Are Prenuptual Agreements Zig Forums?

I see, I still have my worries about this, but at least we spoke about it in a Christian way.
Thanks.

Truly spoken like a non-thinker

Behold, the child who throws a fit when his peas touch his mashed potatoes.(USER WAS WARNED FOR RULE 2: PERSONAL INSULT)

So does not marrying someone who isn't the right person to marry. There's a reason that Paul said that marriage is a last resort if you absolutely do not have the self control to not have premarital sex - the fact that divorce is very messy and is a sin.

A prenuptial agreement for classification of premarital assets could certainly be important for a family where one party has a large estate and substantial assets (like a farm or a large business) and the family owning those assets wants to make sure they stay in the family.

An example would be a grandfather farmer wanting his son to have an agreement before he marries his wife that if the son has inherited the 8-generation family farm and then the son dies, the farm should not be allowed to be sold if it could be given to the farmer’s grandchild.

Having an agreement to make sure family assets stay in the family is a totally legitimate use of a prenup. However, the whole “I’m rich and you ain’t getting my money if we divorce” thing fundamentally undermines the covenantal nature of holy matrimony.

A prenup can actually remove no-fault divorce terms. It is entirely legal to write a prenup that says, in case of adultery, non-cheating spouse gets everything.

That said, judges hate enforcing these and you'd better have very clear-cut evidence. The point of no fault was for them to not have to make findings on adultery, etc. but, you can force the issue into contract if you want.

Not true, if you actually hire a lawyer and go through all the legal hoops.

Mark doesn't make the Matthew 19:9 exception, Christ says it's still better to stay married and Paul (1 Corinthians) says you -cannot- divorce non-believers, but to accept it if they divorce you for your beliefs.

No.

The Sacrament of Marriage is intended as a icon of Christ and His Church, and should be a dissolution of self into a couple. Planning for its end even before it begins is counterproductive.

Just as those settling a new world should burn their boats on landing there, those getting married should plunge in without anything holding them back.

If they're Christian, they should make it work, assuming the common vernacular reasons given for them being "the wrong person" lel. Actual reasons with validity such as abuse actual abuse and not the special snowflake bullshit that counts for it in the modern West were cause for divorce in the Law and continued to be so, both in the Roman West and the Byzantine East, for centuries, before Rome in her various heresies made changes to that.

Irrelevant to the question.

...

Matthew 19:9 does make the Matthew 19:9 exception.

1 Corinthians 7

Such divorces are legitimate. I think you mean the Christian spouse cannot initiate the divorce not that they cannot be divorced. Also doesn't specify that it's only because of being left for belief.

This, we wouldn't need prenups if the church was harder on divorce and marital and sexual sins and more beneficial to those who are married.

"Did He not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union?" (Malachi 2:15)
"Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous." (Hebrews 13:4)
"'Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church." (Ephesians 5:31-32)