Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

Devoted to discussion pertaining to those issues which are specifically relevant to people 45+. Topics must have a specific perspective of people in this age group for it to be on topic.

The story of Abraham and Sarah is told in chapters 11-25 of the book of Genesis.
Learn More:Abraham & Sarah

Jan 5th 2013 new
A prenuptial agreement can be considered in a good sense-- that is, how the marriage is to be conducted. Lots of divorces could be avoided if the spouses agreed ahead of time about their plans and goals. When the prenuptial agreement becomes a blueprint for how the divorce will be arranged, that is just plain wrong, and it easily becomes a self-fulfilling proposition. Marriage is a plane without parachutes; when the parachutes are all over the place, using them gets too tempting. I agree that if a lady started talking about prenuptial agreements, that would be the end for me.
Jan 5th 2013 new

(Quote) John-711000 said: I understand Elizabeth, and any man would be lucky to have you, but you are from the Old ...
(Quote) John-711000 said:

I understand Elizabeth, and any man would be lucky to have you, but you are from the Old Order which produced the best of women. Men and Women of today that are looking to be married have to understand that honor is lacking and temptation and betrayal is great. That is just a fact of this present day.

I would like to point out, if you are not aware, that the whole of western civilization lived under Kingships until the birth of the American Republic. This was the first time since a Republic of this magnitude was created since the fall of the Roman Republic. The idea of a Republic is when men could live independently without a King. All Kingships were abloished by the United States after WW2, and all of the west declined as a result.

The idea of seperation of church and state was necessary for both to operate independently. Our church is ruled by the state under a 501 (c) tax exempt status (which is a scam) since the Constitution guaranteed separation. Here lies the problem when a couple gets married in our church (Traditional included) they can obtain a divorce on a "no fault basis" by the state. The church has no say in the matter.

I believe our church (and all churces to be fair) should only be able to obtain a divorce through the church in which they were married and have a solid reason. All no fault divorces need to be made illegal.

I understand your point very well.. But there is only two choices, to find a good spouse ( like yourself, which is rare ) or have a pre-nup or a legally binding agreement which is fair to both if the worst happens. I'm sorry but our church and we ourselves, are being oppressed by the state to weaken our families so we will not be competition for corporate America. Those are just the facts that need to be discussed.

--hide--


Thank you for your compliment, John. But, I believe my views on our Church and Catholic marriage are widely held by many Catholic men and women. Our faith is a faith of doctrine. Either we follow it and are full communion with our Church or we don't and we are not in full communion with our Church. For discussion sake, it appears what you are suggesting is that one can choose to find a spouse who is in full communion with the Church or settle for what amounts to a non Catholic spouse. I didn't settle the first time and I won't settle this time. If all someone is looking for is companionship, sex, and a cook, those are easy to find without the shame of a convenience marriage. I suspect that St. Paul did or would say it would be better to stay unmarried if that is what we are looking for.

As for this idea that a spouse takes all after the death of his or her spouse, that would not happen in Tennessee. I do not know the law in other states, but I suspect they are close. If you die in Tennessee without a will, the wife takes a child's share of the estate. If you had a will and did not provide the spouse with at least a child's share, then your spouse can elect against the will.


What concerns me in this discussion is total lack of the concept of holy matrimony ordained by God and sanctioned by the Church. I remember a thread a while back where a young man was concerned that the women he was considering marrying did not manage money well and he was concerned she would bankrupt him. My question to him was, "Why would you trust a woman with having and raising your children who you won't trust with your assets? She will be the first and most influential teacher your children will have."

The same type of question comes to mind here. There are far larger issues in marriage than money. Your spouse can join you in knowing God or your spouse can tempt you or lead you away from God. Your spouse can take control of you and your assets if you become incapacitated and keep your children away from you. There are all kinds of things that come with spousal privileges.

Prenuptial agreements are contracts between two unmarried persons and are basically a contract to marry provided the other person will agree to waive any right to your premarital assets. Accordingly, Canon 1102 of the church's Code of Canon Law says that "marriage subject to a condition about the future cannot be contracted validly."


