With over 50 percent of traditional marriages dissolving in divorce and the percentages continuing to rise is living together in a common law relationship a better option?
It would appear that without the traditional marriage license there would be less legal expernse in any separation and the reason to stay together would be more about a personal connection rather than some peace of papter issued by the state.
I have had friends indicate that they got along better when they just lived together but when they entered into a traditional marriatge the whole dynamics of the relationship changed and they separated. What is it about that peace of paper, marriage license, that changes individuals?

I think that little piece of paper makes another take possession of the relationship as if they own you!! But, with common law marriages don't you still have to go through a divorce? At least I've heard you do because you are recognized by that state as being married.

Shackin' up wuz good fer me.

No divorce, just pack it up and haul azz!

Well, dunk me in coffee and cal me a ho-ho!

One alternative to traditional marriage is a common law marriage. While a common law marriage isn’t technically a marriage since there’s no recognized marriage ceremony, Domestic Partnership Agreement, or marriage license, as an interpersonal status it’s still recognized in some states for heterosexual couples. You can show proof of a common law relationship with a notarized affidavit, laying out how long you and your partner have lived together, where you lived, any public announcement of common law marriage, and any previous marriages.

Cohabitation is not enough to qualify you and your partner for a common law marriage: you and your partner must behave like spouses and be qualified to enter a marriage (for example, you must both be of legal age). The IRS recognizes common-law marriages, so you can file your taxes jointly. You and your partner can even use the same last name. However, in the US, no state recognizes same-sex common-law marriages (although some states do recognize same-sex marriages). The states that recognize heterosexual common law marriages are Alabama, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only), Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Other states recognize common law marriages that were notarized before a certain date: Georgia (pre-1997) Idaho (pre-1996) Ohio (pre-1991) Pennsylvania (pre-2005).

Finally, there’s no such thing as a specific common-law divorce: common-law couples have to go through same divorce process as legally married couples.

It's not the paper....it's the people. Common law only makes it where you are not a statistic when you go your seperate ways. In it's own right it is just a free divorce. I know plenty of people that (married or not) may not end it until a year, 5 years, 20 years, what ever......so if it just so happens that you go your seperate ways after being together for ..let's say.. 7 years... you would have probably done so whether you were common law without that "piece of paper" or if you had finally gotten married the year before. If you weren't married when you split then I guess in the minds of most you just split..... but if you happened to get married in year 6 and split in year 7.... people blame it on the fact they got married.

My boyfriend and have been together for years, file taxes as married, share a mortgage and a bank account but do not have to do anything other than leave if we decide to end it. No legalities other than our personal decisions to split assets. No form of "divorce" or state medeling in our business.

I've done both...one isn't better than the other. It's all about preference. I would get married again if it felt right to both...
Those who say.."lets just live together and see if it works" are giving them self an easy out, with that kind of attitude there's a pretty good chance it won't work out.
If some would put as much time, energy, and resources and committment into their marriages as they do their weddings the divorce rate may actual go down

I was married before and loved being married, however it is kind of an odd, creepy-almost thing to do when you think about it. Were both going to sign a contract that says that we'll love each other forever. If you stop loving me then you've broke the contract, and I'm going to take you to court to keep as many of mine/or yours material possessions as possible. Really? Sounds bizarre and corporate like. I really think marriage is just an outdated concept, people today, are independent and less emotionally attached to other people.
That being said, I would get married again, although the idea of having another ceremony with someone else is something I can't even picture. Especially when your whole family fly's in for the first one. How would I convince them, "You guys, I swear, this time it's for real!"?

honestly, I think the pressure of truly being JOINED AS ONE,,is too much for many extremely independent people to take. They want the option to be one, but if you make it a MANDATORY part,, it freaks them out. If you say they HAVE to share assets, responsibilities, their whole entire life,, it can be pretty intimidating and cause people to look for ways to get back to looking after numero uno...


for me,,, Id much rather be married and ask God into the relationship as one than to just kind of shack up as two


,,but everyone is different.

Ya don't have to be legally married to have God, all that is, a higher power..whatever ya want to call it in your relationship.
Two spiritual people have have that also...

I agree, but its my preference to do the paperwork. As a christian, and a believer in biblical testimony by God of proper marital etiquette (which includes papers of divorce), I also prefer the legally recognized paper of UNITY.

There are 9 common law states in the U.S. I know that California and Texas are two of them. I forget the others. Generally, the couple (man and a woman) must have some immediate intention to wed, (they don't have to actually have a formal wedding, but a sincere desire to become married in the near future. The second provision is that the couple must actually live together. There is no set amount of time. A common law marriage has been found after 2 weeks of "shacking up." Third, the couple must hold themselves out to the public as a married couple. Letting your significant other call herself by your last name, having joint bank accounts, joint credit cards, having a joint mortgage, and raising children together are some examples. All 3 provisions have to be fulfilled contemporaneously.

Generally, there is a 2 year period in which to raise or contest the validity of a "common law marriage." A valid "common law marriage" requires an actual divorce decree, just as a formal marriage does. So, there is no advantage of a "common law marriage" over a traditional one. The spouses have the same rights under the law.

