The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

A prenuptial agreement is a smart choice

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/26/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,858 times Debate No: 7968
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)




Some may say it shows a sign of early weakness in a marriage, but the truth of the matter is that there is nothing weak about protecting yourself and what is valuable to you. Prenups restore a sense of communication between couples and gets the "fairy tale marriage" idea out of the way and brings upon the realization of what a marriage really is: a risk. I'll take safe over sorry any day.

Thank you to whoever accepts this debate.


Allow me to first point out that a marriage is based on love, trust, and devotion. This is essentially the foundation of the entire concept of marriage. Without trust or devotion, marriage is a joke. If you choose the wrong person to marry then that is your fault, and it is not fair to say that those who do love and trust each other enough not to get prenup are not smart.
Secondly, I do agree with my opponent, there is nothing weak about protecting what you have. But when you are considered "smart" of protecting something from someone that you hold mutual love for, that is absolutely ridiculous. If you have to protect yourself agenst someone you love, there is no point in marriage.
Lastly, I would like to point out to my opponent that not every (actually few marriages) are based on the idea of a fairytale marriage. Most people understand that marriage is going to be a struggle. Those who think it will be a fairytale, live in fairytale worlds.

(Good luck!)
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting this challenge. Look forward to an interesting debate!

I agree with my opponent in that marriage has a strong foundation in love, trust, and devotion. However, most people overlook the fact that marriage is essentially a business contract, and just like any business, partners have rights and duties to one another. So too often couples will use love as an excuse to hide concerns over their debts, inheritances, secret bank accounts or even talk about money. Of course people aren't "stupid" for deciding to get married without obtaining a prenup, and it is their right to believe that love and trust will conquer through the financial difficulties. All I have to say to this is good luck because one can NEVER be so sure that their marriage will either fail or succeed. Odds may be in your favor, but are never certain. Prenups enable communication, the lack of which is one of the biggest reasons for divorce.

In response to my opponents second point:

Since many more commitments occur during the course of a marriage (especially when married at the age of 18-25, as most people are.) There is an even greater need to protect your rightfully earned assets:

Starting your own business - If a married spouse who owns a business finds them self in a divorce without a prenup, the other spouse may assume a portion of the business revenue.

Family inheritance - A prenup can protect the inheritance of children from a previous marriage.

Debts - A prenup can protect a spouse from assuming responsibility for their spouses' debt.

All 3 circumstances listed above can be avoided through the decision to obtain a prenup. Without a prenup, important decisions may lay in the hands of a judge.


If a couple gets prenup, it would question the others motives and actually divide communication. If it does enable communication, the only discussion it could open up is, "Honey, why did you get prenup? Do you not trust me?" Sure, in some marraiges it is a scam, and they shouldn't be trusted. However, if they are gullible enough to marry someone who they think they can trust, odds are they are going to lose their money to someone else. (I do not commend doing that though)

I do not see how marraige has any relation with a business. As for my opponents comment on age of marraige (18-25) it is not likely that they will have much of anything really. I never have known an 18 year old with a business. If they have debts, it isn't much unless they are a big spender, even then, they can't charge on credit cards too much, because they have no credit. And they could be mentioned in a will, but it takes SEVERAL YEARS to recieve the money. But I digress.

A prenup states that community property is void. When you are married, you basically own what the other owns. A prenup isn't always accurate either.

(tired of writing. So, this is where i quit. Waiting on you)
Debate Round No. 2


A couple is wrong to assume that they are immune to divorce. Couples obtain prenups with the mindset of which a driver fastens his seat belt: As well-coordinated and careful as you may be, the odds that you will end up in a mess are never completely gone. Now with that said, if my fianc´┐Że asked "Why did you get a prenup?" or "Do you not trust me?", I would simply say that "It's not that I do not trust or love you, it's that I want to be protected if something does go wrong." Saying a prenup advocates divorce is like saying life insurance advocates death, and that's exactly how couples should view a prenup (marital insurance). Just like any other insurance, you hope you do not have to use it.

Marriage and divorce CAN be a factor in starting a business. One must remember that marriage is the financial binding between two beings, even though that seems to be hidden in the facade of solely being about love and trust. Also, I did not say that 18-25 year olds are the ones most likely dealing with debts, businesses and family inheritance, but that by that age in one's life, it is difficult to grasp what kind of endeavors and failures such as these may be awaiting in the future.

