Should it be illegal to re-marry?

After divorce.

How can you be trusted to give a vow until death do you part, if you couldn’t stick to it the first time around? You know, the way adults are held to all other legally-binding commitments involving debt and humans (i.e. children).

http://www.divorcestatistics.org/

After how many times? How many times before we cap it?

The purpose of marriage is the security of monogamy. This spits in the face of security and allows serial monogamy, which is, looking back, a kind of fraud compared to what was promised. False light should come back into enforcement with all the other laws that protected the sexes.

At least end no-fault divorce. EMTs don’t use the term ‘car accident’ because they’re never accidents. There’s always at least one party at fault.

Why are legal bailouts allowed for cases that don’t involve a breach of the vows?
Jesus said it’s fine to divorce an adulterer. JESUS. And if one party won’t try, which is what you get married to do, how are they not at fault? Marriages require cooperation, it isn’t one-sided.

And can I bet on the odds of Markle releasing an engagement chicken recipe soon?
Fact: when they divorce, she still gets a title.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2017/10/15/body-language/

No such thing as common law marriage

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42134722

NEWSFLASH: You want the benefits of marriage, you have to actually get married.

There is only living in sin.

Stupid is as stupid does.
You don’t have tenancy rights without signing a tenancy agreement.
Neither do you have employee rights without signing an employment contract.

You lost everything, years of your life, because not once did you think to fucking Google it? I searched this years ago and the Government did their job, it’s the top of the first page. You don’t just get to assume you have rights by the power of wishful thinking. Nah, I don’t buy it, you deserve to be miserable. You know who doesn’t? Any children, tiny tot ATMs.

That’s the real secret. Married couples have less rights to benefits than “cohabiting”.

The kids are still gonna be screwed up, the same as single parents.
Children need the security of marriage.

Room mates don’t have rights. It’s like claiming the town bike is cheating. Nope! They owe you nothing! A girlfriend or boyfriend owes no fidelity.

Marriage is literally a vow of monogamy. No legal right to the latter without the former.
Engagement is the fringe case with a verbal contract. Cohabiting means jack shit.

How many people even know engagements have a time limit? After a couple of years, specifics vary, the proposing partner can claim you never intended to get married, because you delayed and the verbal contract was rescinded. ASK A LAWYER.

Why do women take up more government resources?
Which sex is left holding the baby? Blame deadbeats, they ain’t paying for their little splunk junket. We are. Everyone else.

Bringing in bullshit laws would make modern marriage even more useless.
People need incentives. And price controls for wedding basics would help.
I was planning a wedding recently and OMFG. They’re just flowers. Stick bridal before something and the price goes up 50x.

For the scaredy boys?
Single male friends don’t want you to get married for the same reason single female women don’t want their friends to get married to quality either: less attention, less time. They are replaced as a primary social obligation in your life.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-reasons-marriage-scares-men-arent-what-you-think/
Married men are happier than bachelors, some are frenemies trying to put you off the Best Woman For You, like you’ll get a second chance. If she’s the best option, the prospect of fucking her repeatedly isn’t a trial.
Re-marrying? Having seen the stats? OK, don’t bother. If you couldn’t make it once, you can’t do it again.

It’s easier to write a sitcom doofus fucking up if there’s no wife to help him.

Video: Virgin before marriage or not?

Literally the best video I’ve ever seen on this topic.

Pair bonding is chemical and sex-based.

That glue is meant to be for marriage and pair bonding is impaired in both sexes.

The haters will be jealous you aren’t rushing to the divorce courts.

Cheating risk is lower too.

It’s all around better.

I disagree with the idea that she isn’t superior. Morally, she is superior. She demonstrated the virtue of chastity, that makes her superior. She just doesn’t use it as an excuse to treat normal people like dirt, which is arrogance.

Related.

Age gap marriages unhappy

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/marriages-large-age-gaps-less-satisfied-study-relationships-sex-men-women-older-younger-a7877161.html

Thanks, Dr Obvious.

“What did surprise researchers was that women who married to older husbands were also deeply unsatisfied whilst those who married younger men were far more content.”

probability the researcher surprised was male? 100%

because a woman who doesn’t want ED and other age-related problems, who wants a virile husband who can protect her, that’s just sexist!

how dare the sexes be different and want different but actually the same things?

less BS

which is common with-

younger spouses

quelle surprise

it doesn’t discuss sexual spoilage, namely, that if you’re spoiled, you’ll never be truly satisfied with one person, who has many limits and isn’t the best at everything you’ve had

ah, the wages of sin

Traditionally, spouses are similar age and both young.

Exceptions exist for the wealthy because so many of them died.

This very subject was a common theme of paintings. One party was under duress.

Europeans have always married in their 20s

Using my own country as an example, link other data if you have it.

I already covered the historical norm of spouses within a couple of years of one another.

This is what K-types do, get established then select a mate.
Both sexes are most fertile but least stupid in the twenties. Thank the frontal lobes.
K-types need time before they marry to mature, lest they overbreed or starve their offspring from lack of resources.

http://www.ceda.berkeley.edu/Publications/pdfs/rlee/British%20Population%20in%20the%2018th%20c.pdf

The 20th century is the outlier here. With easy divorce, they married earlier and divorced earlier, to get married more often.
Trump, for example. Yet the re-marriage problem isn’t even addressed, let alone called a sin.
By self-proclamed traditionalists, who believe in marriage. Sure, Jan.

It would be great if Americans stepped out of their bubble and learned real history instead of the BS their schools lead them to believe. I have to keep correcting errors that would embarrass a child. Boomer Professors LIED. Their normal is NOT normal!

Update: it seems they changed the link. CEDA Berkeley British population data.

They keep doing this to my links.

Whatever, I tried.

Ideal age to marry?

http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/2009-August/004039.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3437253/

..Would you look at that?

The medieval range of mid-twenties, which also happens to be when women are most fertile and men are fertile but capable of self-control (both bodies and cortices are finally matured).

” The greatest indicated likelihood of being in an intact marriage of the highest quality is among those who married at ages 22-25″

“However, the findings do suggest that most persons have little or nothing to gain in the way of marital success by deliberately postponing marriage beyond the mid twenties.”

They’re going to marry someone else. Dating is like musical chairs and after 30 the options are grim.

The 20s are neurobiologically intended to equip you for parenthood.
You can’t waste them.
For a relatively good breakdown: http://www.artofmanliness.com/2013/02/05/dont-waste-your-20s-train-your-brain-for-lasting-success/

You find the right person? You put a ring on it.
That sort of thing doesn’t happen twice in a lifetime.
Obviously, you need to be self-improving and on the lookout for the One in the first place.