A step in the right direction

[RedwolfParticipant 38]

http://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/detail/alabama-senate-votes-to-end-state-marriage-licenses

While the motivations for the bill that passed may have been for other reasons, this appears to be a step in the right direction.  It essentially requires a private contract be created at the outset of a marriage and would potentially open the door to protections for men against misandric system in place today.

Kudos to Alabama!

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

Yeah that’s cool however they could always change it back? If this law was changed I still wouldn’t be interested. It might be better if they also added lower child support payments and also do away with putting me in prison for can’t make the child support payments. More than likely they are doing this because women don’t want it anymore because they have nothing to gain from it. This is especially true with women against feminism which is bunch of horse s~~~.

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[RedwolfParticipant 38]

I agree there’s still a long way to go with this, but it’s a move the right way.  It’s still likely that family courts would treat these the way they always have in the past, but I’ll take even a small win if we can get it.

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

If women complained harder they could end alimony for long term and reduce amount of payments. Only if this stuff went on in Canada it would be nice however I don’t plan on getting married or have children. I’m 46 what’s the point of getting married or have children?

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[narwhalParticipant]

This is excellent news and definitely a good step!  However, it’s loaded with issues.  In the same way that a prenup is often not honored by a deciding judge, what’s stopping a judge from throwing out this new contract and falling back on old marriage standards.  For example, if the contract states the one party will all retirement assets in the even of a divorce, a judge may just throw it out as unfair to the ‘losing’ party.

Another factor is the federal government and income taxes.  There will need to be some sort of contractual standard requirements in order for it to apply as federal marriage.

Then you have unenforceable stuff thrown into these contracts.  If, for example, a cheater would lose all assets, then that brings in the burden of proving someone cheated, etc.

There is the polygamy aspect, and people marrying within their own family.  How does that effect the medical insurance aspect of marriage?

Will we start seeing contingencies in these contracts?  For example, if woman proves to be infertile, can that be grounds for terminating the contract?  Can you specify wifely duty requirements?  Give the wife a contractual spending budget?

And this will all screwed up when kids are involved. Because they are essentially joint property, there will be limits to how contracts can be written for their welfare.  For example, I doubt you’d be able to write child support out of the ‘divorce’.

And for those already married, do they need to write up a new contract (can they?), or will the fall under the old rules?

Lastly, even if this happened across the country today, it will be a slow change.  The first contracts would look practically identical to existing marriage.  If a man attempted to have the contract to something more sane, he would be shamed, etc.

Ok. Then do it.

[Author]

Posts