Marriage Should Automatically Dissolve After 7 Years

Lynne

Lynne

Master of Arts
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
30
Location
Northeast, USA
Bavarian politican, Gabriele Pauli, believes that marriage should end after 7 years. Couples could decide to extend their marriage, if desired.

Pauli has been divorced twice herself which may not make her a marriage expert. I wonder where/why people come up with this crazy stuff. I suppose it garners attention and then they can promote themselves and/or their deeper political agendas.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070921/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_germany_politics_marriage
 
Marriage is two things.

One is a religious covenant, to those who choose to make it so.

The other is a civil contract. It is not uncommon for civil contracts to have preset time periods, and extention and renewal clauses.

Personally, I think it is an emminantly reasonable idea.
 
michaeledward said:
Marriage is two things.

One is a religious covenant, to those who choose to make it so.

The other is a civil contract. It is not uncommon for civil contracts to have preset time periods, and extention and renewal clauses.

Personally, I think it is an emminantly reasonable idea.
Click to expand...
I think this is reasonable, but, I don't like it. Marriage is not a driver's license, nor should it be treated like one.
 
Lynne said:
Bavarian politican, Gabriele Pauli, believes that marriage should end after 7 years. Couples could decide to extend their marriage, if desired.
Click to expand...

Couples don't already have a say in how long their marriages last in Germany? Some people have been married just for the weekend here in the US. I don't see a need for the government to mandate some arbitrary term of service for marriage.
 
I've seen similar ideas on marriage in numerous sci-fi books.
 
I'd be curious to see what sort of unexpected consequences something like this would have. Could be good, could be bad. It would definitely be interesting.
 
I personally consider marriage sacred, a commitment, a promise. I can't imagine marrying someone with the idea of nonpermanency looming over my head. I wouldn't want to have children in that scenario either.
 
I don't see any reason to place limits - upper or lower - on marriages. What is the purpose of the government of any country involving itself in such things?
 
Lynne said:
I personally consider marriage sacred, a commitment, a promise. I can't imagine marrying someone with the idea of nonpermanency looming over my head. I wouldn't want to have children in that scenario either.
Click to expand...

Couldnt have put it better myself.
 
Lynne said:
I personally consider marriage sacred, a commitment, a promise. I can't imagine marrying someone with the idea of nonpermanency looming over my head. I wouldn't want to have children in that scenario either.
Click to expand...

I don't want any biological children, ever.

I ended up marrying a woman with two children from her first marriage; which I don't think lasted seven years.

Somehow, I think 'children' is not a good indicator or attribute of marriage. At least when discussing the civic privleges.

In a religous context, it is perhaps a different issue.

I don't think the proposal came from a religious leader, did it?
 
FieldDiscipline said:
Marriage is a religious institution.

Civil partnership is something different.
Click to expand...

I am an athiest. I was required to acquire a 'marriage license' and have it signed by a Justice of the Peace. My wife and I are in a marriage. It is a civil institution in this country. The term is shared with religious organizations, but it is not exclusively one, or the other.
 
Lynne said:
Bavarian politican, Gabriele Pauli, believes that marriage should end after 7 years. Couples could decide to extend their marriage, if desired.

Pauli has been divorced twice herself which may not make her a marriage expert. I wonder where/why people come up with this crazy stuff. I suppose it garners attention and then they can promote themselves and/or their deeper political agendas.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070921/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_germany_politics_marriage
Click to expand...


Contract Marraiges. The contract states the expectations of each party and the term of the contract. Stipulations for children could also be made. Fines set for those who violate the contract, including early termination.

Starter Marriages - a new term that psychologists have coined. This is when people just get married after their BS or BS degree to move out and then etiher get their professional degree (Master's or PhD or Dr *) and then divorce and move on to someone they can spend the rest of their life.

The first takes out all religious meaning and makes it all upfront.

The second could be people using the other in particular if they do not tell their "partner" about their desires to move on in the future. In Psychology today a year ago I believe I read the article and it talked about how mostly (* more than 50% *) were women as they could control if a child was involved or not and still have sex. They also would many times move on to someone in a better profession. Note: There were still men who did the same.
 
Mawarrage! Mawarrage is what brwings us twogether twoday. Because lwuv, twue lwuv ....
(couldn't resist :rolleyes: sorry :D )

CoryKS said:
I'd be curious to see what sort of unexpected consequences something like this would have. Could be good, could be bad. It would definitely be interesting.
Click to expand...
Consenquences? What I can see is that there'd be a lot of half-brothers and half sisters running around and think in the long term what that would do to the gene pool.
Also people wouldn't marry for love and what's the point of that? Without love and sustaining love our society, I earnestly believe would crumble and degenerate eventually to nothing. All the (bad) stuff we talk about in the Study about spousal murders, and rapes and molestations would blossom to horrific proportions. Why? Because without love without the concept of loving for a lifetime children growing up in this "bubble", which is a concept that is felt as well as thought of, would grow up not having the love within them to stop doing these horrific crimes. They wouldn't care.
That, Miss Tina Turner, is what's love got to do with it.

You marry someone because you love someone and can't imagine loving anyone else (that way or that deeply). You WANT to stay with them forever and a day.
People who divorce after a few years of marriage didn't truly see the depths of their affections for their (former) S/O because they were blinded by the moment... and probably by the itch in their crotches. Best way to know is if you're willing to wait... and you do.

Having a contractual marriage just eliminates that (deep-true-love) from the equation. Besides they have that here in the states anyway... it's called Common-law marriage. It's beneficial to the point of helping one another get out of debt faster and getting certian tax breaks to achieve that.
It also helps reduce (not eliminate) the chances of STD's because you're with ONE partner... provided each stays within the confines of the "agreement".
Marriage does that sure, but call it a "life-time warranty"... yet I'll concede that unfortunately the warranty isn't exactly a guarantee... but it's awfully close and does work in many cases that I know. ... but the cases that I know it DIDN'T work outnumber the ones that did work.

Sigh.
 
as a divorced guy, I must say, seeing a story on marriage in the Horror Stories area, seems kinda fitting...
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Taiji teacher murders wife, dumps daughter

Previous Thread

BANNED from K Mart

Next Thread

Similar threads

Makalakumu
Senator Paul Wellstone Died Two Years Ago...Today
Replies
14
Views
7K
Makalakumu
Makalakumu

Latest Discussions

Back
Top