Why not keep a boyfriend the rest of your life instead of a husband? What is the difference besides that paper

Answer 1

*** less committment.

Answer 2

Honestly, a whole lot. 1st of all, there is more finallity in b/f-g/f situations, if you are talking about LTR. Unless, both of yu are equally sick. By this I mean the make-up, break-up rollercoaster. I have a couple that are friends of mine who have been b/f-g/f for over twenty years. They live as a married couple but without all the drama. They have been together successfully through their children not only growing up, but graduating, and starting families of their own. They are grandparents now, yet they are still b/f- g/f. I cannot say the same of most marriages. They continue to date each other, and always have. Yet, you won't find that in most marriages. Most states recognize this type of union between male and female, hence the term "civil union." Just lately the homosexuals are trying to relate this term to themselves. When you are "legally married," (civil union) you are still treated as a married couple in the eyes of the law. If you were to disrupt this union, it is actually more difficult than a run of the mill divorce, simply because of community property issues. There isn't any documentation on file to establish when exactly this union was sactioned. Therefore all assets of the union must be disolved, and both parties recieve an equal share. Where as in a regular divorce the wife usually ends up with the home and the better of the two vehicles, if there are any. Plus a monthly stipend until the spouse can establish a means to support him/ herself. This is the simple jist, I think you would have to decide which is best.

Answer 3

A bf is just that a bf. A husband has obligations as a family man, protector. Is marriage by the wayside? The paper is not just a paper per se; it sets legalities such as-equal partnership when one dies the other automatically inherits assets. Does that go on with a bf? How about the social security? If woman outlives man, then women gets the better part of ss. Would this scenario hold true for a bf? Ok, how about kids and responsibility. My daughter is bfing it and the woman is the nuturer. Who gets kids if they split, the woman. Common law togetherness is now illegal in PA.
In my opinion, I am glad it is.

Answer 4

That is EXACTLY the type of incisive question that should be asked. Its been tradition to have government recognize the union of a couple. Few have ever questioned it. The only real reason to have government recognize is that it gives the woman a few extra legal rights, although she can sue for child support whether your married or not but she can't sue for alimony unless your legally married.

Acquiring the piece of paper is certainly no measure of commitment either despite the answers you've been receiving. Divorce rate is almost 50% in the country. I would not consider that a high level of commitment.

On a practical basis, which we as a nation aren't, no one need recognize your union except you and your boyfriend. On a lot of levels there are good reasons not to get the piece of paper, primarily tax and credit reasons.

The ONLY real reason to get the piece of paper is because we as a society have been doing it for generations and supposedly its a reason to celebrate.

Answer 5

It is important to have the same name, when you have children they become confused and mabe feel insecure if the parents have different surnames. It also shows that a life long comitment is decided by both parties so you have to work harder through the rough times, rather than saying "stuff it i've had enough". Finally it sends a message to other on lookers that you are solid and not looking for other potential partners.

Answer 6

The difference, is that being married is a legal committment. It is binding legally, wehreas a bf/gf situation, is only binding by the personal committments that you have made to each other. Then there are many financial and health issues, such as insurance, try and add someone to your insurance that isnt your spouse or your child, impossible. There are way to many differences to try and list them here.

Answer 7

It's harder for a husband to break it off. A marriage is more official and is a declaration to everyone that both of you are off the market. There are also legal implications to the paper. But, if it won't work without the paper, it won't work with the paper.

Answer 8

the diffrence is if your bf has assets and you arent married they could go to the state or his family, if your bf is on life support you dont make the decisions his mother does. if he his hurt you wont be able to ride in the ambulance.a husband puts more responsibility on him and you to make it work!why not have a husband? whats the point in playing house for the rest of you life especially when you both know you aren't going anywhere.

Answer 9

I would take it as a sign of how much a man loved me if he were willing to publicly (before God and before our families and friends) promise to spend the rest of his life with me. If a man would be willing to make that commitment for me, I would respect him, love him, and cherish him that much more.

I've never been married, but I imagine that there must be something immensely satisfying in making that commitment.

Answer 10

A friend of mine said she'd Never get married. 3 years later she was. She said that the reason was her boyfriend had been in a motor bike accident and almost killed himself. He was in the intensive care area of the hospital and only next of kin were allowed. Because she was his girlfriend and not his wife she wasn't permitted in to see him. He could have died without her there (thank god he didn't). She said that she would never take that chance again. She got married to him but kept her last name.

Answer 11

The difference of a boyfriend and a husband is that you are not comitted to a boyfriend but you are comitted to a husband. With just a boyfriend you have more fredom to do more things but with a husband you make choices with him and talk over everything with him.