Financial planning for the end of life is a very important matter and includes finances. Financial planners and attorneys can help a couple plan ahead. The sooner the better because end of life issues can be extremely draining and leave the "left behind" spouse with limited resources.


As for the state of our American Republic, I am afraid I don't even recognize it. It has begun to look more like Hitler's Austria than Washington's America.


- Elizabeth

Jan 5th 2013 new

"If all someone is looking for is companionship, sex, and a cook, those are easy to find without the shame of a convenience marriage. I suspect that St. Paul did or would say it would be better to stay unmarried if that is what we are looking for."


Sorry for the misspelling. "shame" should have been "sham."


- Elizabeth

Jan 6th 2013 new

(Quote) Edward-822102 said: John - Thank you for posting this. Whether we call such arrangements pre-nups or estate planning...
(Quote) Edward-822102 said:

John - Thank you for posting this. Whether we call such arrangements pre-nups or estate planning for blended families, division of assets in case of divorce -- or DEATH -- needs to be considered by individuals seriously contemplating marriage late in life. The intent should be protection of assets for the children of each person up until the point the marriage takes place. I personally know of a case where two mature people married, and the husband died three weeks later. The new wife got everything, and the husband's children got nothing.

My view is not made in defiance of Church doctrine, but as simple common sense to protect those we love and, in my case, to keep faith with the intentions of a beloved, previous spouse. We live in a secular, as well as spiritual world, and need to make provisions in that world for our children, just as we provide them food, clothing, shelter, education, and last, but by no means least, love.

--hide--

Call the pre-marital agreement what you want: if it contains contingencies for divorce it is not permissible.

Jan 6th 2013 new

(Quote) Edward-822102 said: John - Thank you for posting this. Whether we call such arrangements pre-nups or estate planning...
(Quote) Edward-822102 said:

John - Thank you for posting this. Whether we call such arrangements pre-nups or estate planning for blended families, division of assets in case of divorce -- or DEATH -- needs to be considered by individuals seriously contemplating marriage late in life. The intent should be protection of assets for the children of each person up until the point the marriage takes place. I personally know of a case where two mature people married, and the husband died three weeks later. The new wife got everything, and the husband's children got nothing.

My view is not made in defiance of Church doctrine, but as simple common sense to protect those we love and, in my case, to keep faith with the intentions of a beloved, previous spouse. We live in a secular, as well as spiritual world, and need to make provisions in that world for our children, just as we provide them food, clothing, shelter, education, and last, but by no means least, love.

--hide--



I'd be curious to know what happened next. The wife, though only for a short time, was entitled to the assets. Did she take care of her spouses children afterwards? Wouldn't a will have offered better protection than a pre-nup?

I have to agree with the church on this. Call me naive, but pre-nuptual agreements seemed to gain popularity with movie stars and royalty as divorces became the thing to do and marriage became more a publicity stunt. I came from humble beginnings, married the same and worked hard to maintain a healthy lifestyle for our families. We didn't have a will and my financial planner has encouraged me for the last five years to get one. I did receive my husbands assets, along with his debt. I offered to give some life insurance money to his daughter from his first marriage. She refused it, saying I needed it to raise the kids. She was an adult, with a husband and home and job of her own. But when she became I'll and couldn't pay her bills, I took care of that for her. I didn't want her to have to have added stress during her recouperation.

I know older children fear that the new wife will take all that they deserve. It's the age of entitlement. But if you marry someone that you love and trust, wouldn't you also trust them to do what is right after you are gone? Losing a spouse is really difficult. Most days it is impossible to function. I lost my job five months after because I couldn't keep my focus and would put my children's needs before my employer's. Having assets to draw on for a time helps the surviving spouse through it. Adult children should be supportive and put their greed aside. I think the idea of the evil stepmother is overrated.

If it is a concern, I would update a will together with my new spouse, but I would refuse to enter a union with an escape clause. This isn't a corporation, it is a marriage.

Jan 6th 2013 new

(Quote) Kathy-635104 said: I'd be curious to know what happened next. The wife, though only for a short time...
(Quote) Kathy-635104 said:




I'd be curious to know what happened next. The wife, though only for a short time, was entitled to the assets. Did she take care of her spouses children afterwards? Wouldn't a will have offered better protection than a pre-nup?

