4 ms·

While I agree with the overall sentiment here, it's worth noting that businesses use contracts because trust between two parties can never be assumed—both busin

While I agree with the overall sentiment here, it's worth noting that businesses use contracts because trust between two parties can never be assumed—both businesses are purely acting in their own self-interest. On the other hand, with marriage, it's generally (hopefully) safe to assume that both parties trust each other fully before entering into the agreement. Whether and how that plays out in practice is another story, but IME, very few people enter into marriage prepared for the case in which it ends. This is why prenuptial agreements can sometimes be a touchy subject, since it breaks that assumption of complete trust.

damnencryption 6y ago
Prenups aren't valid in every country.
- RussianCow 6y ago
  I'm not sure how that's relevant?
DoreenMichele 6y ago
One of the functions of a marriage contract is to protect your partner from other people. This is why gays have fought for the right. They got tired of co-mingling their finances, buying a house together and then having one partner thrown out into the street with little more than the clothes on their back when one of them died and the parents (or nearest blood relative) inherited the house.
barumi 6y ago
> On the other hand, with marriage, it's generally (hopefully) safe to assume that both parties trust each other fully before entering into the agreement. Whether and how that plays out in practice is another story, but IME, very few people enter into marriage prepared for the case in which it ends. Sounds to me you're describing the whole point of marriage as a contract, as it specifies the default set of conditions and requirements that are applied to both parties, and also the rights and obligations of both parties in case of a contract resolution and even breach of contract. > This is why prenuptial agreements can sometimes be a touchy subject, since it breaks that assumption of complete trust. Again, it sounds like you're describing the whole point of marriage as a contract, as its the original (and baseline) prenuptial agreement.
srean 6y ago
> On the other hand, with marriage, it's generally (hopefully) safe to assume that both parties trust each other fully before entering into the agreement. This is a lot less obvious in practice than it seems. Fair-weather 'partnership' isn't really rare. Unless it has been tested at times of adversity it is hard to predict how people would react. A piece of paper does not ensure that the relationship will be anything but of the fair-weather variety, with one ready to jump ship at first signs of bad times, it does give one an opportunity to reflect on the gravity of the promise and vows and the public nature of the promise gives it some air of barrier to dissolution.

damnencryption 6y ago

Prenups aren't valid in every country.

RussianCow 6y ago
I'm not sure how that's relevant?

DoreenMichele 6y ago

One of the functions of a marriage contract is to protect your partner from other people. This is why gays have fought for the right. They got tired of co-mingling their finances, buying a house together and then having one partner thrown out into the street with little more than the clothes on their back when one of them died and the parents (or nearest blood relative) inherited the house.

barumi 6y ago

> On the other hand, with marriage, it's generally (hopefully) safe to assume that both parties trust each other fully before entering into the agreement. Whether and how that plays out in practice is another story, but IME, very few people enter into marriage prepared for the case in which it ends. Sounds to me you're describing the whole point of marriage as a contract, as it specifies the default set of conditions and requirements that are applied to both parties, and also the rights and obligations of both parties in case of a contract resolution and even breach of contract. > This is why prenuptial agreements can sometimes be a touchy subject, since it breaks that assumption of complete trust. Again, it sounds like you're describing the whole point of marriage as a contract, as its the original (and baseline) prenuptial agreement.

srean 6y ago

> On the other hand, with marriage, it's generally (hopefully) safe to assume that both parties trust each other fully before entering into the agreement. This is a lot less obvious in practice than it seems. Fair-weather 'partnership' isn't really rare. Unless it has been tested at times of adversity it is hard to predict how people would react. A piece of paper does not ensure that the relationship will be anything but of the fair-weather variety, with one ready to jump ship at first signs of bad times, it does give one an opportunity to reflect on the gravity of the promise and vows and the public nature of the promise gives it some air of barrier to dissolution.