Pre-nups

[Luther073082]

First of all, it was obviously too quick or Keri would've been sure as well. You can't possibly compare the fact that you dated Keri for a month and then the relationship ended...to a couple that has dated and made the decision to marry.

If you and Keri had decided to marry after only dating a month and you felt the need for a pre-nup before you got married - wouldn't that speak more to the fact that you should wait a little longer to get married rather than speak to the validity of needing a pre-nup???

I agree however, that wasn't my point no matter if its 1 month or 3 years . . . one person can be sure and the other one is not.

Again, I think this mindset actually speaks more to who are "you" (and I'm speaking about the universal "you" not anyone in particular) dating and marrying. People seem to be really worried about other people being deceitful and misleading...who are these people and where are you meeting them? Yes, I'm not stupid or naive - I understand that anyone can mislead you and be deceitful - even Christians - but I just think it is really sad that "you" would go into a relationship already expecting there to be deceit down the road...

No, I'm not expecting it, I'm not getting one. But if I had money I would.

Wow! Nice to see that only women are being characterized as gold diggers...I'm sure that there are no men out there that would do something so dispicable and underhanded as that...nope...I'm sure that all men go into relationships with the utmost character and intentions...

Relax that wasn't my intention, we can change the roles if you want. I'm not saying men go into marriage with only the best of intentions. A lot of men have no idea or care of the committment they are taking. However women do generally get the better end of divorces financially. As well as custody.

You're right money does change people...but guess what - it's just money...and don't criticize me for saying that...money isn't a big deal to me - yes, I like having it and I could use more of it but it isn't the be all end all for me...

Again, for me it goes back to trust....that is more important to me than money...

That may be true, but most people say money wouldn't change them. Unfortuntly the sad fact is that it changes most.

Not trying to sexist here, gold diggers can be on both sides.

 

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

Most of the things that have the most worth is simply toys, not "assets". I guess it would depend on the situation at the time.

I can see where it might foster an enviroment of mistrust, but at some point you have to have to be responsible when kids are involved, and make sure their interests are protected.

In my mind, if I was in a position where I felt I needed to do that to protect my son's interests, and you had a problem with it, then that would be a problem.

I suppose it would. But if you felt you needed to protect your children from me then you probably shouldn't marry me.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

I agree however, that wasn't my point no matter if its 1 month or 3 years . . . one person can be sure and the other one is not.

Actually, I think you're missing my point...if one person is unsure then you shouldn't be getting married...whether it was 1 month or 3 years...

Relax that wasn't my intention, we can change the roles if you want. I'm not saying men go into marriage with only the best of intentions. A lot of men have no idea or care of the committment they are taking. However women do generally get the better end of divorces financially. As well as custody.

I am relaxed Kirk - I just disagree with you - but thanks for being patronizing....

Not trying to sexist here, gold diggers can be on both sides.

You're right...they can be on both sides...

 

[Luther073082]

Then that was poor financial planning on your part. You should've set up a college fund in your son's name...what would happen to the money if you died and it wasn't set up in your son's name??? It would go to your estate...so you need to plan better and protect the money that you want to go towards your son's education.

Also, if you married a woman that would actually demand money that was set aside for your son's college education then you should have spent more time thinking about the type of woman you were marrying before you married her...

But this is part of the financial planning, the pre-nup. Doesn't always have to include everything, just some things.

Yes you could set it up in a 503 (I think thats the number) but here is the thing, in a 503 I can't withdraw that money for anything but education. If my child doesn't go to school I lose it. . . ALL and he doesn't get it either.

The second part, I agree with you however you can't always tell the full character of someone as much as you would like to. Some people have been married 20 years and then found out their spouse was a serial killer.

Don't take anything here personally Denise. A pre-nup isn't a good idea for everyone, and probably won't be for me. However in some circumstances it is a good idea.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

Don't take anything here personally Denise.

I'm not taking anything here personally Kirk, are you?

 

[Luther073082]

Actually, I think you're missing my point...if one person is unsure then you shouldn't be getting married...whether it was 1 month or 3 years...

I am relaxed Kirk - I just disagree with you - but thanks for being patronizing....

You're right...they can be on both sides...

Ok I though you where upset.

Anyhow, yes no one should get married if they are unsure and Keri had the character to tell me before I moved across the country to be with her. But not everyone has that character and you can't always tell.

If I remember right the BTK Killer's wife had been married to him for 20+ years. I doubt she knew that he had a thing for killing people.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

Yes you could set it up in a 503 (I think thats the number) but here is the thing, in a 503 I can't withdraw that money for anything but education. If my child doesn't go to school I lose it. . . ALL and he doesn't get it either.

