This a very weird interpretation of the words. I'm not even sure what the legal basis is for your angle on the phrase. They're not statutory words in the first place, for one thing. So you don't have to have them in your contract and there's no structure in place to apply them. In fact, the whole comment you've made is at best provocative, at worst just silly. But at least you managed to attract a lot of attention to yourself. So well done.
The marriage (the agreement, not the love & the lives & the property etc. that are part of it) is like the artist's signature on the masterpiece. Think; would Picasso's crazy-scribbles be worth anything if he hadn't written his name on them? So at every wedding, the bride & groom ought to stand together and announce to the congregation, "It's now official: None of you matter. Your witness is meaningless, because the verbal contract you are witnessing has NO MEANING WHATSOEVER." And weddings are a waste of time---fun, yes; but a loss of money.
There are some detriments to marriage - to becoming one in the eyes of the state as far as finance goes, let's not forget - depending on many factors. That could be sexual orientation, or anything. Marriage - in the eyes of the state... yep. I don't give a flying shit what the eyes of the state see. Lol. It's all about what I see, and what I want, along with the person that I may or may not be marrying. Marriage is nothing like the artist's signature. I think that's a poor analogy.
life will throw us lemons from time to time and we just have to turn it into lemonade or at least try to. Marriage is a beautiful thing but it is not final as we know of the changing nature of man, though we took the 'death do us part' vow. There is a sense of anger in your comment as if you have been recently divorced and this was not what you would have wanted, if that is the case i hope that you get past the rocky aspects of the situation really soon. Too man persons are getting married for the wrong reasons these days and it seem to be really a contractual arrangement for too may. Marriage is sacred, not something to play with, some denominations even go as far as to not allow divorce this speaks to the level of seriousness of the institution of marriage.
Nope nope nope.. it's nothing like the masterpiece, unless I planned to sell my husband when he disagrees with me and I assume I'm important enough to up his value with my signature. As for the verbal contract at the wedding thing.... why a wedding at all? What does that change? It certainly doesn't make a masterpiece... at least not in most of the marriages I'm witness to, you'd have to be one before to be one after. What does the signature really do? Does it suddenly create respect when it wasn't there before? Does it really promise forever? How many people do you think would take it so lightly.. heck, how many people do you think would marry at all if you were never allowed to divorce or separate? But it sounds like that's what you think marriage is.. that even in great sorrow, one should stay with someone who didn't hold up their end of the bargain.
The way the question is asked can be quit offensive for a lot of people. Even if your vows had the words "til death us parts" you can take them literally. Being in an unhappy relationship where there's no love left, can be considered some kind of death, since you won't feel alive in that scenario.
