love starved for attention? Sound like the women are.

By: Curiepoint

Curiepoint — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:04:45 +0000

Nobody ever remains the exact same person they were before the marriage after the wedding takes place. As far as really knowing someone before you marry them, what if the intent was to deceive all along? There are lots of people out there who enter into marriage and relationships with sublimated ulterior motives. Most ugliness doesn’t come out until it’s too late, or the ugliness doesn’t start until the marriage takes the least little undelightful turn, which is the way of all life.

And, how much time should anyone allot to “getting to know someone” before the marriage? Two years? Three? Twenty-Five? It doesn’t matter. A person can be wholesome and good and kind when the couple start off with very little, but turn into crazed harpies once the assets start piling up.

The only trust anyone should “grant” anyone else in a marriage is the trust that they will live up to the oaths of Love, Honor, and Cherish. Any other issues of trust are off the table, and are earned, not granted. Hence, the pre-nup.

By: jazzygc

jazzygc — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:40:05 +0000

I agree with an earlier posting that the law of the land (federal law) should require not only a pre-nup before marriage, but also that the pre-nup must identify and disclose all assets and debts that each party is bringing into the marriage including income streams from trusts, etc. that exist before the marriage.

These income streams that are in place before the marriage occurs do not become community property, even if they are received after the marriage occurs. If a person commits fraud by not disclosing, then the offended party receives 100% (not 50%) of all assets acquired after the marriage (normally community property) in the case of divorce. These agreements must be iron-clad meaning a judge is powerless to nullify, but can only adjudicate under the terms of the agreement.

This will help both women and men and will greatly reduce the activities occuring in divorce courts today.

By: A Woman

A Woman — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:07:17 +0000

Prenuptial agreements have no place in a marriage–any marriage. If a man desires trust from his wife-to-be (as the writer of this articles purports), he should trust her as well. A prenup is a sure sign that the man who wants one doesn’t have much for the woman he claims to love and wants to marry.

The problem? Men and women don’t take the time to choose wisely for a spouse. They try to take the easy route (i.e. men focus on her appearance to the exclusion of other, far more important criteria, while women focus on his wallet and what he can give her materially to the exclusion of far more important criteria) and then try to cover their butt with a prenup. It doesn’t work.

It seems to me instead that you should find a person whom you can trust and marry her/him. If you think you’ll need a prenup, you’re probably marrying the wrong person. Furthermore, if you have trust issues, you are probably the wrong person for her/him to marry as well.

By: Curiepoint

Curiepoint — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 12:40:38 +0000

Pre-Nups are great in theory. They are more often than not set aside at the time of divorce, particularly if the terms of the agreement stipulate that the man gets anything that could be construed as fair and equitable division of property. Women commonly claim that they felt coerced into signing as a condition of the marriage going forward, and the mangina judges say “Oh, you poor bullied dear”.

A roll of toilet paper has more worth than a pre-nup.

As far as men using women as ***toys and then casting them aside, most divorces are initiated by women for no other reason than their husbands are continuously delighting them in their lives (i.e. they feeeeeel unfulfilled) or more likely she is a subscriber to AshleyMadison (dot) com and has gotten herself something going on the side.

I’m all for equal division of jointly acquired property, but it had damned well better be 50/50. Anything they brought into the marriage independently immediately reverts back to them. If he bought the house, she has no rights to it whatsoever. If she did, then he doesn’t have a stake in it either.

By: annieangel

annieangel — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:08:55 +0000

Pre-nups are great! As long as they spell out what the woman will get if there is a divorce, SUPER! But um, only an idiot would marry a man who tries to make her sign a paper saying that after he uses her for a f**k-toy for a while she can be tossed aside with nothing.

Make them sign the pre-nups ladies! And make sure you’re protected for when the b*****d throws you out!!!

By: Mary

Mary — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 21:59:13 +0000

I’m a woman and agree with this article. I initiated a pre-nup with my fiance so that money will never be a reason we are together. I also agree that any woman who wouldn’t sign a pre-nup has made her choice to marry at least in part based on the lifestyle – marrying the man promises. You aren’t buying her (or are you?) so money should not be a factor. Pre-nups provide an opportunity to focus on what’s important to one another. If a woman is insulted by a pre-nup, I think she has something to hide. (Her expectation that she will be entitled regardless of whether or not you live your entire lives together).

I feel for all of you guys! I’m really disgusted by what i see.

By: Shauna

Shauna — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:46:47 +0000

I whole heartedly agree that prenuptial agreements are important. Many people get married thinking that they can “change” the person they’re marrying about important issues like; having kids, having pets, living in another state, not being a workaholic, or whatever. Having a big list of what the relationship entails (as well as legal stuff in the event of a spouse’s death, or divorce) is very smart so that both parties know to some extent what they’re getting into.

It’s smart for men, it’s smart for women. I think that a prenuptial to some extent should be legally required with a marriage license.

After all, it’s better to be safe than sorry because you were “young and blind with love.”

By: diz

diz — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:33:19 +0000

In current times a pre-nup may be advisable since today’s women may be more educated and self-reliant and have their own assets. So it depends on who you are involved with. I have a friend who was injured severely in a car accident, and though she is now, for all to see who don’t know her, a regular person, she has health issues that require her to have access to her $$$ she received in a settlement. This is a condition that will be with her the rest of her life. Thus, she needs a pre-nup if she were to marry, to protect her very life and well-being.

Aside from that, if you are not going to have children, why get married? What about living together and knowing each day that you are CHOOSING to be with this person again for another day? This is not to sound short-termed, but to create awareness of how you are together. Taking each other for granted is too easily a product of marriage. Why not a daily commitment, like when things were good while you were still dating? (The same things that get stilted when you marry. A kind of having caught the bus so you stop running?)

If you have children, that is another dimension entirely and their legal rights are paramount and the whole picture changes. Then if you choose to get married, you probably need to be most creative and broad-minded about how the pre-nup is worded.