In today’s post-modern society driven by capitalist consumerism, could a divorce insurance with really good provisos be the answer in keeping “modern love” equitable?
By: Vanessa Uy
Ever since Pope Gelasius declared February 14 as a Red Letter Day in honor of St. Valentine back in year 496, anyone from bards to scientists and even lawyers had lend a hand in gaining insight on this thing we call love. Although gaining insight means different things to different people, in this day and age, gaining insight on love usually means making the damned thing equitable to the parties involved. Love used to be the business between two loving couples, but in our present age, greeting card companies and those “weird people” who claim to be close to God by virtue of celibacy all lay claim to be the sole authority on love and marriage. I think these two camps are what’s been making Valentine’s Day a very interesting holiday for over a millennia.
When capitalist consumerism declared that it knew the price of everything – including devotion and obligation – did it made equitable ground rules? Or are we now so cynical that nothing free has value anymore? How could Calvinism put a price on one’s own devotion and obligation? Only the Anglo-Saxon God knows and He’s not talking. To me, this makes it a situation where only lawyers have free reign on arbitrarily deciding what’s equitable or not. I just hope that more prenuptial agreements be offered in pro bono flavor.
To me, it’s just sad that the thing we call money – whose value is backed up by our increasing materialism - is also the very thing that could get us out of this specific dilemma. In this day and age, divorce insurance with proviso for legal separation and prenuptial agreements really has existing demand. Divorce insurance really has legitimacy because the element of gambling – the first essential factor in insurance – is not present. This is so because countless people get married on a regular basis with the knowledge that over half of it will end in divorce and currently divorce proceedings are always messy affairs by judicial standards. Then, only a couple of things are left to be studied to make divorce insurance an integral part of most insurance companies’ / providers’ retinue. Like the possibility in making accurate and scientific calculations of the extent of the hazard, so as to charge a fair premium. Remember, irreconcilable differences causes stress and stress leads to ill health mental or otherwise. The other is the cost of divorce insurance must be within the reach of a large number of people.
Forgive me for being too cynical – even by “Michael Moore Documentary” standards – but divorce insurance, in my opinion, could really revolutionize how our present generation look at and approach “Romantic Love”. Divorce insurance could end once and for all the blatantly ithyphallic way young couple decide to get married – by whim – with utter disregard to the hardships that they will certainly encounter in marriage. Just something to think about during Valentine’s Day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Judging by this particular blog, I bet you're very familiar with the three rings of marriage namely: the engagement ring, the wedding ring, and last but not least "suffer-ring". Too bad Friedrich Nietzsche never got involved in our current litigation practices. I think the "good old institution" of marriage only work back in those days when you have to walk for five whole days just to visit your "next-door neighbor".
Have you visited www.lawyershop.com ? There was an article pertaining to North Carolina-based SafeGuardGuaranty Corporation announcing their plans to offer divorce insurance internationally sometime in early 2007. SafeGuardGuaranty's suggested average cost of legal fees for a divorce is $15,000 to $30,000. Costly but well worth it given that most people are not self-policing warrior-poets living Nietzsche's ideal.
Sociologist Jay Zagorsky found that divorced individuals lose an average of 77 percent of their net worth during a divorce. Additional research depicts divorce as the number one reason for bankruptcy and poverty among single mothers worldwide. Finally, a politically-correct-White-Knight to defend feminism.
Nothing could be more romantic than romance (Western style romantic love) because the essence of romance is uncertainty. The only catch is - as said by my favorite postmodern philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche - is that "One does not want to be deceived, under the supposition that it is injurious, dangerous, or fatal to be deceived." Pragmatist par excellence indeed. Just like Armando Ang's campaign for greater Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethical Business Practices should be adopted by organized Christianity, I too view a divorce insurance like you described as a genuine progress for women's rights in the increasingly uncertain postmodern world of ours where Evangelical Christian preachers think that Jesus Christ and Friedrich Nietzsche were best buds. So much for Pope John Paul II views on "Christian Humanism". Cognitive Dissonance? Sadly our former pope is no TS Eliot.
We prefer the term 'Marriage Insurance' since our real goal is to provide a method of wealth creation for people who stay married. The insurance protection is more a by-product of the statistical facts that create the need. We'll provide a financial safety net for those unfortunate to become a statistic of divorce. And while it's taken a little longer than expected to launch, it is indeed right around the corner.
Much research and statistics show that there is a need for Divorce insurance. The sanctity of marriage is not what it used to be. They are not lasting as long as they used to. Hence we are seeing many second and third marriages. If you have ever been involved with a divorce or known someone who has then you aware of the devastation it can cause. This can be mentally, physically and definitely financially.
http://lifeinsurancebyjeff.com/divorce-insurance-is-it-really-worth-it/
Post a Comment