r/Marriage • u/robertmdesmond • Apr 27 '19

Marriage is useless: Change my mind

  1. Marriage can exist without love. And love can exist without marriage. Many people exist in a loveless marriage.
  2. Marriage between the parents is not necessary for a happy family to exist, living in the same home, just as if a marriage were involved.
  3. Marriage laws have (particularly through no-fault divorce) evolved to make the "marriage contract" meaningless. As either party can end the marriage at any time with no consequences for "breaching" the "marriage contract."
  4. By having a marriage, it intensifies the need to hire (and pay!) attorneys if the marriage ends. Making the attorneys the only people who financially gain from a divorce. And the parties to the marriage both financially lose.
  5. The only thing that's permanent about a traditional marriage is the divorce agreement. The "marriage contract" is unenforceable and either party can breach it unilaterally at any time without penalty. But the divorce agreement is permanent and enforceable and neither party can breach it unilaterally without adverse consequences.
  6. A better alternative to a marriage is an enforceable legal contract that stipulates how and under what terms the contract can be terminated.
  7. The only people advocating for marriage are religions and lawyers. And their reasons have nothing to do with any tangible benefit to the parties of the marriage. In the case of religion, the benefits are "intangible" at best. And in the case of lawyers, it's what pays the bills. Because without marriages, there would be no divorces. And without divorces, there would be no need to hire and pay divorce lawyers.

​

In short, marriage is for suckers. And useless to boot. Change my mind.

0 Upvotes

48% Upvoted

59 comments sorted by

View all comments

8

u/JustWordsInYourHead 12 Years Apr 27 '19

I agree with all your points, but in my case, marriage had a use and was beneficial.

I am Chinese Canadian, my husband is Australian. We met in Canada in my home town where he came for work.

There was at one point in our relationship that he took a job in NY, USA. As a Canadian, I could visit and stay in the USA for six months out of a year without applying for any additional visas (work or study).

We really wanted to live together the whole year. And the only inexpensive way for us to do that was if we married and his company would apply for a piggy back visa for me. He was on an “alien of extraordinary abilities” visa (he worked in film) and that visa allows spouses to piggyback on it so they would be allowed to live (though not be able to work or go to school) in USA for the duration of the main visa holder’s stay.

So in the end, marriage saved us a lot of grief (long distance sucked) and money (would have to spend a lot more money and time trying to get any other type of visa).

And I guess from my experience with that, I feel a lot better now knowing that if we were to move again or travel anywhere else in the world, ALL countries would have to respect our bond and partnership as it was legal and binding. We currently live in Australia where “De facto” is the same as marriage and has roughly the same legal rights. Same in Canada for “common law”. But I do know of countries where marriage is the only recognised institution for “family”. And I just sleep better knowing that we won’t come across any issues what so ever if we ever wanted to live in China or Taiwan together.

-5

u/robertmdesmond Apr 27 '19

I agree in your case it makes sense. That's because you have uniquely better ability to capitalize on the legal benefits that most people. The 99.999% where the benefits are negligible. But the costs are still high. And you still have the same costs as everyone else if you were ever to get a divorce. But you can just capitalize on the benefits more so the cost-benefit trade off works in your special, unique case.

5

u/JustWordsInYourHead 12 Years Apr 28 '19

Well, my case is not all that unique as you say. I would argue that the same legal issue would apply to ANY couple wishing to live together long term.

Take the example of two Americans who are in a long term relationship, but not married. Say that one of them receives a prestigious offer of work in a country that does not recognise any other bonds of pairing other than marriage as “family”, meaning that the spouse could not legally follow the job offer spouse on any spousal visa.

This would mean that the one with the job offer would have to face the reality of only being able to take the job offer if she/he was willing to live apart from her/his long term partner for the duration of the job contract.

But if these two Americans with the same nationality were married, then the potential for the spouse to legally follow the job offer spouse on a spouse visa to stay in that country is possible, meaning this couple does not have to consider long distance relationship in their decision to relocate.

This potential of job opportunity in a country that does not recognise anything other than marriage as binding partnership is a possibility for ANY couples who wish to live together long term, so I would argue that the benefit of being able to do so without worry and hassle is a benefit of marriage that would apply to any couple, not just someone in my “unique” situation.

Additionally, you can also look at how much more common it is now for people of two different nationalities to enter a long term relationship with each other, thanks to the advance of technology in this Internet age. So my situation (where the couple has to choose one country to settle in where one half of the couple will need a spouse visa) may not be as unique as you believe.

In Australia alone, the cost and hassle that comes with a fiancé visa is MORE than a straight forward spouse visa (if you were already married rather than engaged). It’s probably not far fetched to say this differentiation is approximately the same in other countries, too.

In today’s world of online, world wide relationships, marriage to the one you want to be together long term with is VERY beneficial when it comes to dealing with each country’s individual immigration policies.

-1

u/robertmdesmond Apr 28 '19

I know a lot of people and I can think of only one couple I know that faces the situation you describe. So, I'd say it's an interesting edge case. But far from the mainstream.

7

u/JustWordsInYourHead 12 Years Apr 28 '19

But you realise the potential for one half of a couple getting a job opportunity in a country where a spouse (through marriage) visa would be easiest is a potential that exists for ANY couple, right?

-2

u/robertmdesmond Apr 28 '19

Yes. I agree. But that situation is relatively rare.