Posted on 09/18/2005 3:05:48 AM PDT by Caipirabob
Over a casual dinner, Rachel Kaplan turned to her boyfriend and asked, "You're open for a prenup, right?"
Darren Waldohlz, 38, a partner in a successful speed-dating business, admits he was caught off guard. But he said he realized a prenuptial agreement would protect the house he owns, too.
"It's not that I plan to get divorced," says Kaplan, 23, a single mom from Fort Lauderdale, who has a sizable inheritance. "I have to protect myself and my daughter."
While men are still more likely to seek a prenup, "women are becoming a more dominant force," said attorney Alan Braverman, who has offices in Fort Lauderdale and Boynton Beach.
Experts attribute the change to women marrying later or more than once.
"It's not uncommon in today's world that women are entering marriages with assets and stock options," said matrimonial attorney Jacqueline Valdespino, in Coral Gables. "Now both sides have equal bargaining power."
(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...
Mommy hater.
LOL! Planning to fail, wonderful.
Believing that people should keep their vows, oaths or promises is being delusional? Assuming your statistic is accurate, that means 50% percent of couples do not know how to pick a marriage partner. If you expect your future spouse to "fall from grace" then by all means get a prenup.
Don't bring it up; just make sure you trust the SigOther completely before marrying him/her.
Even in some of the best case scenarios Clinton happens. One partner cheats or one parter develops a gambling habit or something like that. Why should the innocent party suffer?
sorry....i thought Reason signified Objectivist leanings
I don't think I'd want to be in a money squabble for millions. Just give me 500K for a house, and I'll go away.
Ever get the feeling that people are just too into STUFF?
What? Milk is over $3 a gallon...
THe correct term is , why buy the milk when you have the cow at home... Be content..
Can you imagine going through life with that much self righteous, it's-all-about-me attitude? "You may touch my pee pee but I shan't ever marry you because the minute you touch it, you are ho. I will encourage you to touch my pee pee. I will pursue and attempt to conquer you sexually. I will use all avenues of persuasion at my disposal. But the minute you allow me, the sinless one, to have the intercourse I want/suggest/encourage, I will immediately hold you in disdain like the lowest street walker. I call this "traditional" ideals."
You know, we use to sacrafice virgins to the volcano gods. That stopped. Wanna know why? Cuz it was STOOPID.
A Man can be sure just as a woman. The babies blood type is the fathers. Just because the evidence of a woman carrying a baby proves it's hers (unless surrogate) the father's DNA is half of what that baby carries (basic genetics lesson)
And so a wise man knows that a woman who refuses to have sex with anyone until marriage, is a woman more likely to be faithful after marriage--for she strictly follows the rules.
I know a lot of women who saved themselves for marriage and have fallen... so, this is not true...
Such a woman shows she is weak and more likely to make excuses to herself to break rules when temptation comes along.
Not true, it is the man that causes this to happen... The woman is fragile and can be lead to temptation, it is the man that is to help protect her virtue and keep her honor
I would never marry a woman who had sex with me before I married her.
Good luck in finding one now...
But I would have sex with her.
So you would be willing to keep degrading a womans virtue by tempting to fornicate?...
I don't think I'd want to be in a money squabble for millions. Just give me 500K for a house, and I'll go away.
This is a good question and goes right to the heart of the damage that's been done to marriage over the last 40 years or so.
WRONG!!!!! Second wives trump first children. Theres such a thing called the spousal elective share. A spouse can elect to take against the will. For example: H has two kids by 1st marriage. Marries W2. H has a family business he wants to leave to his children. H makes small bequest to W2 with bulk of assets to children. H dies. W2 can elect to take 1/3 of the estate, even if H writes in the will that he is making no provision for W2 and wante EVERYTHING to go to children. Unless there is sufficient cash in the estate to pay W2 her 1/3 share, the business has to be sold to pay her off. You can put everything in an irrevocable trust, but I would recommend getting a waiver of the elective share from spouse with some consideration paid to spouse.
Me ? ; )
She has her father's feet, though. Poor thing.
http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/newborn/babys_blood_type.html
Never waste a good virgin on a volcano.
Now let's look at this seriously. Would I call YOU a mommy hater?
However, should you ever come before all of us and say that you are permitted to pursue women and petition for sex using all means at your disposal only to discard the female afterwards under the flag of traditional values, some might call you a mommy hater.
Me? I'd call Laura Earl and watch her kick yer butt. Bring popcorn.
I was referring to the other poster that has the word "reason" in it's handle yet uses little. I think he hates his mommy.
Most if not all states have a widows/widowers share. It was created so that husbands could not "cut out" a wife and leave her peniless. (back in the day when divorce was harder to obtain. The practice was akin to make me miserable in life so in my death I will make you miserable)
A will alone will not work.
Some states even have requirements for MINOR's shares.
It DOES point out that this is an issue for those with children of previous marriages.
(then again what would the alternative lifestyle crowd of the SunSentinal know about children.)
BTW if the name defines your location, stay safe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.