I have to agree with the church on this. Call me naive, but pre-nuptual agreements seemed to gain popularity with movie stars and royalty as divorces became the thing to do and marriage became more a publicity stunt. I came from humble beginnings, married the same and worked hard to maintain a healthy lifestyle for our families. We didn't have a will and my financial planner has encouraged me for the last five years to get one. I did receive my husbands assets, along with his debt. I offered to give some life insurance money to his daughter from his first marriage. She refused it, saying I needed it to raise the kids. She was an adult, with a husband and home and job of her own. But when she became I'll and couldn't pay her bills, I took care of that for her. I didn't want her to have to have added stress during her recouperation.

I know older children fear that the new wife will take all that they deserve. It's the age of entitlement. But if you marry someone that you love and trust, wouldn't you also trust them to do what is right after you are gone? Losing a spouse is really difficult. Most days it is impossible to function. I lost my job five months after because I couldn't keep my focus and would put my children's needs before my employer's. Having assets to draw on for a time helps the surviving spouse through it. Adult children should be supportive and put their greed aside. I think the idea of the evil stepmother is overrated.

If it is a concern, I would update a will together with my new spouse, but I would refuse to enter a union with an escape clause. This isn't a corporation, it is a marriage.

--hide--


Well said, Kathy. In all this talk about protecting assets for the children of former marriages, the discussion of protecting the wife seems to have been left behind...no pun intended but it seems to fit.


- Elizabeth

Jan 6th 2013 new

(Quote) Kathy-635104 superation. I know older children fear that the new wife ...
(Quote) Kathy-635104 superation.


I know older children fear that the new wife will take all that they deserve. It's the age of entitlement. But if you marry someone that you love and trust, wouldn't you also trust them to do what is right after you are gone? Losing a spouse is really difficult. Most days it is impossible to function. I lost my job five months after because I couldn't keep my focus and would put my children's needs before my employer's. Having assets to draw on for a time helps the surviving spouse through it. Adult children should be supportive and put their greed aside. I think the idea of the evil stepmother is overrated.

If it is a concern, I would update a will together with my new spouse, but I would refuse to enter a union with an escape clause. This isn't a corporation, it is a marriage.

--hide--
i think the greed comment is unfair. maybe the new spouse would be the greedy one

Jan 6th 2013 new

(Quote) Marirose-887295 said: i think the greed comment is unfair. maybe the new spouse would be the greedy one
(Quote) Marirose-887295 said:

i think the greed comment is unfair. maybe the new spouse would be the greedy one

--hide--


You're right, it could be unfair to assume either party is greedy. I have noticed the ire of adult children when their elderly parent marries and they are more upset at potentially losing their inheritance than considering their parent's dream of happiness and companionship. What is important is having these discussions before walking down the aisle and taking the time to to know who you are marrying and their children. I would be more suspicious of someone wanting to rush into marriage without fully disclosing assets, dreams and intentions before hand.

Jan 9th 2013 new

(Quote) Jacqueline-556574 said: It makes sense to have some verbal discussions about money well before marriage, whether on...
(Quote) Jacqueline-556574 said:

It makes sense to have some verbal discussions about money well before marriage, whether one has children from a prior marriage or not. I support that, but not "pre-nups." Mention of needing a prenup is a good way to lose a fiance. No one, and I mean no one appreciates being considered a "threat."

An individual's credit report is much like a balance sheet. It shows one's credit worthiness at one point in time, e.g., it can be changed for the better or for the worse, and is not a good indicator of the person in general. No one is exempt from life difficulties such as critical illnesses, unexpected life problems, and loses of income. Any and all of the above would affect a credit report.

Better, I would find someone who I think has good judgment, or rather whose ideals are similar to my own about money and living in general.
--hide--


Well said Jacqueline. The world today is a risk no matter what you think you have or don't have. Faith in God and good judgement will get you through.


I hope I'm paying attention to what I'm saying here.

Jan 9th 2013 new
I didn't know that! Thanks for setting me straight truly.
Posts 31 - 40 of 42