Actually, there are other plans that allow you to withdraw the money when a child reaches a certain age regardless of what they plan on using the money for...that's what a good financial planner can help you with...

 

[dluvs2trvl]

Ok I though you where upset.

Nope, not upset at all...just having a healthy debate!

Anyhow, yes no one should get married if they are unsure and Keri had the character to tell me before I moved across the country to be with her. But not everyone has that character and you can't always tell.

Yes, she did and for that you should be thankful. You're right not everyone has that same character, however, I think that if you are truly listening for the Lord's voice and you are doing everything you can to meet someone who is similar in values and character to you then it is the rare occasion where you would meet someone under those circumstances and they would end up totally deceiving you...I'm not saying it wouldn't or couldn't happen I'm just saying that everyone needs to make sure they are being smart about their relationship choices and not getting caught up in the moment so to speak...

If I remember right the BTK Killer's wife had been married to him for 20+ years. I doubt she knew that he had a thing for killing people.

and how would a pre-nup help in that situation???

 

[justaGUYnamedROB]

Anybody remember good ol' Job?

Job 1:20-22

"Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped, 21 And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.

I don't need a prenup for one simple reason: my God will always provide. No amount of pre-emptive strategizing or haggling in a courtroom will ever be able to supercede that.

I know it's much easier to say than it would be to actually go through it, but if it ever turned out that my future wife saw fit to take me to the cleaners, then so be it. God is still in control, and God has a plan for me. Perhaps I would be meant to learn some kind've lesson from it.

And besides all that, I don't think I could have any kind've love in my life short of the kind that has totally blinded me. Some might say I'm a fool, and they may be right, but if they only knew how great it feels to be totally and completely fooled...

 

[Sketcher]

I'm not rich, so I probably won't be a gold digger's target. If I were rich, I would consider a pre-nup.

 

[kingoffools13]

Wow! That's a pretty bold and, quite frankly, offensive statement and as a woman who wouldn't sign one and ISN'T a gold digger I think you need to reconsider making blanket statements like that...

And I would ask the same thing...if it isn't an issue and you're not planning on divorcing then why would you expect someone to sign one...

the divorce rate is over 50%, especially in the church today.

If you are getting married to someone no matter how well you know them there is a 50% chance that they will divorce you statistically speaking.

I dont think i will ever divorce, i sure wouldn't initiate it. However if i was well off or something, had some assets to protect, and i wanted to be with someone and have peace of mind that they were with me for me, and not my money, it would be a Pre-Nup for sure. Not to mention as a man of average means i wouldn't want to be paying her exorbitant amounts of alimony if she decided to leave me.

I know guys whose wives left them for no particular reason, and took them for half, plus alimony ... its BS.

If you dont love someone enough to give them peace of mind about being with you ... what possible motive could you have except "leaving that option open" ... how could you even try and make it look like something else?

Mind you i understand completely how it might offend someone in a conversation if someone suddenly said i wanna marry you but first ... i need you to sign this. After you get over the initial seeming offensiveness of the statement, the cons far outweigh the pros if its going to put them at peace.

K
O
F

 

[dluvs2trvl]

the divorce rate is over 50%, especially in the church today.

If you are getting married to someone no matter how well you know them there is a 50% chance that they will divorce you statistically speaking.

I dont think i will ever divorce, i sure wouldn't initiate it. However if i was well off or something, had some assets to protect, and i wanted to be with someone and have peace of mind that they were with me for me, and not my money, it would be a Pre-Nup for sure. Not to mention as a man of average means i wouldn't want to be paying her exorbitant amounts of alimony if she decided to leave me.

I know guys whose wives left them for no particular reason, and took them for half, plus alimony ... its BS.

If you dont love someone enough to give them peace of mind about being with you ... what possible motive could you have except "leaving that option open" ... how could you even try and make it look like something else?

Mind you i understand completely how it might offend someone in a conversation if someone suddenly said i wanna marry you but first ... i need you to sign this. After you get over the initial seeming offensiveness of the statement, the cons far outweigh the pros if its going to put them at peace.

K
O
F

Again, I can pose the same question in reverse...

Why would you push a pre-nup if you knew that it bothered your future spouse to the point of feeling like you don't trust them? What if you not asking for a pre-nup gave them peace of mind to be with you? Why then do you think you're way is right and the other point of view is wrong.

I understand that you disagree with my point of view but again, I find it rather offensive that you want to lump all women into the category of gold digger if we don't want to sign a pre-nup...there are other very valid reasons why a woman wouldn't want to sign one even if you don't agree with those reasons.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

I voted: "I don't expect to have a pre-nup but I would sign one if it was important to my future spouse".

