Resolved: The United States should offer Temporary Marriages

I offer my thanks to my opponent for taking up this debate. I, too, hope that it will be a good one.My opponents response can be divided into two parts: First, undermining and rebutting the points I made and second, offering a counter argument.Con's Rebuttal:Prenuptual Agreements - Yes, I will admit that I did fail to acknolwedge prenuptual agreements as an element in marriage and marriage disolution. An encompassing view of marriage and marriage options should have included this, and I thank my opponent for bringing it to my attention. That said, the effect of its inclusion in the argument is minimal.My opponent cites a minimum of $250 for a prenuptual agreement, which is almost four times as expensive as the most expensive cited price for a divorce kit. Now, I mentioned divorce kits by way of comparison, not to say that a temporary marriage would operate identically in all ways. But it stands to reason that, if you can get a cheap divorce kit to dissolve a marriage where there is nothing to dispute, then a temporary marriage that ends automatically where there is nothing to dispute should operate similarily. In fact, since the disolution of the marriage is factored into the original marriage license, then, all things being equal, we should expect it to operate more smoothly and more cheaply.Prenuptual agreements are an option that already exists. Adding temporary marriages to the equation doesn't alter or affect this. However, temporary marriages are offered as a general option from the beginning, whereas prenuptual agreements are generally for specific cases, where there are already substantual assets to be concerned about. Only 3% of spouses have prenuptual agreements (1), so whatever benefit they may offer is mitigated by the fact that they are hardly used as an option.As the source notes, resistance to a prenuptual agreement is primarily emotional. How can you start a relationship by formalizing conditions on what happens if it ends? Temporary marriages would not have this stigma as their end is not meant to signify a definite end to the relationship, as with prenuptual agreements, but rather to give the couple the opportunity to end or prolonge the marriage.Divorce as punishment - My opponent correctly notes that temporary marriages will not eliminate all troubles that are associated with the end of a marriage. In fact, I noted this in my own argument. I specifically acknowledged this to demonstrate that at worse a temporary marriage could not be worse than a typical divorce. The benefit, them, comes from introducing the option to end the marriage before things get too out of hand.No one wants to get a divorce in the sense that no one wants to go through the difficult divorce process. A desire to avoid a divorce could very understandably cause people to stay in a broken marriage. A prenuptual agreement would exacerbate this issue. This only makes things worse. While some people may be able to fix the marriage from within, a great deal would end in divorce anyway and the longer a broken marriage lasts, the more likely there will be things to dispute.A temporary marriage fixes this by offerring an easy (or easier) out. There is no incentive to stay quiet about a broken marriage and the short time period reduces the odds of there being a dispute or, if there is a dispute, reduces its magnitude. My opponent may criticize me for lack of evidence, but this is simple reasoning. Take, for example, children. You cannot have 5 children in 2 years (excepting particularly extraordinary circumstances). Yet you can easily have 5 children in 20 years. So the odds of having to deal with a custody battle over 5 children is significantly less in a temporary marriage than a longer marriage that ends in divorce. More heartbreak, longer court battles, etc.Lack of Evidence - I'm not aware of any place that actually enacts temporary marriages. I heard about it as a proposal in Mexcio, and that is it. However, I think there are merits to the idea and the fact that we don't have statistical evidence to demonstrate its efficiacy is not a problem. If it were, we would never commit to innovative ideas. Lacking tangible or statistical evidence should not hinder us; we still have our capacity to reason. I believe the reasons I first cited stand and where they have been rebutted, I have responded above.Con's Counter ArgumentMy opponent suggests that, rather than save marriages, it will result in more failed marriages as people simply give up, rather than work out their differences. The motivating factor here, cited by my opponent, is the problem of divorce.I counter in stating that the motivating factor in fixing a marriage should be love. Whether or not two people love each other is not affected by being in a temporary marriage or permanent marriage, or by being married at all. There are a great deal of long-term couples who are not married, yet love each other enough to work out their problems. My opponent's logic would suggest that such couples, with no fear of divorce (as they aren't married) would walk away at the first sign of trouble. The fact that they exist, and exist for long periods of time, renders this complaint invalid.I will concede that there is a probable chance that the number of frivolous marriages may increase, but this is moot. How many people get drunk, go to Vegas, get married, and then have their marriage annulled? The goal here is not to preserve some perceived sanctity of marriage, but rather to offer an option other than a financially and emotionally draining divorce.My opponent claims that temporary marriages won't eliminate divorce. I know they won't; I did not assert that they would. However, simple math can show that at least some divorces will necessarily be eliminated if a couple chooses a temporary marriage: divorces for all marriages of two years. So, if all other things are equal, all couples that engaged in a temporary marriage that would have otherwise gotten divorced after two years of a permanent marriage would not need to do so. They would simply let the marriage expire.SummaryI will again restate my caveats that temporary marriages will not eliminate divorce or the problems associated with divorce. They will not eliminate the tolls of ending a relationship. They will not prevent people getting in bad relationships. They will, however, provide couples with an easier out then getting a divorce. An out that would save people time, peace of mind, and money.[1] http://www.usatoday.com...