I’d like to invite others who have some interest in the issue, especially those who have written on the subject, to visit the page and post links. Attorneys with experience writing prenups or simply in contract law are also very much welcome.
The goal is to give people who want a better form of marriage the guidance and tools to make it possible. Default civil marriage as it exists today has become an evil and destructive institution that must be changed. People who remain in civil marriages do so despite the incentives to divorce and engage in gender warfare. For the weaker and less sensible it is too often a disaster that literally ruins lives, including those of the most innocent — our children.
Feminism may have done a wrecking job on the Western family, but I am optimistic that this can be turned around. The fight against feminists must continue, but it’s time to start discussing reconstruction, and reforming the devastated institution of marriage is where it should begin.
In a previous post on the same topic he described the fundamental problem with the current legal definition of marriage perfectly:
Whether written down or not, marriage has always been seen as a binding contract, and it is only in recent times that this universally accepted basis for marriage has been undermined and rejected in favor of the modern civil marriage, which cannot be called a marriage at all, but rather more of a tax classification. Marriage does still exist, but none of its conditions are fulfilled by what is known as marriage under Western civil law. It is the only contract that rewards a party for unilaterally breaking it: a wife is under more of an obligation to fulfill the terms of a cell phone contract than to fulfill her marriage vows.
He also argues that marriage is a natural state for men and women:
Marriage is the natural state of relations between men and women who cohabit and engage in sexual relations, and has been for thousands of years across a wide variety of cultures, races and faiths. It comes in many different forms, but in all cases there is a contractual element, and the needs and feelings of each spouse are taken into account.
His proposed solution is for men and women to enter into their own specifically defined contracts which define the rights and obligations of each spouse:
Although laws surrounding domestic relations – VAWA and other incentives to accuse in particular – present some obstacles to marriage contracts, prenuptial agreements could remove some of these incentives and remain enforceable. Men and women can still enter into legally binding agreements under civil law, efforts of feminists notwithstanding, and many of the incentives to unilaterally break promises and vows could be removed with well-conceived contracts.
Furthermore, in the free societies of the West, contractual marriages could render the arguments over the definition of “marriage” moot, as the state’s role in defining the institution would decline as people increasingly defined it themselves. Lawyers who now profit from dissolutions could turn their efforts toward strengthening marriage and defending agreements, therefore contributing to families’ well-being rather than living off their destruction.
In the comments section, he acknowledges that this plan isn’t without risk:
The problem is that feminists will try to come up with ways to undermine the contracts, but they can’t undermine contract law too much without doing MAJOR damage to civil law in general.
I agree with him on the source of the risk. This is the fundamental problem. Unfortunately I don’t share his optimism that that the courts will honor marriage contracts. If the courts held private contracts relating to marriage as sacrosanct then a good prenup would seem to solve most of the problems with marriage 2.0. I’m not an expert in the law, but as I understand it this isn’t the case. Either way, I applaud him in his noble efforts. I sincerely hope he is correct. If you feel you could be of assistance in this worthy endeavor, please drop by the Marriage Reform page and share your thoughts.