The way that I understand it pre-nuptial agreements are simply people protecting themselves.

It is not much different from the wording of, say, a lease agreement for an apartment.

Wording saying that the leasee must pay damages if he/she does not comply with the terms of the contract is not the leasor saying, "I do not trust you". If the property owner did not trust a person then he/she/it would not take the risk of leasing an apartment to that person. It is simply the property owner protecting him/her/itself.

I do not see how two parties in a contract doing everything each feels he/she/it must do to protect him/her/itself is a bad start to a relationship--even if we are talking about a marriage contract.

 

[kingoffools13]

Again, I can pose the same question in reverse...

Why would you push a pre-nup if you knew that it bothered your future spouse to the point of feeling like you don't trust them? What if you not asking for a pre-nup gave them peace of mind to be with you? Why then do you think you're way is right and the other point of view is wrong.

because you are becoming offended at the idea that if you got divorced that they wouldn't want you to take financial advantage of them. ... despite what your emotional response is to this, that is the non emotionally biased synopsis

ie you want to get married, and he loves you and tottaly trusts you, but he wants to make sure if for some unforeseen reason it didn't work out, that you wouldn't ruin his life and burn his wallet to the ground in the aftermath of a divorce. Are you saying he should just "take your word for it" that you wouldnt do that in the event of a divorce? would he really trust the person you would be if you were getting divorced?

The point is they trust you for marriage, but you should never just automatically trust anyone you divorce, and that is what the pre-nup is for.

It is a contract between two people who are on good terms going into a marriage with the understanding that if for some reason, even against conviction, you ended up divorced, you would not be able to take him to the cleaners.

I understand that you disagree with my point of view but again, I find it rather offensive that you want to lump all women into the category of gold digger if we don't want to sign a pre-nup

That is possibly because you are viewing it in an emotional manor and not just the straight logistics of the issue. I know women hear this and it can be offensive, but speaking strictly of the terms of what it is, it is a legal document that protects the individual in the event of "the worst case scenario".

there are other very valid reasons why a woman wouldn't want to sign one even if you don't agree with those reasons.

There are plenty of valid reasons, but they do not outweigh my point. The issue is a legal one, it is to protect them from being ripped off in the event of a break up. If a man (or woman because either can have the pre-nup) get a divorce, its a terrible thing, they do not need on top of that to be a financial slave to the ex spouse simple because they did not think ahead.

Pre-Nups are not for the marriage couple, it is a futuristic document that the ex couple needs, and if an ex couple does not have one, chances are at least one of them will wish to God that they did. While they are the same physical people, they are NOT the same people, ergo he(she) isnt showing lack of trust to the person he is marrying, again he is showing wisdom in not trusting a person who he is divorcing.


I say you should just sign it and never divorce.

K
O
F

 

[justaGUYnamedROB]

The issue is a legal one, it is to protect them from being ripped off in the event of a break up.

Lemme ask you something: does God answer to the legal system?

 

[dluvs2trvl]

There are plenty of valid reasons, but they do not outweigh my point.

That's your opinion not mine...I actually think my reasons do outweigh yours...

I say you should just sign it and never divorce.

And I say you shouldn't sign it and never divorce....

We'll just have to agree to disagree...

 

[kingoffools13]

That's your opinion not mine...I actually think my reasons do outweigh yours...

why? ... yours are emotional i gave reasoning for mine.

you are so concerned with how offended you would be with the idea of a pre-nup ... what about your SO? Lets say they are just as adiment that you sign one as you are that you dont (just to get you both hypothetically emotionally invested). You are saying your small discofort one time is worth more than his continual discomfort and in the event of a divorce, loss of financial assets?

I personally doubt will use a pre-nup as of this time, but if a girl even felt that way just talking about it, i wouldn't marry her. That is such a self focused point of view its not even funny. If all she can think about is herself and not the welfare of the person she is with? Doesn't sound like she should be marrying anyway, she doesn't sound like she would "do anything" for that person and when you marry you should be willing to, no matter if it makes you uncomfortable, or "might" make you doubt whether or not someone trusts you. Not even definitely will, MIGHT make you doubt, as if there aren't countless endless other ways for them to reassure and reaffirm the fact that they trust you.

Do you really base how much you think they trust you on whether or not they ask you for a pre-nup? If not there goes your entire argument, if so you cant possibly be ready for marriage.(not you specifically, anyone)

And I say you shouldn't sign it and never divorce....

if we lived in a perfect world i agree .. however we live in a world where half of us that get married will end up in at least once divorce ... why take such a large chance on the future?

