Topic: Time Limited Marriage
Anonymous A started this discussion 14 years ago #20,921
Hey minichan, just wanted to know what you lot thought about the idea of time limited marriage.
If you don't know, a TLM (time limited marriage) is an alternative to a traditional marriage contract (TMC), that acts just like a TMC, except instead of being "till death do we part" (TDDWP) it expires after a certain amount of time (usually 1 to 3 years, or a minimum of 7 if the couple has children, so the children will have consistent parents in those developmental years)
This will not only cut down on the divorce rate, but also cut down on situations where spouses just hate each other, and adultery will also be much less common.
Another benefit of the TLM contract (TLMC) is that it's a renegotiable contract (RG), so partners can put extra effort into showing their worth to their partners around contract negotiating time.
What do you think?
What's better, TDDWP and the TMC, or TLM, and the TLMC (RG)?
If you don't know, a TLM (time limited marriage) is an alternative to a traditional marriage contract (TMC), that acts just like a TMC, except instead of being "till death do we part" (TDDWP) it expires after a certain amount of time (usually 1 to 3 years, or a minimum of 7 if the couple has children, so the children will have consistent parents in those developmental years)
This will not only cut down on the divorce rate, but also cut down on situations where spouses just hate each other, and adultery will also be much less common.
Another benefit of the TLM contract (TLMC) is that it's a renegotiable contract (RG), so partners can put extra effort into showing their worth to their partners around contract negotiating time.
What do you think?
What's better, TDDWP and the TMC, or TLM, and the TLMC (RG)?
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 17 minutes later[^] [v] #336,049
@OP
I feel this undermines the sanctity of marriage. Marriage is a sacred vow before God to be shared for life between a man and a woman to permit them the opportunity to have occasional heterosexual sex in the missionary position for the sole purpose of procreation.
Please stop cluttering up the board with topics pushing your liberal agenda.
I feel this undermines the sanctity of marriage. Marriage is a sacred vow before God to be shared for life between a man and a woman to permit them the opportunity to have occasional heterosexual sex in the missionary position for the sole purpose of procreation.
Please stop cluttering up the board with topics pushing your liberal agenda.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,055
> Invites the state into their bedroom.
> Is willing to live with it since it's only temporary.
lol.
> Is willing to live with it since it's only temporary.
lol.
Killer Lettuce !!+BWon2MGy joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,059
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,064
@336,049 (B)
Allowing the state to regulate marriage undermines its sanctity. We have lost the concept of a civil government and embraced illiberal Protestant notions.
Allowing the state to regulate marriage undermines its sanctity. We have lost the concept of a civil government and embraced illiberal Protestant notions.
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,065
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,100
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 34 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,110
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,132
Marriage is fucking stupid. It's an excuse to get fat, dumb and lazy while still imagining yourself to be deserving of love. Pathetic.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,134
@previous (H)This modern Mormon operation allows multiple unlimited Wives. So much unbridled sexuality.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,144
I forgot that no one can take a topic seriously on here.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,148
squeegee joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,150
@336,144 (A)
I like the idea, but then why not stay just stay single? You can still impregnate women and pay child support without getting married.
I like the idea, but then why not stay just stay single? You can still impregnate women and pay child support without getting married.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #336,225
@OP
It sounds like a nice compromise until we reach the point of cost/benefit equilibrium and nobody fucking bothers with marriage.
@previous (squeegee)
But men are often screwed on CS. The money given may not all go to supporting the children. Then she calls up about starving babies. What do you do, let them starve because she's stupid and selfish? And what if they decide to base the payment on your "potential earnings?" Because then you're paying out more than you actually make based a hypothetical formula. And and, what if you fall on hard times and miss payments? (Hint: it involves prison rape.) Marriage is safer right now for fathers.
It sounds like a nice compromise until we reach the point of cost/benefit equilibrium and nobody fucking bothers with marriage.
@previous (squeegee)
But men are often screwed on CS. The money given may not all go to supporting the children. Then she calls up about starving babies. What do you do, let them starve because she's stupid and selfish? And what if they decide to base the payment on your "potential earnings?" Because then you're paying out more than you actually make based a hypothetical formula. And and, what if you fall on hard times and miss payments? (Hint: it involves prison rape.) Marriage is safer right now for fathers.