Do you agree or disagree with the concept of having a prenuptial agreement?

I do agree yes, more than that I think financial counseling should be a prerequisite before cohabitation. So many couples fall short due to arguments over finance.

If you have anything worth protecting, get one.

Hell, get one anyway, that stipulates all of your “This marriage is over if…” stuff. Can’t hurt. Marriage is a legal contract, and you have the right to cover your own arse.

Mostly, no. If one person has a lot of assets going into the marriage, yes.

Yes. Besides being legally wise in our litigious-minded society, it’s a good way for soon-to-be partners in life to demonstrate their commitment to the marriage.

It’s like when you cross the road, look both ways or your shit might hit the fan, best to be prudent.

I think the concept is a good one. If you brought more in, when you leave you should take more.

I think it’s a good idea. Better to divide up the stuff while you still like each other. Maybe you won’t need it, but if you do, you’ll be glad you have it.

I find it sad that so many people think of divorce in terms of when and not if. With that said, I suppose if you’re going to marry someone whom you’re not entirely sure about, it’d be a good idea to protect your property.

@RandomGirl I find it sad too.

I feel the same as @marinelife. Mostly no. You might as well not get married with such low expectations,

In community property states, a marriage license is essentially a pre-nup. In case of a breakup, it theoretically assures that the property will be divided 50–50.

If one partner has significantly more assets, then a pre-nup would be advisable.

I agree with @marinelife and @jonsblond. Unless one of us is coming into the marriage with a ton of assets, I wouldn’t have one.

I’d rather stay single.

As long as the girl gets half of what she did not earn, there should be a pre nup. Or vice versa. If both partners are equal contributors, no pre nup needed. Otherwise, there is no justice. I know of which I speak.

If you ain’t no punk, holler “We want pre-nup…”

When I got married, I said No Pre-Nup. I feel you are hedging your bet on the marriage.
People enter into marriage far too easily, and exit it the same way.
With no pre-nup, you are going to be more serious about it going in, and you will try harder to make it work.

If you own property going into the relationship and you want to take at least that property away with you if things don’t work out, get a pre-nup. I have a girlfriend who owns property and entered into a relationship with a guy who has nothing a couple of years ago. She was concerned about this but didn’t want to upset the apple cart by bringing up a pre-nup. If they break up, he can claim part of her original property. She is too old to be starting to build up her finances for retirement again and she worked hard for what she has.

If I ever had to get married again, I’d want one. But I didn’t need one when I got married.

Prenups are for people who have assets and children to protect.

I’m all for it. I once heard of a divorce settlement that gave the ex wife of a multi millionaire a high percentage of her husband’s future earnings because he had enabled her to become accustomed to a certain lifestyle. There were no kids involved and she, as far as I am aware, did not contribute at all to the earnings that they made when they were married. I think that is disgusting. It may have been John Cleese’s last divorce but don’t quote me on it.

I agree with @Pachyderm_In_The_Room I think a prenup is proof of currently being in the relationship for the right reasons. How many of the rich and famous marry people that are, quite clearly, only with them for financial gain but only see that when it comes to divorce. It’s sad that people need to protect themselves from people like that but I can’t see it changing any time soon.