>>One might imagine a situation in which marriage was strictly a contractual agreement - any number of parties with any conditions they chose to agree upon. However, the first one would end up in court, with one or more parties claiming the contract was invalid because they were coerced (”He said he’d leave if I didn’t sign!”) or that the agreement was morally negated. Back to square one. <<
Well actually, if it’s handled as a contract, it’s a contract. It’s not much different than those who live together and handle it in that way. Houses bought together, etc. Some kind of court decided kids anyway and at this point, men are left on the losing end of the bargain.
The only difference is that I don’t have some government telling my girls they can’t get married until they are 25.
Garden-variety marriage isn’t a contract at all, in our current system. It can be dissolved at will by either party with no “breach of contract” penalty.
The problem is that “marriage-type” contacts, including pre-nups, are not necessarily going to be upheld by the courts. Don’t like the agreement you signed? Get a lawyer and roll the dice. Maybe you’ll draw a judge and jury who agree that he/she done you wrong.
We have at this point no legal means of establishing marriage as it once was.