From: utzoo!decvax!ittvax!sii!mem
Newsgroups: net.singles
Title: Re: marriage questions
Article-I.D.: sii.230
Posted: Thu Nov 11 01:41:21 1982
Received: Fri Nov 12 07:33:48 1982

c
In spite of everyone getting mad at having it brought up, the
problem does exist.  Love can turn into litigation; the courts
tend to favor the woman because, of course, the woman without
a husband has no chance at all.  Is it a good idea to draw
up a contract before getting married?  It is an interesting
thing to speculate on, in the coldness of an unknown future;
but (unfortunately?) this kind of thinking does not get
directed towards the one you love - it requires that coldness
as well as lack of trust, things that just are not applicable.
If, now, Kirk can be in love AND consider contracts -- well,
I might just be tempted to start a new religion with Kirk as
the principle saint.   <<- Humor.

There seems to be a problem: the clash of social freedom and
general (personal) acceptance of non-binding relationships against
public and personal requirements for marriage.  Marriage is
entered into out of custom, out of fear (i.e. to impose an
artificial bond), out of pressure; but how often for a need
of marriage?  That is, to provide for a secure environment
for children or because of true religious beliefs.  The clash
is between the belief in the obsolescence of marriage and
the lack of a non-marriage-oriented social structure.

Not really trying to start an argument,
Mark Mallett