Comments
[deleted] t1_j51ak4c wrote
[removed]
PinkbunnymanEU t1_j514uhl wrote
So anyone who is non-religious and doesn't want to marry due to that shouldn't have a child...I see
weebeardedman t1_j517amg wrote
Is that really your argument?
Marriage isn't strictly a religious construct, and hasn't been since tax/medical/legal benefits were introduced for married couples/married couples with children.
If someone was willing to have a child with me, but unwilling to get married while subject to a government that provides huge amount of legal benefits for being married, I'd run like hell.
To be clear, I am 200% opposed to organized religion, and its affect on the general population. That has nothing to do with getting "married" in the eyes of the gov't - you can get married in a courtroom with no ceremony/religion involved.
PinkbunnymanEU t1_j518cw2 wrote
>since tax benefits were introduced for married couples with children.
Oh really? I'm in the UK and we have (almost) no tax benefits for marriage (£200 a year subject to very specific circumstances), almost every EU member state has no marriage benefit.
>while subject to a government that provides huge amount of legal benefits
So in the USA?
>Is that really your argument?
Is YOUR argument really "But 'murica gives us benefits for it"
Perhaps the real LPT should be "If you're in a place that give benefits for being married, discuss the benefits of marriage with your significant other, and if not being married is a deal breaker, don't invest in a relationship with that person" but I guess it's not quite as catchy as bashing men for not agreeing with your opinion...
weebeardedman t1_j519cv7 wrote
It's not just murica, the uk and eu gives a swath of legal/beneficiary and medical benefits for being married. Also, the uk does have a "married couples allowance" but it recently allows for unmarried partners as well.
But, regardless the u.s. situation is enough
PinkbunnymanEU t1_j51acnn wrote
>the uk gives a swath of beneficiary and medical benefits for being married.
Oh really? Because the only "medical benefit" is implied next of kin.
For beneficiary only non shared assets are subject to inheritance tax when one spouse predeceases the other. Non-shared assets can also be held in trust for minors.
The uk literally has alternative options for EVERY marriage benefit except married tax allowance, where £1250 of the tax allowance can be transferred, but only if you're a basic rate payer, meaning that only if one partner is earning under £12500 pre tax a year and the other under £50000 you can get up to £250.
weebeardedman t1_j51bgry wrote
It's not just next of kin I'm concerned with, it's medical visitstion/decision making that would otherwise have to be proactively dealt with, and even then, can fall through if it's not "as normal."
Same with power of attorney/beneficiary. A huge amount of people don't deal with this until its too late, and it's significantly more difficult to legally navigate.
Even in the u.s., most services are available for non-married couples, it's just an amount of hoops to hop through that don't make sense to deal with
PinkbunnymanEU t1_j51c4q0 wrote
>visitation
Not an issue I'm the UK, non married have the same visitation rights in all hospitals
>decision making that would otherwise have to be proactively dealt with
I agree with this point, however "get married because then you don't have to fill out as many forms" seems to be a reason that falls flat for me why it would be a reason to "run away"
_no7 t1_j51bmxc wrote
Marriage certificate is a legal contract regardless of religion. You’re the one who’s mentioning religion all of a sudden.
[deleted] t1_j5151b4 wrote
[removed]
PinkbunnymanEU t1_j515en2 wrote
The title literally says "If he is willing to make a baby with you, but unwilling [sic] to get married, RUN. RUN LIKE HELL."
Not sure how "unwilling" means I'm missing context but okay.
Seems like it's a "No marriage is a dealbreaker for me, it should be a dealbreaker for everyone" post.
[deleted] t1_j51bg51 wrote
[removed]
Zero1030 t1_j50z7zc wrote
Goes the other way too
KhaosDancer OP t1_j50zasn wrote
It does; however, this post wasn't about the other way
Zero1030 t1_j50zyw1 wrote
Still goes both ways even if you make a post singling out one gender
[deleted] t1_j510833 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j519g16 wrote
[deleted]
ricardo9505 t1_j5147pp wrote
I get it, you're absolutely right. But There are some trifling and/or twisted women out there that just want a "kid" and not a family. Men have to run like hell from them too. And when you commit , it's a hard road you choose. I see couples break up for the simplest things that therapy or some good conversation could easily solve.
KhaosDancer OP t1_j514k1u wrote
And I agree. However, saying "women do it too", has succeeded in derailing the original topic. The few comments on here are about women. Which is what I wanted to avoid.
[deleted] t1_j51b8z6 wrote
Derailing what? Your tip applies to both genders regardless of your intended target. Conversations around that are perfectly on topic. Or would you rather every commenter simply said “agreed”?
SadieOnTheSpectrum t1_j518g3d wrote
Lol this guy above not getting it
KarasLegion t1_j51a25m wrote
Women do it too and saying so isn't off topic. And your issue with that fact is ruining your topic.
You're the the bad guy here.
bing-bong-forever t1_j51br51 wrote
This is so dumb. Don’t follow this “LPT” folks.
_Nightrider121200_ t1_j51bu42 wrote
This is the most stupid anti-advice I have seen in a month.
We are entering a new era and marriage, as a social institute, is going to be extinct.
EmilyLovs t1_j511tao wrote
I'm with you in spirit. But in practice, gov licensing of marriage has destroyed marriage.
Get a formal commitment ceremony instead, that doesn't involve the government. And if you're worried about no state protection if he's a douchbage and leaves you with a child, you can make a legally binding agreement, that doesn't involve the state.
But, if you're really concerned about that, should you be making babies with him?
KhaosDancer OP t1_j514oua wrote
Why I'm being down voted for my request to stay on topic is a mystery
[deleted] t1_j516ech wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j516o7n wrote
[deleted]
SadieOnTheSpectrum t1_j51934b wrote
I’m wondering too if I’m just not understanding the other comments, but women have to sacrifice their body for said baby… so like yes it goes both ways technically but not in a equity way. Unless I too am part of the problem?
Idk I think this is a great bit of pro tip advice! To be wary of partners that want to rush into life events we’re not ready for <3
[deleted] t1_j516uyi wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j5179ke wrote
[deleted]
Sunkisty t1_j51c9ab wrote
Hello, KhaosDancer. Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):
- Posts concerning the following are not allowed: religion, politics, relationships, law and legislation, parenting, driving or medicine or hygiene (including mental health). This list is not exhaustive. Moderators may remove posts considered to deviate from the spirit of the subreddit.
If you would like to appeal this decision, please feel free to contact the moderators here. Do not repost without explicit permission from the moderators. Make sure you read the rules before submitting. Thank you!
keepthetips t1_j50yolq wrote
Hello and welcome to r/LifeProTips!
Please help us decide if this post is a good fit for the subreddit by up or downvoting this comment.
If you think that this is great advice to improve your life, please upvote. If you think this doesn't help you in any way, please downvote. If you don't care, leave it for the others to decide.
sunnyflow2 t1_j516ft1 wrote
Marriage and babies are two totally different things!