Marriage in the Khavian Age of Rational Nationalism

1. Anyone of legal capacity can devise their own contract.

2. Gay people can have their own contract which can resemble marriage but cannot call their contract "marriage".

3. Straight people who contract with each other will have their contract treated like a marriage when offspring is produced, whatever they called their contract to begin with.

4. No marriage may take place without a marriage contract.

5. The purpose of a marriage contract is so that FAULT can be apportioned when a party to the contract is accused of not fulfilling the terms of the contract by the other.

6. Any divorce settlement will reflect the fault apportioned on the party considered by the court to be in the wrong.

Lawyers should support this idea as this would be a regular source of income for them.  Too bad they are mostly PC extremist feminists now so they won't get what I am on about.

My idea would actually have them associated with weddings,domestic partnerships, house-warming parties and happy events, but it seems they prefer in their PC extremist feminist way to be hated as blood-sucking shits and associated with divorce, disappointment and degeneracy.    

None of the lawyers I have explained this to get it, but I think they are just pretending not to get it, in their cowardly pissy shitty way.   


Popular posts from this blog

The 30 second rapist

The easy and cheap availability of British women

Religion and Recreational Sex: sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?