I think it's a good idea, because it'll backfire on them.Couples will still find each other, but they will think a lot more about the purpose of their relationship. This will lead to much better relationships and subsequently less breakups and if it happens, the breakups will be a lot less messy.I say: Let them pass the law, it will only turn people conservative.
mfw
>>541749318Maybe; I definitely don't support authoritarian laws like this, but it's better for people to be serious about it, rather than just run around and fornicate.
>>541749318Tip;always find some source of revenue which you can hide in case of divorce. 'Backup money'. So if a 304 ever decides to divorce you, even if she takes half your money (that she knows about), find some way or another to accumulate assets that she can't access easily to keep yourself on track.
>>541749318Assets?
>>541749318Seems to be an extension and codifying of already extant Common Law - Common Law marriage has been a thing for hundreds of years but it is difficult to use when needed (at times of bereavement, for example). I don't see a problem.
>>541749318No it won't. We have that law. No one thinks about it. Cunts pretend they'd never do that because you're such a Chad, dumb fucks fall for it. Get shafted by kike courts. Tale as old as time.>inb4 macacos don't thinkYeah, and your aryan german stock thoughts say this will work out? Ha.
>>541749318>This will lead to much better relationships and subsequently less breakups and if it happens, the breakups will be a lot less messy.Right, because having a sword of damocles type of situation where the bitch can tell the government to rob you at any moment and for no reason is conducive to good relationships. This was already a thing with marriage but now guys won't even want to date.
This thread again?
>>541749731It's got nothing to with dating, anon. It pertains to co-habiting couples.
>>541749318Pls be real so we can laugh at anglo kikes
>>541749318Just another step closer to Pikes plan that he told you all about. Once this passes, Masonic agents will make up a load of stories that never actually happened where the worst possible outcome of this law occurred to further the gap between men and women.
>>541749658>I don't see a problem.Aside from the fact that it's theft?
>>541749318Based. My penultimate ex has fantastic assets - when do I get my gibs? Picrel
>>541749318interdasting
>>541749668I assume that it means any guy with a brain will just refuse to move foods in and treat them like fleshlights. Simps will ofc simp, but they already were
>>541749487Are you stupid? A man can’t take this seriously, since he has no power and is on the losing end 90% of the time.
>>541749318We have that here already
>>541753481Yes. Simps simp, but before the law, cunt is fucked lol, should have waited for the ring to put out.And if you think nor letting her move in protects you, you're dumber than I thought! With so many modern couples with long distant relationships and etc, she brings a "witness" friend of her who claims "yeah, they were totally a couple" and the kike courts doesn't even need that excuse to fuck over the guy and they will, you know it.