We'll just have to agree to disagree...

lol i always hated when people say that, its kind of a useless thing to do. If you believe what you say is right, then you shouldn't be agreeing to just let someone believe something that isn't ... but thats a side issue neither here nor there.

K
O
F

 

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

Actually, when you think about it...it's pretty sad that we even have to consider this type of thing. I guess I'm kinda old fashioned and wish that everyone did what they say they are going to, never lied, and always give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[dluvs2trvl]

why? ... yours are emotional i gave reasoning for mine.

I did give reasoning for mine however you have deemed my reasons as emotional...so how do I debate with someone who isn't willing to give weight to my point of view...

you are so concerned with how offended you would be with the idea of a pre-nup ... what about your SO? Lets say they are just as adiment that you sign one as you are that you dont (just to get you both hypothetically emotionally invested). You are saying your small discofort one time is worth more than his continual discomfort and in the event of a divorce, loss of financial assets?

Again, the same could be said in reverse. Why is it that you are giving more weight to the man's point of view (or to the woman if she is asking for the pre-nup) then to the one who is uncomfortable with signing it? Why do you think that it would only be a small discomfort to the person being asked to sign it? Why do you think it is more important for the person who is asking for it to feel comfortable than for the person who doesn't want to sign it?

You are focused soley on the financial side of a marriage and are giving no importance to the actual relationship of the marriage and the idea of two people becoming one...that is being totally left out of your equation and scenerio.

I personally doubt will use a pre-nup as of this time, but if a girl even felt that way just talking about it, i wouldn't marry her. That is such a self focused point of view its not even funny. If all she can think about is herself and not the welfare of the person she is with? Doesn't sound like she should be marrying anyway, she doesn't sound like she would "do anything" for that person and when you marry you should be willing to, no matter if it makes you uncomfortable, or "might" make you doubt whether or not someone trusts you. Not even definitely will, MIGHT make you doubt, as if there aren't countless endless other ways for them to reassure and reaffirm the fact that they trust you.

I agree with you...if a man was as adament about having me sign a pre-nup then I wouldn't marry him either. My point of view is just as self-focused as yours. You said, "If all she can think about is herself and not the welfare of the person she is with?" Why isn't the same true in reverse? Why shouldn't the man consider the welfare and feelings of the woman he is with?

You also said that it doesn't sound like "she would do anything" for the person she is with...again, why is that wrong and yet you don't consider the man NOT signing a pre-nup as doing anything for the person that he is with....

if we lived in a perfect world i agree .. however we live in a world where half of us that get married will end up in at least once divorce ... why take such a large chance on the future?

If you're not willing to take that chance then you're not ready for marriage...

lol i always hated when people say that, its kind of a useless thing to do. If you believe what you say is right, then you shouldn't be agreeing to just let someone believe something that isn't ... but thats a side issue neither here nor there.

I do believe what I'm saying is right however you don't...what's the point of continuing to argue when apparently neither one of us is going to change our mind?

 

[Tamara224]

But this is part of the financial planning, the pre-nup. Doesn't always have to include everything, just some things.

Yes you could set it up in a 503 (I think thats the number) but here is the thing, in a 503 I can't withdraw that money for anything but education. If my child doesn't go to school I lose it. . . ALL and he doesn't get it either.

Hey Luther... Sorry but I just have to butt in here.

This is ridiculous. If you want to save money for your child for college a pre-nup will not help you AT ALL. That is not what pre-nups do.

If you want to save money for your child for college, you set up a trust. And if your child doesn't go to college, the child can still get the money. Trusts are incredibly flexible - you can do just about anything you want to with them. You can say they are for education purposes alone, or you can say they are for education but if your child doesn't use it for that by the time he is 25, he gets it all, or monthly installments, or yearly installments, etc, etc, etc. In fact, if you just want to make sure your kids get your money (and don't care whether they go to college) you just set up a trust. Your spouse won't be able to touch it.


To anyone else who has said that pre-nups protect children... Nonsense. Trusts do that. If you're worried about protecting money for your kids, don't sign a pre-nup, put the money in trust.

Also, there's a lot of misinformation about pre-nups and what exactly they accomplish. My strong advice to anyone is this: If you are ever considering signing a pre-nup, get a lawyer!! Don't go to your future spouse's lawyer (if that lawyer even talks to you he/she is out of order).

Also, be aware that many jurisdictions don't favor pre-nups and will find whatever excuse they can to void them. So dot your i's and cross your t's or you'll find that the pre-nup's only real use was bathroom reading.