Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

German politician argues for 7-year marriage


questionmark

Recommended Posts

German politician argues for 7-year marriages

By Harry de Quetteville in Berlin

Last Updated: 3:55am BST 21/09/2007

A latex-wearing, twice-divorced German politician has stunned her staunchly conservative party by suggesting marriages make way for the seven-year itch.

Gabriele Pauli is everything that most politicians in the CSU — the Bavarian sister party to Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU — are not.

For a start, she is a woman. But she is also a flame-haired motorcyclist, who in one photo shoot eschewed the traditional dress that southern Germans love for latex.

Her latest outburst came as she campaigned for the leadership of the CSU, one of Germany's top political jobs.

"The basic approach is wrong… many marriages last just because people believe they are safe," she said. "My suggestion is that marriages expire after seven years."

For many in the CSU, including her chief rivals for the leadership, her words are an affront to the sacrament of marriage and the Catholic values which are deeply engrained in the party.

But Miss Pauli, 50, has said she is desperate to shake up the staid ways of CSU politics.

"This is about bringing ideas into the CSU and starting a discussion," she said yesterday.

Whatever the success of her attempts to stir up controversy, it seems highly unlikely that Miss Pauli will succeed at the CSU polls next week. There, the principal contenders are Erwin Huber, the local economy minister, and Horst Seehofer, the federal food and agriculture minister.

Full story, Source: The Telegraph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 13
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Avinash_Tyagi

    3

  • InHuman

    3

  • questionmark

    2

  • evil inside

    1

Top Posters In This Topic

First off, the article is horribly biased and Harry de Quetteville should be ashamed to call himself a journalist.

Second, I have nothing against 7 year marriages, provided you can renew if you want and you can also have a standard lifetime marriage as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, the article is horribly biased and Harry de Quetteville should be ashamed to call himself a journalist.

Second, I have nothing against 7 year marriages, provided you can renew if you want and you can also have a standard lifetime marriage as well.

From the Fringe | 20.09.2007

Bavarian Politician Proposes Seven-Year Limit on Marriage

In a wild-gamble election bid for the leadership of the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), a two-time divorcee who put the kink back into conservative politics, suggested that marriages should dissolve automatically.

"I propose that marriages lapse after seven years," Gabriele Pauli told reporters in Munich on Wednesday, Sept. 19, announcing her platform for the upcoming party congress. "This would mean that one will only commit for a fixed period and will actively have to renew your vows if you still want to continue."

With statistics showing that almost 38 percent of Germans who marry today are likely to get divorced, Pauli believes that putting a time constraint on the sacrament of holy matrimony would save many people the trouble and drudgery of filing the divorce papers.

But making marriage sound like a business investment with an exit strategy just as the seven-year itch sets in does not win you brownie points with party officials in a center-right, Catholic-dominated party.

"That's an absurd idea and totally contrary to the program of the CSU," said German Agriculture Minister and CSU member Horst Seehofer, who is also wants to become party leader.

"We are not in a circus," he said. "With ideas like that, she should give up her candidacy."

Full story, Source: DW-world

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

biased? looks like everybody else concerning this story....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't sound like a bad idea really, as you can always renew, and it would cut down on divorces, as you'd just choose not to renew the marriage after the seven years were up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get it, how would this HELP marriges? People wouldn't chose to work out their problems, they would just "forget" to renew. Its a very stupid idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get it, how would this HELP marriges? People wouldn't chose to work out their problems, they would just "forget" to renew. Its a very stupid idea.

Then that would be their problem, if they don't care enough then they shouldn't be married

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then that would be their problem, if they don't care enough then they shouldn't be married

You dont get it do you? All marriges have problems, and the people understand that they are going to be together forever, so they should try to work those problems out as best as they can, this tottaly defeats the purpose of marriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dont get it do you? All marriges have problems, and the people understand that they are going to be together forever, so they should try to work those problems out as best as they can, this tottaly defeats the purpose of marriage.

Not at all, since those who are serious can renew and work at it, it weeds out the weak and keeps only the strong, making marriage even stronger, its like natural selection

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its nothing like natural selection, all it does is take away from what a marriage is really about, like they said in the article, it sounds more like a buisness contract then anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dont get it do you? All marriges have problems, and the people understand that they are going to be together forever, so they should try to work those problems out as best as they can, this tottaly defeats the purpose of marriage.

Considering that 55% of marriages end in a divorce, this is actually a good idea. Saves money and time. Renew if its all going well and have another ceremony. Thats fun in and of itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is really a path to marriage that is renewable every year, just like a car registration. And there will be those who would like the idea because of the revenue that it will bring. Just imagine, 100 bucks a year to renew a marriage, and they send you a sticker to attach to your marriage certificated , "Valid until Sept 2008". :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! What do people think that marriages are? They are contracts. Why did people get so cheesed off when a betrothal was broken up to the last hundred years or so in western culture? Because a contract was broken. Especially ones with dowries.

Marrying for love is something that has only come into vogue in the western culture in the last 100 yrs...

Yes there are those that marry for love, there are those that marry for position, for citizenship, for every reason under the sun. To assume that everyone who enters into a marriage is entering into a spiritual union with their ideal partner and are committed to that union for a lifetime isn't being realistic.

Actually my spouse and I talked about this a few years ago. We were talking about the items in the news when all the controversy about "how to marry a millionaire" was on and all the pop culture marriages and divorces two minutes later were in the news. We were cracking up about people arguing about the sanctity of marriage who had been married three and four times themselves.

When we were talking about it came across the notion of renewing or rather requesting a dissolution of the marriage when you file your taxes. You do your taxes every year and both persons need to sign off on the paper so just add another little box that states next year we wish to have our union dissolved and file separately. Of course this would be for persons who have no children or children under the age of eighteen. And these would be no fault divorces, one where everyone agrees that it's over and doesn't want anything other than what they brought into the marriage.

Bing, bang boom done..

I hope that she does shake things up a bit. Because it's about time..

Why would it cost money to renew?

It would cost something dissolve the marriage, but that would be paying for the extra paper work. Do you know how much it costs to hire a lawyer and get a divorce, even when both parties want to split up and there are no children or large sums of cash or holdings? It's a lot more than a hundred bucks. And the only thing the lawyer does is paper work and gets anywhere from $1200.00 on up for doing it.

Mabon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.