Regardless of what one wants to do, there is generally a right way, a wrong way and the accepted way. With some things, the right way and the accepted way are the same because that’s the best way to do it and it works. However, there are some issues in which there is debate over what the right way and wrong way actually is, with the result is that the accepted way is the way that doesn’t cause women to get their panties in a wad.
Case in point: Marriage
Quite literally, nobody knows what they’re doing anymore. There was a time when marriage was a serious business, back when boomers weren’t cruising the highways in land boats spending their children’s inheritance. There was once a time when it was expected of couples to leave their children better off than they were. No more. There was a time when marriage combined property and there was a sense of stewardship. No more.
Every state has a law stating that those who wish to get married must get a marriage license from the state and almost nobody knows that law is, according to the Supreme Court, nothing more than a polite suggestion. In 1878 the court visited the issue and declared marriage to be a fundamental right, stating that laws regarding marriage licenses and such were “merely directory.” Look up the word “directory” in a legal dictionary and you’ll see what I mean- there can be no invalidating consequences for disregard for such a law.
Understand what it means to get that license: you are putting the State in charge of making the rules for your marriage. Isn’t it far better to have the rules for your marriage set down on paper, one which you have signed and had witnessed?
Far better than relying on the state’s whims is to get married with a well-written marriage contract that functions as both a pre-nup and a contract of marriage. If done right and all the requirements are observed, a court would be leery of disregarding such a contract because they know they’d lose on appeal. You see, there was a time when people got married with a contract. Yes, they observed the social niceties but the contract was serious business because there was property on the line. Assets that took generations to accumulate.
It’s time to return to the use of the marriage contract and do it right.
Those individuals who are numbered among that most despicable class of persons known as attorneys often protest that a marriage contract doesn’t work, a judge will throw it out and proceed as planned. This is incorrect and I have yet to have a member of that most despicable class present me with evidence in which a couple was married by right, without a license, using a contract of marriage that specified:
- The authority under which the couple was married (God’s not the state);
- Who the parties to the marriage were (specifically excluding the state);
- Why the parties chose to get married, listing the reasons and expectations;
- What the standard of commitment called “marriage” they were agreeing to;
- What the rules for the marriage are (only from God or by mutual agreement);
- How such rules were administered and by whom;
- How the posterity (children) might be dealt with (inheritance);
- Who had the authority to adjudicate irresolvable disputes within the marriage, and;
- When and how such a marriage might end.
Don’t take that the wrong way, I’m not saying all attorneys are personally despicable because they’re not. I’ve known a few almost all my life and a few were likely enough wenches to take to my bed, but they’re still members of that most despicable class of persons due to their training and egregious profession. As proof, most attorneys will have nothing to do with helping draft a marriage contract designed to exclude the state and avoid the court system because it’s a conflict of interest and a violation of their rules.
Use a contract.
The images in this post are real wedding pictures from hundreds of years ago.