What do you think about marriage?

As selfish as it may seem, i'll take my chances with the courts staying out of my love affairs at the expense of other's consequences of their personal situations.

Children are another matter entirely and should be partially taken care of financially by the father (married or not) up to a capped limit per month. If one parent cant afford to provide care for the child along with the other parent's portion, give custody to the parent who can afford it.

IMO, if a woman decides to forgo or abandon her career to be a house wife, shes taking her chances just as I would if I laid up in some woman's house with no job.

The current state of divorce rulings arent anywhere close to fair today so I cant be bothered to revel in our current laws as some form of benchmark.

 

Amen to this Max....!

 

You might want to read into my statement again. Here, I'll put it in bold for you. I've already addressed that to the tee. And thank you for proving my point even further. It's more about the benefits. And also, and always will be...property rights. My state is the only state with the Napoleonic Code and it's still pretty much enforced.

 

My reply had zero to do with property.

 

Smh. Again I find it interesting when some dudes say something there's no scrutany but the same words said by someone who isn't liked is met completely differently. I guess we aren't capable of approaching things from an unbiased and fair point of you. So why even debate? This isn't a shot at you MM. I just remember when other members have made the same point a lot of the women couldn't wait to scream how alimony is well deserved because the kids are normally with the kids and their careers suffer for them raising our kids (thier kids I have to add). But you make a post like you just did pretty much all you hear are crickets. I guess the lesson here is just don't rock the boat and let people have their dellusions and you'll be recieved far more favorably.

 

Now now, Drae. Don't get a bee in your bonnet just because Max is more popular than you :mrgreen:

 

Mad? Hell I voted for dude lol

 

It could be one or more of a few things....

#1(and most likely) People havent had time to reply and disagree

#2 The manner it was said or explained maybe shed a different perspective

Also..I just looked at the member list and noticed a "Mr. Fantastic" as #7 on the most repped list in the entire forum :smt002

 

It seems like when they waste no time when they want to disagree with certain members but I concede that you have a point.

I've never one to practice decorum, always felt dishonest to my true nature but I guess you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. But there's something to be said about stinky uncomfortable shit. Its hardcore and apparent but I do notice a difference in the way our approaches are recieved.

And as far as me being #7, that has more to do with me having no life and posting 4 times more than the average poster. You take more shots your bound to score points lol. I appreciate the attempt to boost my ego fam but being liked is last on my list of agendas even though I have grown fond of certain posters. The dynamic here is very interesting and I've learned a lot more about the IR scene especially since I don't have many friends who have dated outside their race(sex yes but no relationships). This is great material for my documentary.

 

I love this idea but usually only one parent wants to care for the children (full time anyways). So who's left to be the responsible one? Who was asked to leave her job to be house mom for both kids and dad?

I know lots of men that pressure their partners to stay home, it's not necessarily always the woman just up and quitting her job.

I actually lost the most financially in my divorce and will very likely get my fiance to sign a pre-nup before we get married - he's already agreed to it

 

You get rep for forum anniversarys and each milestone of # of posts too. So MF is right. If you have no life you can be at the top too.

 

Nice jab lol

 

The parent who can afford it. if both can, the parent that the child wants to live with.

Its a hard question... and one I dont have a solid solution for. All I can say is, the laws on spousal support currently in place are being exploited more and more.

Good deal But I wonder how iron clad that prenup is when theres a child involved?

 

I see. Arent you up to #4 on the list these days? :smt023

 

Seeing the examples of my uncles and how miserable they sound, it makes me wonder.

I told you guys about my uncle that sits in his car in the parking lot after work at a local sheriiff's office in Virginia and doesn't want to go home, because its usually an argument soon as he steps through the door.

Keep in mind, the guy works all day with prisoners and then doesn't want to go home at the end of the day because its that bad at home. Yikes.

Sometimes it seems like marriage can be absolute hell when two people don't love each other any longer and can't get along.

 

it is

 

I was responding to Bookie's post. I actually agreed with what you said on yours.

 

Yes I spent time sitting by the sea in my car not wanting to go home so totally understand this.It wasn't because there was fighting but because there was nothing- just distance,no love and endless work with being only one pair of hands with 4 children.Divorce was not an option for financial reasons.You cannot be homeless with 4 children and feel you are giving them the best start in life.The children needed their father too as he was actually a good dad.
But it is worth giving marriage a try all the same and it gives the children a real identity and somehow there is more a sense of commitment when you cross that line.
Just be aware that, although you go into the marriage with the best of intentions,as we all should, that things can and will most likely change over time.I was married 37 years and it would really be a triumph of hope over reason to think nothing would change.It happens ,just not often.
Maybe relationships have their time and eventually stress and child raising take their toll and you lose each other.In the past marriage may have only been 20 years because of lower life expectancy.
Also 75% of divorces occur in people who married before they were 25.So the message in this is wait a bit before marrying.

 

I mostly agree with what you're saying. In IL, if you have one child together, when you divorce, the father (usually) has 20% of his NET pay garnished for child support. It goes all the way up to FIFTY PERCENT if you have 6 or more children together: http://www.childsupportillinois.com/general/calculating.html

Nobody wins financially when children are involved. It's beyond expensive to raise kids today, even if both parents are together and working.

It's hard to say what's fair and not fair.

But, there are too many dead-beat parents (though you hear more about the Dads, I'm sure there are Moms doing what they can to not pay child support, too) for it to ever be out of the courts' hands.

I understand your reasoning for a capped amount, and it holds merit. But really, the percentages ARE capped amounts, ya know?

Seeing as how you're taking about raising kids and saying alimony, I'm hoping you just screwed up the wording, since alimony has nothing to do with children. It's child support you mean.

As for alimony, I think it should be abolished. So, you're used to a certain lifestyle. Oh well. Get over it. I don't believe a person should have to pay their ex maintenance because their ex is used to living the high life. It's like the ex is getting their cake (don't have to stay in the marriage) and eating it, too (can still live like they were when they were married). That's utterly ridiculous, if you ask me.

Getting back to the topic at hand, I know a guy who has (by law) 20% of his paycheck being garnished every month for child support. That's the law. HOWEVER, he has his daughter every week from Monday night through Thursday morning and every other weekend. To me, that's absolutely, unequivocally keeping his child 50% of the time. So, why does HE have to pay his ex $800-$900 a month when he actually has his daughter 50% of the time?

I think it's completely unfair. And I think it's also completely an asshole move on his ex-wife's part. Even though she's allegedly not using any of the money and putting it away in an account, why take it? Why not say, you know what, don't pay me child support since we're splitting the raising of our daughter 50/50?

A woman CAN choose to not ask for child support. I believe in this case, she should have done that.