My son is moving off to a major metropolis this summer with his Girlfriend. She'll be attending grad-school at an expensive private university. She's not getting a ton of financial support from the University.
Talking with her newly appointed councilor at the college, and others, she's learned that if she or my son were to get a job with the school they would be eligible for substantially reduced tuition costs - this benefit supposedly extends to the employees spouse.
The gf is convinced that my son will get a job with the college and marry her. Son is not too keen on marriage at this point. He is apping for jobs with there but says even if he does get one he'll not get married before fall term.
The tuition savings, if one of them did work for the institute and they did marry, would be upwards of $25k/year. That's pretty substantial.
Does it justify a convenience marriage?
Edited to be more like jeopardy.
Edited, Mar 21st 2012 4:00pm by Elinda
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- A Convenient Marriage
A Convenient MarriageFollow
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
As long as they're not gay.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Just move to Canada, Northern Europe, Australia or New Zealand already.
That's a heck of a lot of money.
How long have they been together? Are they happy together? All that kind of stuff? I mean if things are moving that direction anyway, it's certainly an incentive. College debts are a huge problem these days. You go down to the courthouse, sign some paperwork, and they'll knock 25k off the tuition (assuming he gets the job of course...). That's hard to pass up. Even if they don't have a ceremony, or really make it official until they're ready later on you know.
Also if they're knocking off 25k, I'm not sure I want to imagine how much she's paying. Yikes.
Anyway, wow.
How long have they been together? Are they happy together? All that kind of stuff? I mean if things are moving that direction anyway, it's certainly an incentive. College debts are a huge problem these days. You go down to the courthouse, sign some paperwork, and they'll knock 25k off the tuition (assuming he gets the job of course...). That's hard to pass up. Even if they don't have a ceremony, or really make it official until they're ready later on you know.
Also if they're knocking off 25k, I'm not sure I want to imagine how much she's paying. Yikes.
Anyway, wow.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
someproteinguy wrote:
That's a heck of a lot of money.
How long have they been together? Are they happy together? All that kind of stuff? I mean if things are moving that direction anyway, it's certainly an incentive. College debts are a huge problem these days. You go down to the courthouse, sign some paperwork, and they'll knock 25k off the tuition (assuming he gets the job of course...). That's hard to pass up. Even if they don't have a ceremony, or really make it official until they're ready later on you know.
Also if they're knocking off 25k, I'm not sure I want to imagine how much she's paying. Yikes.
Anyway, wow.
How long have they been together? Are they happy together? All that kind of stuff? I mean if things are moving that direction anyway, it's certainly an incentive. College debts are a huge problem these days. You go down to the courthouse, sign some paperwork, and they'll knock 25k off the tuition (assuming he gets the job of course...). That's hard to pass up. Even if they don't have a ceremony, or really make it official until they're ready later on you know.
Also if they're knocking off 25k, I'm not sure I want to imagine how much she's paying. Yikes.
Anyway, wow.
Employees pay $500.00 a year for as many credits as they want to take.
They've been together about three years now. They have discussed marriage and seem to be heading in that direction. They've not ever lived together.
Edited, Mar 21st 2012 5:08pm by Elinda
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
They've not ever lived together.
Personally, I feel like everyone should live together before marriage, if at all possible. I'd advise them as such, myself. But I'm not about to suggest that it's a concrete rule or anything. No outside opinion could really supersede their own understanding of their relationship. Nor would I begrudge anyone moving things ahead for a financial benefit...who knows, it could be a perfectly fine move.
Edited, Mar 21st 2012 11:12am by Eske
If they are rushing into a marriage that they might not feel ready for in order to get a financial break, I'd heavily suggest a prenup, but maybe that's just me.
Sounds like a terrible reason to rush into marriage.
Convenient? Perhaps.
Wise? No.
Convenient? Perhaps.
Wise? No.
Server: Midgardsormr
Occupation: Reckless Red Mage
I think RDM's neurotic omniscience is sooooooo worth including in any alliance.
Occupation: Reckless Red Mage
IcookPizza wrote:
I think RDM's neurotic omniscience is sooooooo worth including in any alliance.
Elinda wrote:
Employees pay $500.00 a year for as many credits as they want to take.
Wow... is this commonplace? I might have to consider the option if I ever decide to go back to school.
I don't know if it's really a "convenience marriage". That implies to me that at least one of the two parties don't care about the other emotionally at all and are just in it for some non-romantic benefit. If your son and his filly have been dating for a while, I'm hoping they like each other at least a little.
But if he ain't ready then he ain't ready. And the expectation that he'll get a job there (which I'm assuming isn't his dream) makes me wonder why SHE doesn't get a job there.
Also, call the university and ask if this policy to convince your son to get married before having children.
But if he ain't ready then he ain't ready. And the expectation that he'll get a job there (which I'm assuming isn't his dream) makes me wonder why SHE doesn't get a job there.
Also, call the university and ask if this policy to convince your son to get married before having children.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
My cousin, active Navy, got married right before re-upping for another tour of duty. The gal he married was an old girlfriend that he dated in high school, and had started dating again after his return to the States after his second deployment. They got married mainly so his girlfriend could take advantage of tuition benefits for spouses of active duty military.
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.
My cousin got married right before her husband (naval engineer) shipped out to Japan (so she went with him). I'm almost certain it was a marriage of convenience. They had been dating, but I think they were pretty much close friends for the most part. He gained a companion for his tour overseas, they both benefited from the increased wages, and she got to live in Japan for free. They didn't stay married that long after he left the service, but I think they are still close.
