fan_from_texas;664591 wrote:Re a pre-nup: because marriage is based on a commitment to work through whatever problems come up, I think it's counterproductive to create a fall-back plan "just in case." How can someone be committed forever if they're still holding back part of themselves in case things fall apart?

That's my take as well, but I know plenty of guys who have had a marriage fall apart and they got screwed.

Ernest, my post says we have, not we had. When he was born, my priorities changed more.

Fidmeister;664740 wrote:Ernest, my post says we have, not we had. When he was born, my priorities changed more.

Me make-a joke. Durrrrr.

fan_from_texas;664591 wrote:I didn't say it makes someone a loser. I am saying that there is a level of happiness that comes from a spouse/kids that is tough to meet through other relationships or life experiences.

That is your opinion which you are entitled to share, but not everyone is made happy by these things. You are, which is great, but others may find higher levels of happiness in traveling the world without a family or many other things.

I am not against the idea of getting married one day and having children, but I don't like how it is burned into the minds of people in our society that if you don't get married and have a family it is abnormal.

fan_from_texas;664591 wrote: I think the pre-nup is a bad idea. Marriages work because of commitment, not chemistry. It isn't an issue of finding the right person; it's an issue of becoming the right people by working through the problems that inevitably come up.

Mrs. FFT is a therapist and does a lot of pre-marital work with couples. Happy couples aren't the ones that have the most in common; they're the ones who develop good communication and conflict resolution skills to work through the problems that everyone faces. If you get married at 25, you won't be the same person at 35 or 55, nor will your spouse. So if you're marrying a specific set of interests/hobbies/physical features, you will both be disappointed. The idea is that you grow together and become one, changing together. Your life is different and some of your interests/hobbies are different, but in a good way.

Re a pre-nup: because marriage is based on a commitment to work through whatever problems come up, I think it's counterproductive to create a fall-back plan "just in case." How can someone be committed forever if they're still holding back part of themselves in case things fall apart?

I respectfully disagree. IMO, a pre-nup can protect both parties in case something goes south. It's not about holding back, it's about being realistic. It's like not saving money because you're certain you will have your job and will never lose it. There are no absolutes in life, even with marriage. No matter how much you feel you are in love and can work through any problems, there is no guarantee someone's spouse will feel the same way. IMO it is naive to think otherwise. JMO with no disrespect towards yours.

dwcrew...I respect your conviction but your opinion is indeed not the "norm". Most people do indeed get married and do so without a prenup. Yes a prenup can protect each person but again it is not the norm to put one in place,

Not having a pre-nup is more than likely due to the fact that there are a substantially larger number of people getting married that don't have anything to protect. It's just a numbers issue, not a statement on a pre-nup's worth.

If I had scratch when I got married I'd have had one, to many Paul McCartney stories to be so naive'.

Con_Alma;665709 wrote:dwcrew...I respect your conviction but your opinion is indeed not the "norm". Most people do indeed get married and do so without a prenup. Yes a prenup can protect each person but again it is not the norm to put one in place,

Oh believe me, I do realize it is not the norm, but perhaps it should be. I am a realist though. And just because a pre-nup is signed, IMO, doesn't necessarily mean I plan on getting divorced or even if I do end up getting divorced that I would try and screw my wife out of everything. It just wouldn't force me to give her "entitlements" as I have heard them described by divorcees in the past.

Also, to me, a pre-nup is to protect what you already have. If any assets were made or accumulated mutually during the marriage, that should be split evenly and fairly. Personally, I own quite a bit of property and have a decent amount saved. If I were to get married and then divorces, I want to make it as difficult as possible for someone to try and access anything I acquired before the marriage.

Pre-nups have a negative stigma, but in reality, that's not what they're all about IMO.

Also, if someone is willing to agree to a pre-nup; to me that is a sign that they don't care about anything but you. If someone was hesitant to sign a pre-nup, I'd question their committment. Marriage is a contractual relationship and like any good business, you should protect your interests.

ytownfootball;665712 wrote:Not having a pre-nup is more than likely due to the fact that there are a substantially larger number of people getting married that don't have anything to protect. It's just a numbers issue, not a statement on a pre-nup's worth.

If I had scratch when I got married I'd have had one, to many Paul McCartney stories to be so naive'.

I don't disagree that it's a net worth issue...or lack thereof. The bottom line is the norm in this country is for people to get married and they do so without a prenup. That's what people choose to do.

Con_Alma;665715 wrote:I don't disagree that it's a net worth issue...or lack thereof. The bottom line is the norm in this country is for people to get married and they do so without a prenup. That's what people choose to do.

Agreed and I'm not saying what is right or wrong, only that for me it would be a must.

Yep...I got that from your post.

Con_Alma;665715 wrote:I don't disagree that it's a net worth issue...or lack thereof. The bottom line is the norm in this country is for people to get married and they do so without a prenup. That's what people choose to do.

Times are different though, had you ever heard of a pre-nup before you were married (I had not) but that was 20+ years ago. Also, given the fact that marriages already cost what they do, how many who have nothing are going to shell out coin to protect what they don't have? Most don't have one because they've got nothing to protect and I understand that completely.

Also, if someone is willing to agree to a pre-nup; to me that is a sign that they don't care about anything but you. If someone was hesitant to sign a pre-nup, I'd question their committment.

very underestimated value to asking.