What if we no longer had civil marriages and civil divorces. What if you could get married in the church or religion of your choice, but it only carried weight in that particular religion. If you chose to be with someone, purchase property together, have children together, etc...you would just have a contract written up (like a pre-nup without the "nup") and that would be the basis for resolving disputes if the relationship broke up. There would be no legal marriages.

Would this be a good thing?

Depends will she still get half my chit if we divorce?........

You won't need a divorce because you were never married. Whatever is yours is yours and whatever is hers is hers unless you have a contract between you two stating otherwise.

So basically you are pretending to be married. That would be about the only way I would ever get married again......

No, you're not pretending to be married. There would be no marriage other than what some people need for religious purposes and would not have an affect on society at large.

If you choose to live with someone, whether as a roommate or sexual partner, it would be just that. Property disputes would be handled just as that....property disputes.

Child custody would be determined the same way it is now. Whatever is in the best interest of the child. As would child support.

What is the benefit of civil marriages to society?

i never joined accounts with my husband. but i think if two people are living together regardless there will in the end be some sort of dispute, if you have a contract and then you go on to purchase more items throughout your relationship. . . they will still have to be divided should the relationship come to an end. i see this all the time on judge judy, haha. . . where bf/gf bought a car or a flat screen and one of them wants it back after being together for 4 years.

A pre-nup would only work if the other half moved into YOUR PLACE and you OWNED evrything. .any new purchases during that relationship would change the contract.

I think we have been kind of heading in this direction in the US
for a while now. The problem is the division of labor within the
family and how it is valued. If both partners earn an equal wage
and contribute equally to home responsibilities and child rearing
and pooper scooping then it seems like this could be fair. On the
other hand there is no such thing as equality except in mathematics.

So one is left with the same fundamental issues of valuing the
relationship contributions of each party, what they bring into the
relationship and what they leave with. Except, if one takes your
suggestion literally and there is a document drawn for each possession
then there are N documents and N negotiations where the number of
possessions and/or issues is N.



So... it doesn't matter whether you call it marriage or not. All
relationships requires a consideration of these things and mutual
agreement.

Let's just all forget about it and partay.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj0iwfiiWmA

But, how does a civil union help in the property dispute? I understand there will always be property diputes. And, there are legal recourses for property disputes. How do legal, civil unions help society?

I agree. However, these are property disputes about who gets what and how much money each party gets. Why get married to address to these issues? Why not take the marriage and divorce out of the legal equation?

Ruth,

That would be great. I believe people don't need a piece of paper to be married. But the problem is the split.

The reason courts get involved is because couples can't always agree on who gets what. Take a house in both of their names. A judge could decide that the parent with the kids can stay there and they buy the other parent out or it gets sold and the profits split.

Or bills....some get petty.

The property before the marriage isn't a problem, it's the property obtain during the marriage.....not to mention the kids visitation and child support.

During a divorce/break up.....a lot of people get petty.

Sad, yes....but that happens

But, how does being legally married make this any easier???

I'm not suggesting that property issues would be settled by eliminating civil unions. I'm asking how marriage helps anything? Isn't it really just one more document that has to be written up by a lawyer requiring a filing fee at the court house?

marriage or civil union embodies a pre-developed legal framework
which already addresses all of the concerns in one single simple
agreement. there is no point in doing away with it since all the
issues would arise again anyway in another context.

such is the nature of humanity, fairness and law
there is much more than simple property issues in any relationship

for example valuing each others respective contributions emotional
support, help with homework, doing the laundry and painting the house
and cooking and washing up!

and pooper scooping!!

So, you are saying that civil unions make the property disputes easier. And, we should keep it because it is simply a property contract. Okay, I can see how that would be beneficial. Not sure I agree entirely, but that makes sense.

Does marriage help society in any other way? Or is this the only benefit?

How does marriage do this?

I guess what I'm saying is that maybe the "legal" part avoids disputes.

Example...I'm from Texas (a common law state) but if someone can later claim they weren't really married and could change the property division. It's not equal any more.

In Texas we have that now. As long as people represent they are married and live that way, they can claim common law. But they would still have to get a "legal" divorce because of property disputes and for tax reasons.

Ok, so marriage is a simplified property agreement. That makes sense.

Marriage isn't civil it is religious the government just put a tax on it to make money.....pre-nup is just a way to place value on yourself when the only thing really valuable is what you and society lend value to.....nothing is valuable.......unless we make it so......if I pick up a rock start my own country and call it valuable money exchange in that country then so it is

IMO yes I don't believe I need a piece of paper to say I'm committed to someone, but if a split comes, then I will probably be glad for the courts.

Break ups can be hard enough without the emotions in splitting assets and debts...not to mention if kids are involved.

how do you value the emotional benefit of long term formal mutual
commitment, sexual monogamy, care for each other medically and
the promise to have biological children together and raise them?