Honestly, that does seem somewhat different than this case, since it strikes me that your son and his gf are closer to marriage than my cousin was (not considering his imminent departure). It was easy for them to be married. Rushing into a marriage when you actually have hopes it will last? Sounds risky to me.
Honestly, that does seem somewhat different than this case, since it strikes me that your son and his gf are closer to marriage than my cousin was (not considering his imminent departure). It was easy for them to be married. Rushing into a marriage when you actually have hopes it will last? Sounds risky to me.
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Aripyanfar wrote:
Just move to Canada, Northern Europe, Australia or New Zealand already.
Demea wrote:
My cousin, active Navy, got married right before re-upping for another tour of duty. The gal he married was an old girlfriend that he dated in high school, and had started dating again after his return to the States after his second deployment. They got married mainly so his girlfriend could take advantage of tuition benefits for spouses of active duty military.
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
This is pretty much what my brother-in-law did. He and his casual girlfriend got married. She became his 3rd wife. He shipped to Japan, she stayed in the US. They were able to get some extra cash during his deployment. They got divorced as soon as he came back so that he could get married to his 4th wife. It was a marriage of convenience definitely for them.
Marriage isn't always about love and romance. Sometimes it's just a business transaction.
Thumbelyna Quick Hands wrote:
Demea wrote:
My cousin, active Navy, got married right before re-upping for another tour of duty. The gal he married was an old girlfriend that he dated in high school, and had started dating again after his return to the States after his second deployment. They got married mainly so his girlfriend could take advantage of tuition benefits for spouses of active duty military.
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
They got divorced less than two years later.
Of course, the divorce may have been due in large part to his particular choice of career, but this is the only anecdote that I could think of relating to a "convenience marriage."
This is pretty much what my brother-in-law did. He and his casual girlfriend got married. She became his 3rd wife. He shipped to Japan, she stayed in the US. They were able to get some extra cash during his deployment. They got divorced as soon as he came back so that he could get married to his 4th wife. It was a marriage of convenience definitely for them.
Marriage isn't always about love and romance. Sometimes it's just a business transaction.
This is what happens when you let the gays marry.
Just as Planned.
Thumbelyna Quick Hands wrote:
Marriage isn't always about love and romance. Sometimes it's just a business transaction.
Cue another 20 page Gbaji thread...
Thumbelyna wrote:
This is pretty much what my brother-in-law did. He and his casual girlfriend got married. She became his 3rd wife. He shipped to Japan, she stayed in the US. They were able to get some extra cash during his deployment. They got divorced as soon as he came back so that he could get married to his 4th wife. It was a marriage of convenience definitely for them.
Marriage isn't always about love and romance. Sometimes it's just a business transaction.
Marriage isn't always about love and romance. Sometimes it's just a business transaction.
Well, thank the baby Jebus they're straight so the sanctity of marriage was not imperiled.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Marriage is primarily a business transaction.
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
/shrug
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during theirmarriagebusiness transaction, the child will be better protected by the law than otherwise and be more likely to enjoy positive outcomes as a result. So mission accomplished!
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during their
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Must... resist... urge...
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
/poke
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
/shrug
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during theirmarriagebusiness transaction, the child will be better protected by the law than otherwise and be more likely to enjoy positive outcomes as a result. So mission accomplished!
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during their
No, the child will likely suffer from bad Romantic Relationship modelling, being around a couple who are presumed to be a couple, but are not actually in love with one another. And either the couple will do what they wanted to do originally, and get divorced sooner, when the child is very young, making the born-in-wedlock thing moot, or the couple will do the worst of two bad alternatives, and stay together "for the child". Cue child picking up on and being exposed to tensions and fights between unhappy adults, whom for stress reasons are likely to be worse modellers and explicit parenters to their child.
I'm not sure how the child would be better protected by the law really. I'm not an expert though. Neither is Gbaji of course, but he is more likely to make something up.
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
It wouldn't be better protected by the law. The child I had when I was single had more benefits than the child I have while I'm married.
Aripyanfar wrote:
gbaji wrote:
/shrug
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during theirmarriagebusiness transaction, the child will be better protected by the law than otherwise and be more likely to enjoy positive outcomes as a result. So mission accomplished!
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during their
No, the child will likely suffer from bad Romantic Relationship modelling, being around a couple who are presumed to be a couple, but are not actually in love with one another. And either the couple will do what they wanted to do originally, and get divorced sooner, when the child is very young, making the born-in-wedlock thing moot, or the couple will do the worst of two bad alternatives, and stay together "for the child". Cue child picking up on and being exposed to tensions and fights between unhappy adults, whom for stress reasons are likely to be worse modellers and explicit parenters to their child.
Hey Kaolian
Just nuke this thread, please.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Debalic wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
gbaji wrote:
/shrug
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during theirmarriagebusiness transaction, the child will be better protected by the law than otherwise and be more likely to enjoy positive outcomes as a result. So mission accomplished!
And on the off chance that he should knock her up during their
No, the child will likely suffer from bad Romantic Relationship modelling, being around a couple who are presumed to be a couple, but are not actually in love with one another. And either the couple will do what they wanted to do originally, and get divorced sooner, when the child is very young, making the born-in-wedlock thing moot, or the couple will do the worst of two bad alternatives, and stay together "for the child". Cue child picking up on and being exposed to tensions and fights between unhappy adults, whom for stress reasons are likely to be worse modellers and explicit parenters to their child.
Hey Kaolian
Just nuke this thread, please.
WHY DID I CLICK THAT PICTURE I WISH YOU A FIERY AND PAINFUL DEATH
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Recent Visitors: 724
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (724)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- A Convenient Marriage
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC