[Caipirabob]

By all means, if you believe the person you have chosen for a lifetime partnership is a lying, cheating, greedy skank-a-lank then get that dotted line signed.

Just kidding. I do mourn the moral and cultural breakdown that has reduced "Holy Matrimony" to a business transaction. And yet seriously, I don't blame many of these people.

It's a sad fact that the societal morality has degraded and destroyed the significance of marriage to the point where the social perspective of divorce bears no more stigma than a trip to the ATM. And since many divorces end up being a trip to the ATM for one or the other party, a prenuptual agreement is a wise approach if you have any lingering doubts.

Yet my thoughts would be that if you have any doubts, why bother getting married at all?

Let's face it, unless you AND your mate are strongly ground in morality, more than likely derived from a lifetime of faith, you are fodder for divorce lawyers.

Otherwise marriage is a temporary state that endures until one or the other partner decides they like the Lexus more than their partner.

I'm not being dour, just practical.

On the other hand, there is a place for non conditional marriage in this world. I hope that many who read this are part of such a relationship and pray that the others who hope to enjoy such one day.

Anyway, so what do y'all think? Have at it...

[gitmogrunt]

"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."

Now that the skank has financial interests to protect she wants the pre-nup.

When pre-nups first came the skank-a-lanks, would get very mad at even the suggestion of pre-nups.

How the times have changed.

IMO you're an idiot if you marry later in life, after you've accumulated assests, without a pre-nup.

Skank-a-lank will clean you out,after she's had enough, if you don't think so you're a p*ssy whipped fool!

Thanks caipirabob for the use of the word skank-a-lank.

[longtermmemmory]

so it seems the article is saying that a prenup is for protecting the children of a first marriage.

hmmm, did the author think to consider that this is more a SECOND marriage issue?

The author tried to imply this was a first marriage no children issue.

I have seen this more in OLDER marriages not marriages without pre existing adult children.

Seems to be a slow newsday for this writer...

[Mr. Jeeves]

I think a simple change in the law would take all of the finger-pointing out of this. Part of obtaining a marriage license should be an accurate accounting of each party's assets and liabilities, to be filed with the county along with the other documents. In the event of a divorce, the judge will ensure that each party leaves the marriage with at least an equivalent level of assets that they brought to it. Any assets earned during the marriage will then be divided either evenly, or in a way that is balanced by which partner has custody of any children resulting from the marriage.

Essentially the point of a pre-nup - protection of assets brought into a marriage - would simply be part of the law and would apply equally to everyone.

[Texas Eagle]

More women are asking for prenups

And that's just from Larry King.

[Goodgirlinred]

I am a widow. I have 3 daughters and 8 grandchildren who will inherit. If I were to ever remarry, I would certainly have a pre-nup and would expect the person I marry to have one, as he would probably want one as well.. The reason I would have one is to protect my children's inheritance.

Also, I was about to marry a man who, it turned out later, was only interested in my money. He turned out to be a very skilled professional con artist. I had only been married to one man, for 33 years since I was 18, so I was very naive about such things. Thank heavens I realized I was about to make a big mistake!

Divorce is not the only reason to have a pre-nup. One could stay in a happy marriage until death. Then there might be problems with step-children and children of the deceased couple.

[Torie]

One never knows. People and circumstances change. If one partner has a lot more money than the other, a prenup is simply good planning, along with any other kind of planning.

[CORedneck]

I remarried not too long ago. I did a prenup and it is very simple. If it is separate accounts/property, it stays with the given owner. Money earned separately or increased in value remains separate. If it is joint, 50/50.

I have a large amount of assets that I own and maybe over time, her name may get on them but the idea is to keep the division of assets simple.

On this subject, there are definite sides people take on this. There is no one in the middle. When my son gets married, I will advise him to do a prenup plus I will setup assets for him in such a way that his wife cannot get to them if he decides to skirt a prenup.

[lawgirl]

I agree- if I got married again and had anything (or if he did) I wouldn't fight signing a prenup. I never ever dreamed I'd get divorced but it was not just up to me. Sadly, the other person in the equation did not have the same feelings so I am divorced.

[Vision]

One more thing. I worry about younger women. It is my experience that a lot have no virtue, and virtue is a very important element of what a man is looking for.

I can't tell you how many engaged women have offered to sleep with me. Now what does that say?

I've had women hit on me in front of their boyfriends. Does she think I'd give a woman like that the time of day?

Maybe this is what porno and feminism had done to young girls. But something needs to be done.

[rjp2005]

Somehow I dont think "till pre-nup do us part" helps to make a lasting marriage. It's like asking "so, you're open to leaving the front door open in the middle of winter, right?" Nice knowing ya, Rachel!

[Osage Orange]

And here I thought the headline was "More Women Asking For Pin-ups".

[A CA Guy]

Inheritance is no issue in a marriage and is separate unless they mingle it into the estate.

If you make 550k a year and the one you marry makes 5k a year, a pre-nup might not be a bad idea and they must be consulting with their own lawyer about their own interest before they can sign and make it legal.
Even after signing such a paper, the spouse can object and some judge might still find the pre-nup unfair and inequitable and might award support or assets anyway.

Depends on the state, the judge and other stuff I guess.

[JasonC]

I do. They have no business getting married. They should just shack up and leave the legal system out of it.

[HitmanLV]

I'm not for a change in the definition of marriage in any way. And that means that everything each party owns becomes property of the married pair. If that pair should dissolve, they get treated fairly: they get the 1/2 that's theirs.

It's perfectly fair. This protects the cuckolded spouse as much as it protects the loyal spouse.

A lot of Freepers don't want to change the rules about marriage in regards to same sex couples, noting tradition, custom, etc.

Well, I'm aboard with that. But part of that same definition is the rules for dividing property if the marriage breaks up. It would be immature to start picking and choosing what I want to preserve about marriage and what I want to discard.

PS - Non conditional marriage is a real drag, particularly if your wife decides to date some hunky guy and entertain him in the master bedroom all night, bullying you into the guest room! "No conditions - we're together, forever!" :-)

[wardaddy]

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.

[HamiltonJay]

If you are worth ANYTHING of significance and plan to get married, you absolutely have to have a prenup... unless you like watching lawyers get rich by extending the misery of an already miserable situation.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Yet my thoughts would be that if you have any doubts, why bother getting married at all?

This is a good question and goes right to the heart of the damage that's been done to marriage over the last 40 years or so.

[Sloth]

"It's not that I plan to get divorced," says Kaplan, 23, a single mom from Fort Lauderdale

Of course you do. There's no other reason for it.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I have a much better idea.

Don't get married at all.

Unfortunately it took me 3 times at bat to learn this lesson.

Guess I'm just hardheaded.

Never again.

[NeoCaveman]

It's funny. Last weekend the big 800+ post article was on high powered women not being able to find mates. Now we are onto them insisting on pre-nups.

I think there is a connection here. I'm just not sure what it is.