Posted on 09/18/2005 3:05:48 AM PDT by Caipirabob
Over a casual dinner, Rachel Kaplan turned to her boyfriend and asked, "You're open for a prenup, right?"
Darren Waldohlz, 38, a partner in a successful speed-dating business, admits he was caught off guard. But he said he realized a prenuptial agreement would protect the house he owns, too.
"It's not that I plan to get divorced," says Kaplan, 23, a single mom from Fort Lauderdale, who has a sizable inheritance. "I have to protect myself and my daughter."
While men are still more likely to seek a prenup, "women are becoming a more dominant force," said attorney Alan Braverman, who has offices in Fort Lauderdale and Boynton Beach.
Experts attribute the change to women marrying later or more than once.
"It's not uncommon in today's world that women are entering marriages with assets and stock options," said matrimonial attorney Jacqueline Valdespino, in Coral Gables. "Now both sides have equal bargaining power."
(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...
Society has ALWAYS be a part in every marriage. And if you think that that is incorrect, then you know less than nothing whatsoever about marriage, history, nor much else; as is always evidenced in your replies.
It's an unhealthy mindset. I think a 50-50 split should a marriage break up is fair for both parties, wether the guy takes up with a floozie or whether mommy starts spending extra quality time with the poolguy. It doesn't matter why it breaks up, just that it does. A 50-50 split makes the results relatively predictable,
The mindset that the marital property belongs to both partners in good times and somehow reverts to a wronged party in bad times is just insane. There's nothing 'conservative' about it.
Possible, it's possible. (I like the way you think).
Well then, if birth control undos a million years of sexual behavioral evolution.
Then creating test tube babies undoes the evolved behavior to have sex altogether.
And DNA testing, along with women's equality, undoes the need for legal marriage.
Thanks to science, we can simply turn our backs on all our primative instincts as they are no longer needed.
It appears that there are a LOT of little boys on this thread; little boys who hate and fear women and yes, who look a lot like the Taliban.
I've unfortunately run into AoR before and he never ever posts anything worthwhile/that makes any sense at all.
re: Affairs, Divorce, & Dividing Property
The trick here is that there is a natural inclination to give favor to a cuckolded spouse. A spouse doesn't deserve a financial award just because they were cheated on. That gives them too much credit, and may ignore the fact that they were a poor spouse, for example. A cheating spouse doesn't deserve to be financially punished, either.
Adultery is a lot more complex than a lot of folks are willing to consider. It's a reason to leave a marriage. It's not a reason to clean-out the cheater, or unduly benefit a person who just had the fortune to be cheated on.
No wonder you aren't married, pet; nobody with more than 3 working brain cells would even date you more than once; let alone marry you.
Birth control has been around for millennia. So has sex outside of marriage.
And just WHAT, exactly is "sexual behavior evolution ?
You really, really, REALLY have a problem with women...don't you! LOL
But there shouldn't be.
It is unjust and against nature--and human nature--for the law to enforce such an obligation without the man and woman having first legally married.
Marriage is a contract that exists to protect women should they become pregnant.
No no legal obligation should ensue to the man who is not a woman's husband.
Otherwise, the woman is having it both ways.
That a woman is the one to become pregnant confers on the women evolutionary advantages (the baby always carries her genes).
But she pays for that advange--as is fair--with a price: She can have only one baby every year or so.
Therefore it would likely be woman's evolved nature to desire sex with a man who will endow her child with good genes, and with a man she can be sure will be around to help her bear and raise that child.
She should therefore evolve emotions to lead her in such direction.
Men, on the other hand, do not get pregnant. Which is an advantage as they are BY NATURE FREE to make as many babies as they can find women to impregnate.
But nature is fair and makes men PAY FOR THAT FREEDOM by a man's never being sure any baby he thinks he's made is really his.
So the checks and balances are already in us.
For government to force men to pay for babies made out of wedlock, is giving the female of the species all the advantages.
And it also destroys the need for marriage, as we now can substitute DNA testing and lawyers instead.
And for a man to betray his sex, by adding legal advantage to woman's biological advantage, is folly.
And is evidence of the success of liberal social brainwashing.
That's very generous of you. 'Course finding a woman who WILL have sex with you under any circumstances might prove difficult.....
You can cry all the way home, but YOU are responsible for YOUR actions.
Where do you think the desire to have sex comes from, logic?
Our motivations--emotions--desires, are shaped in us by evolution.
you should change your name from Age of Reason to Age of Sexist Idiocy...
it fits better...
Nor do I have hairy breasts.
You try to sound as though you are some sort of sociologist/anthropologist/expert in evolution; however, the ONLY thing that you keep doing, is making excuses for men to have emotionally free and unencumbered sexual intercourse, without the taint of ANY responsibility and to blame women for everything you can come up with. How juvenile and pathetic of you!
Do you believe that the ONLY reason for marriage is to produce children ?
I don't believe in prenups.
I do believe wholeheartedly in family estate trusts and other binding legal devices to keep ambitious folks away from "family" wealth.
PreNups are just tacky.
You can accomplish the same thing being prepared estate wise.
I see.
And if a woman knowingly has sex with a man who has herpes, the man is responsible if she catches herpes.
A woman's ability to become pregnant is her evolutionary advantage and her responsibility to manage properly.
Of course, that would put a dent in the sexual revolution and ensuing destruction of family and marriage--and we little liberals can't let that happen, can we?
And every living creature has always had sexual desires. That's just how it is. Evaluational behavior, would mean that nobody and nothing had any sexual desires at forst, but that those desires evolved; which is utter nonsense fro them gitgo!
Correction, you little twit.... for two people having recreational sex, pregnancy is absolutely no advantage, but rather, a vulnerability you both share. The accidental child will have TWO parents, not just one. And even if you cry all the way home, that will still be the judgment against you.
Of course, that would put a dent in the sexual revolution and ensuing destruction of family and marriage--and we little liberals can't let that happen, can we?
Go to hell and don't talk to me about the destruction of marriage. A man with no honor, like yourself, has no standing to mourn the destruction of values he has just pissed on.
Don't post to me anymore. You'll never convince me you have one valuable thing to add. Life's too short for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.