Wouldn't it be better if a marriage contract had a 3 year time limit? It would be like a sports contract. At the 3 year mark the couple can decide if they want to re-up. If things are going south they can leave amicably. I think this would be good incentive for both partners to always bring their best self to the relationship.
Anyone agree?
2007-01-02 03:32:43 · 14 answers · asked by tenbadthings 5 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
That might work if children werent involved, but you enter children into this equation, and it will become a real mess!
2007-01-02 03:35:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would agree, if marriage weren't what it is. Saying you are with someone for better or worse means that you've made a promise to stand by them forever. Marriages are also an investment, if you give someone an easy out they will take it every time there is a bump in the road and shatter all of the time and energy put into it. People too often are lazy in life and don't want to put forth the effort needed to make something good. For some people it's easy just to get out and move on than to work at something.
If you feel this way, simple solution, don't get married. You can live with someone and have a life with them without making it legal.
2007-01-02 03:40:32 · answer #2 · answered by lookinforanswers 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no, i don't think that would make anyone bring their "best self" to the table. 3 years isn't that long. i know a lot of people that could stick out 3 years in a bad relationship just for the hell of it. i've done it a few times. 3 years is about the time that the marriage starts to get comfortable and stale and people usually run anyway. WAY more people would get married if there was only a 3 year time limit. now if there were a 15 year limit, people might think little bit more.
2007-01-02 03:43:35 · answer #3 · answered by redpeach_mi 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
A marriage contracts shows that you have no faith in the marriage from the beginning. I don't think most people would want to marry someone who is thinking about the marriage going wrong before the vows are even read. I think this idea is offensive.
2016-03-29 04:31:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This already exists...it's called a prenup!! I made sure I go one! Heck, you can pretty much put anything in there, probably including a clause like you suggest about the three-year option.
Many people see prenups as unromantic or going into things with doubt, but really it just makes things easier if you decide to part ways. Look at how much people fight when they decide to divorce. With the divorce rate now over 50%, it's only a smart way to try not hurting each other's feelings even more when you split.
2007-01-02 03:56:57 · answer #5 · answered by Back in the game... 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is shameful. The original vows were "for better or worse, until death do us part." This gives our children a chance to become well rounded citizens and not misfits. Our kids feel like they are dumped by parents. Our children are tired of having to listen to step-moms and step-dads.
The truth is without God as the head of the family that we love God first, then families will continue to divorce as uncaring adults.
And our children will continue to feel unloved, unwanted and unnecessary.
If people, would just read the Bible, they could recognize what is coming in their life before their life is wrecked. God even tells us "without a cause, a curse does not come."
If I ever saw a world that needs the Word of God, it is this world today.
2007-01-02 03:48:09 · answer #6 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I feel that this is a bad idea. I agree that too many people would view marriage as temporary and so we would have far more formerly married people than we do.
If you feel this way, just make sure that your significant other knows and agrees and don't get married. There are a lot of people doing this. It is called living together.
Good Luck to you.
2007-01-02 03:49:24 · answer #7 · answered by math_prof 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you have doubt after three years what is the point of marriage in the first place. Marriage was a unity that was set for life.
2007-01-02 03:41:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
it really depends on how people view marriage as it is .. if u cant stay or commit to someone for life. den mite as well dont get married cos it will defeat the puspose on the marriage vows that you have made... like one person above said if u have children in this kind of agreement it will be a total mess.
2007-01-02 03:44:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ya, like a lease, or rent -to -own. Sounds real romantic. I'd love to see that contract!
2007-01-02 03:43:46 · answer #10 · answered by INDRAG? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