> ... Marriage is FAR more to me than convenience ....
 
Good for you ... my point simply was that marriage has a
convenience-treshold somewhere. By that I meant to say it is less expensive
to live together at a specific place than to finance 2 separate dwellings.
Thezre's no way of denuing that.
 
> I think you should think again .. if your marriage is nothing but
> convenience
> maybe you are missing the whole point .. or maybe you have not met the
> right person.
 
Or maybe you have missed the complete point. My wife and I had been
together for 16 years and had had 4 children already (with 1 miscarriage).
There was no real reason to get married here other than the emotional stuff
and an expensive feast. However, we got married in 1994 because due to the
specific legal environment if I were to die my wife would not be a widow
and would not qualify for the benefits. I don't know how it goes overthere
but overhere a surviving spouse can elect to stop working and continue
cashing the other spouses pay-check until his/her death as a kind of what
we call "widow(er) pension". This is part of our very expensive
social-security system but handy when needed.
 
So we decided that was a very good reason to get married as my paycheck was
a lot fatter than her's. Anything wrong so far?
 
> Sorry ... I hope you don't take this as a personal attack ..
 
Of course not.
 
> ... but there is more to marriage than sharing one set of household
> appliances
 
... There's also putting the toilet-seat down ... 
 
By the way, why using a handle in the header? Your real name would do beautiful.
 
 \%/{at}rd

--- DB 1.58/001877