The perfect example of this: What if Bill Gates had married Melinda during this age range? Since most likely being unaware that he would eventually become the huge business magnate that he is now, I'm sure he wouldn't have taken the idea of a prenup very seriously. Now if that had happened, Bill Gates would now be praying daily that she doesn't divorce him.


First of all, I disagree with my opponent, "Saying a prenup advocates divorce is like saying life insurance advocates death" Death is not a possibility- it's a garentee. So I do not understand my opponents statement. However I do agree that a prenup is an insurance, like house insurance. In the unlikely event of a disaster, there is always a possibility. But would you pay thousands of dollars for a house in a quiet neighborhood with respectful people and little natural disaster activities? Probably not.

It is a waste of time. However, there is always going to be a few exceptions, like that of celebrities. However, I am not saying that we all do not have something worth protecting, but I am dissuading from the topic.

The point is, a prenuptual agreement is not a smart choice, because it chips at the foundation of trust that marraige is built upon. Would you like to marry someone that you truely love, only to find out they want a prenup? And by the way, you don't always have to conjoin finances, like bank accounts.

(Gtg or i'll be late for school. Good luck!)
Debate Round No. 3


As an honest gesture, I would like to acknowledge that my opponent had made a very good rebuttal saying that the connection between life insurance and a prenup is invalid, considering that death is a guaranteed possibility. HOWEVER, it just so happens that life insurance is the only exception to my point (the connection between homeowner' s insurance and car insurance is still valid). My opponent himself has agreed: A prenuptial agreement is a form of insurance that protects your finances in the event of divorce.

My opponent has failed to counter my argument that couples are not immune to divorce, which only leaves me to believe that he agrees with this point as well. If not, my opponent must realize that no amount of experience can ever prevent with all certainty, the possibility of failure. If we are to believe that it is possible for an experienced driver to have an accident, what is preventing my opponent and/or any of his supporters from believing that a loving, trustful married couple of many years experience might end in divorce? Now realizing that possibility, why forfeit your say in your belongings to the decision of a judge in court?

In conclusion, It is my belief that social conditioning has prevented our society from viewing marriage as built upon nothing more than love and trust, as my opponent insists it is. If my opponent were correct, then why does our country have a fifty-percent divorce rate? I've never heard of a couple that was contemplating marriage without loving and trusting each other before-hand. Certainly love and trust isn't enough to keep half of all marriages together. Couples neglect to concern marriage as the business contract that it is, one that is riddled with financial responsibilities. If still unconvinced that a prenuptial agreement is a smart choice, remember that with a prenup, neither party has anything to lose nor gain. Without a prenup, one party loses and one party gains, and it is usually the gainer that doesn't deserve a cent.


I agree with my opponent. No couple is immune to divorce. My opponent made an interesting and true point. Fiftey percent of Americans get a divorce/inullment. However, as my opponent stated, most marriages age ranges are very young. They realize that their actions were rash, and before they have long term relationship, divorice. If they have something of value at such a young age (especially with the current economy), the judge can clearly distinguish what is rightfully theirs, and they often make the right decisions, because they are expert professionals at their job.

Prenup is a form of insurance, I do agree. But is it a nessicary insurance? Not probable. If you stay together, there is always doubt there. If they do break up, not 100% of those divorces call upon community property to steal everything away, it's actually not as predominate as you might think.

I disagree with my opponent when she said "Couples neglect to concern marriage as the business contract that it is." Because marrige itself is not a business, nor is it a contract. It is a legal document saying that a couple are officaly conjoined spiritually, mentally, emotionally, and physically. (I noted that my opponent did not cite a source for "Without a prenup, one party loses and one party gains, and it is usually the gainer that doesn't deserve a cent." Does our justice system EVER make the correct decision on prenup? Or is it always wrong?)

Because of these reasons, I urge you to vote a negative ballot...or whatever the voting system is here. I wish my opponent good luck. (but that doesn't mean that I don't want to win!)
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by snelld7 7 years ago
If I can say a prenumpt is bad...then say cuz I believe the wife shouldn't assume half of the money if they haven't done half of the work.... would that be ok with you?
Posted by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
they dont mean jack diddly. Just try to get that to fly in a court
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
Posted by wpfairbanks 7 years ago
The way I understand it, is marriage has always been essentially a financial contract. Therefore, it wouldn't make sense to sign a prenup, it would make more sense to not marry
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
Depends who you are. If you're some deadsh1t 21-year-old with no prospects, and your fiance is a 90-year-old multi-billionaire, a prenup wouldn't exactly be the smart choice there.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by el3m3ntsk8s 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Vote Placed by Charlie_Danger 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03