I would advise all those bachelors who "shack up" with their ladies to be careful that they don't fulfill all 3 provisions of a "common law" marriage.

FYI - With Texas, it depends on the lawyer and what you are divvying up.

My ex tried to get our 4 years recognized as common-law, and the lawyer I spoke with said it wasn't. Texas is in the throes of this whole issue with regards to gays trying to use it.

Have had this conversation many times over the years and the people engaged with it all basically felt the same way. I was in both by the way.
It appears that when people are simply living together, because it is so easy to leave, people work a little harder for the relationship to work out. Yet..although it is much more difficult and tiresome, agonizing, what have you, when people get married after living together for periods of time, they tend to let things slide a little. Not noticiable but the little bit of extra energy seems to go out the door when the certifcate comes in. On both sides, mind you. He forgets to call when he's going to be over a half a hour late, she doesn't always the best favorite food but the stuff on sale. Yes, these are silly examples and meant to be just that.
My ex and I lived together for ten years then got married. We were doing fine before and surely within a year those little things were slipping in, you could relax now, that person isn't going to jump on the next train.
Perhaps it takes the mystique out of it, the little excitement. I can't say if I'll get married again, unless they owned a little sister house right next to mine and we each could go home to our own spaces when we wanted. or were very, very rich and very very old- I know - that wasn't very nice. JK

Marriage=Fail. Bachelor=Win!

This is EXACTLY the point of a marriage license in the first place, so the state can put its' nose into your relationship, and your family (kids you may have). That's what is all about. On top of that, under the new healthcare regulations which just passed take a look at the tax numbers for you if married vs. being single:

"“There is a huge middle class marriage penalty hidden in the House and Senate health care bills. The penalty becomes evident by evaluating questions like the following: How much would two single people, each making $30,000 per year, pay for private health insurance if the Pelosi bill was in effect now? The answer is $1,320 per year for both individuals combined (based on the premium limits and subsidies outlined on the charts below). But how much would they pay for the same level of insurance under the Pelosi bill if they were to marry? Their combined cost would then be about $12,000 a year (the estimated cost for private insurance).

“Health insurance premium costs for two adults with equal incomes if the Pelosi bill was in effect now:

Combined yearly
Income


Combined premium
cost if single


Combined premium
cost if married


Change
$60,000 $1,320 $12,000 +$10,680
$70,000 $1,960 $12,000 +$10,040
$80,000 $2,880 $12,000 +$9,120
$90,000 $12,000 $12,000 $0

Sources: The numbers on the chart are based on (a) a chart provided by The Committees on Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor, October 29, 2009, see next chart; (b) the current Federal Poverty Levels; see final chart below; and (c) the estimate that two adults would pay $12,000 annually for individual health insurance with average benefits if their income exceeds 400% of the Federal Poverty Level."

More here:
http://www.redpills.org/?p=8309

Beyond all this they really have no right at ALL to regulate marriages anyway to me. It's between you, your spouse and God (for those that believe), that's it, no one else. If or when I ever get married, I will not get a marriage license for these reasons. I'll do it my own way, and on my own terms.

Common law was started because many years ago some people were unable to get to a judge or preacher and do it the right way. Most states have done away with it now because it was never meant to force people to be married when they didn't want to be.

Marriage is a legal contract and has nothing to do with love. It's about merging and protecting assets. Getting married doesn't make it more likely that you'll stay together or be more faithful.

Just because you don't marry them does not mean it can not go through the whole divorce issue. It only takes one to file and your azz will go through a divorce in the state of Texas. Actually my brother lost more from one he lived with for less then a year then the one he was married to for 17 years go figure...........

Don't always think your safe just because you live with someone. They may come into it saying they want take your stuff in the end but piss them off and see if they still feel the same...........

Just be careful no matter what you decide and draw up some legal paper work prior.........

I am a Christian too, I've read in the Bible where it talks about "papers of divorce", but where is anything
said about 'papers of marriage'.

Abraham & Sarah were married, what papers did they have? Only a contract (promise/covenant ) between them and God to be committed to each other for life. How about those men who had several wives at the same time?

I would go through a commitment ceremony, have a covenant between the two of us, and a have God centered relationship. I would be committed to her
for life. Are you saying that just because of not having that state license and a contract with the state, that God wouldn't bless us. Marriage is in your heart and emotions, not a piece of paper stamped with the signature of the governor who also signed the law legalizing gay marriage or 'unions'that you may be
against.

I don't need a piece of paper to be in a life committment with my S/O. Getting married you might also lose some of the rights you have yourself or from your previous marriage.

Ron

no, Im not saying ( I try never to say) what God will and wont bless unless I can specifically find it in the bible. The bible does not mention marriage specifically but it does give instances where Jesus attended weddings,, it also seems to refute the notion that just shacking up is marriage , and it does support the notion of obeying governing authorities as long as they dont require us to disobey God.

Because of the combination of these things,, I err on the side of the legal and religious ceremony.

Oh, the irony...