Marriage - Page 7

JennyPiccolo · 15th May 2008, 7:55pm

Weddings are generally vulgar affairs which make me want to vomit. I like the idea of a partnership though, and i think marraige would mibbe be ok.

*edit* WITH a pre-nup, but, obviously.

Rowsbette · 15th May 2008, 8:05pm

I'm a bit surprised at the amount of cynicism in this thread... even happily marrieds like Vonnie are citing their reasons for marriage as relating to rights etc. I know all the divorce stats are dire and it's an outdated institution, yadda yadda yadda... but surely the gesture that you wanna spend the rest of your life with someone still means something? And the concept of wanting to share that sense of love and commitment with your closest pals and family isn't necessarily a bad thing?

Fair does, it seems to have become of a bit of a commercial thing these days (as anyone who saw last night's The Apprentice will understand) but surely marriage still means something?

Pink punk · 15th May 2008, 8:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Semprini

Married Couples Allowance is only available if one spouse (or civil partner) was born before April 6th 1935.

You do get to inherit the nil rate band of one spouse upon death, assuming you would be paying inheritance tax.

Me, I'd love to have assets worth £600k.

StuntGirl · 15th May 2008, 8:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by poprock

If you want the law to recognise you as a couple, sign a legally binding contract. I don’t see what’s so complicated about that.

You can get married without any of the ‘archaic bullshit’ if you want to, especially so in Scotland. Technically, you can do it for about £250 all-in if you really only want the legal recognition and nothing else.

You're missing the point im making about the law.

If contracts can be made implicitly by the parties actions in pretty much all situations, then why not for in the recognition of cohabitation? This is generally the way the courts are looking at things now, with length of time together, type of relationship, whether you have kids together all being "terms" of the "implied contract".

**djtoast** · 15th May 2008, 8:20pm

Quote:

I'm a bit surprised at the amount of cynicism in this thread...

I guess it's partly that it's a personal thing and writing that kinda stuff on teh internet doesn't come naturally to everyone...

Jaemi · 15th May 2008, 8:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowsbette

but surely the gesture that you wanna spend the rest of your life with someone still means something? And the concept of wanting to share that sense of love and commitment with your closest pals and family isn't necessarily a bad thing?

I'm too much of a man to say that though.

AWESOMEUS MAXIMUS · 15th May 2008, 8:30pm

yo fuck the law, I want a wife & weans before I'm 35.

15th May 2008, 8:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowsbette

I'm a bit surprised at the amount of cynicism in this thread... even happily marrieds like Vonnie are citing their reasons for marriage as relating to rights etc. I know all the divorce stats are dire and it's an outdated institution, yadda yadda yadda... but surely the gesture that you wanna spend the rest of your life with someone still means something? And the concept of wanting to share that sense of love and commitment with your closest pals and family isn't necessarily a bad thing?

Fair does, it seems to have become of a bit of a commercial thing these days (as anyone who saw last night's The Apprentice will understand) but surely marriage still means something?

You're right. In my head I was trying to separate the dull reasons from the fact that actually, I love Bob with my whole heart & soul and I want the world to know that I want to spend the rest of my life with him by my side.

It's really weird how this place can sometimes make you second guess yourself.

mischief · 15th May 2008, 8:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonnie

You're right. In my head I was trying to separate the dull reasons from the fact that actually, I love Bob with my whole heart & soul and I want the world to know that I want to spend the rest of my life with him by my side.

It's really weird how this place can sometimes make you second guess yourself.

I don't think the reasons you gave initially were dull, it makes sense to protect your childrens future when you are in a serious/longterm relationship. The fact that you love Bob is a given and I'm sure you would have the same life together if you hadn't got married, it just makes more sense to formalise it through marriage when thinking about the future of the kids.

*Potatojunkie* · 15th May 2008, 8:52pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowsbette

… surely the gesture that you wanna spend the rest of your life with someone still means something?

Of course it does. Do you really need a legal document to prove it, though? "I love you so much that I want to make it legally complicated to wriggle out of it if I ever change my mind"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowsbette

And the concept of wanting to share that sense of love and commitment with your closest pals and family isn't necessarily a bad thing?

Make your commitments, throw a huge party and invite all your mates. Boffo.

15th May 2008, 8:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mischief

I don't think the reasons you gave initially were dull, it makes sense to protect your childrens future when you are in a serious/longterm relationship. The fact that you love Bob is a given and I'm sure you would have the same life together if you hadn't got married, it just makes more sense to formalise it through marriage when thinking about the future of the kids.

Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by Potatojunkie

Of course it does. Do you really need a legal document to prove it, though? "I love you so much that I want to make it legally complicated to wriggle out of it if I ever change my mind"?

Make your commitments, throw a huge party and invite all your mates. Boffo.

Actually, this reminds me of an argument I was having with my Nana a few weeks ago. In days gone by, you'd stand with your best beloved and say, "I'm married to you" they'd say it back and lo! It was so. Now it's a legal process where the spontaneity and dare I suggest, the romance is removed from it. It annoys me that something as personal as marriage has legal status.

Rhöna of the Rhein · 15th May 2008, 9:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by StuntGirl

I'd have to disagree with you there.

If marriage is ultimately a contract then surely cohabitation is an implied contract and therefore the parties should be subject to the same benefits and responsibilities if they choose to take advantage of them? And as for cohabitation rights being an invasion of privacy, surely judicial discretion so far has indicated that rights of the cohabitant are "imposed" only when certain conditions are met (i.e. length of time together, living as married), so it's hardly a case of them being applied all over the shop.

cohabitating with someone is not in any way "less" than marriage after a point, so why should it be treated as such? fewer and fewer people opt to get married these days any way, so should they be denied rights with their partner because they dont believe in some archaic bullshit and make a valid lifestyle choice? I dont think so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by StuntGirl

You're missing the point im making about the law.

If contracts can be made implicitly by the parties actions in pretty much all situations, then why not for in the recognition of cohabitation? This is generally the way the courts are looking at things now, with length of time together, type of relationship, whether you have kids together all being "terms" of the "implied contract".

But the point remains that cohabitants have opted not to enter into a contract of marriage - they don't necessarily want the rights.

Of course, there are couples who will benefit from the provisions. Perhaps they don't believe in the concept of marriage/have kids/have lived together for many years. I can understand that these couples really should have rights, particularly rights upon intestacy.

But for those couples, who, as i said earlier, were moving in together to 'test their relationship' but without the intention of creating similar legal obligations as in marriage, they lose out, particularly if the relationship fails - if they split up, they will be left with a more tricky separation than if the rights didn't exist at all.

It just doesn't make much sense to my mind to apply these rights pretty much across the board.

GoddamnElectric · 15th May 2008, 9:07pm

I fully intend to be both a husband and a father at some point in my future. Probably in my 30's in both cases.

bikuki · 15th May 2008, 9:56pm

I'm with Kirsten (and whoever else said they had a thing for 'traditional' relationships) - I want to get married, get a big house in the country with lots of animals and have kids. I'm definitely not having kids until I'm in my early 30s, but marriage can happen whenever.

*Vestiga* · 15th May 2008, 10:54pm

I want to get married, I like the idea of starting my own family. Obviously you dont need to get married to do that but i've just always seen marraige as being a nice way to declare that you are certain about spending your life with your best friend who you happen to be in love with.