married couples vs common law and congical processing

[jamaicanincanada]

I have been with my fiance for almost 7 years now. We got engaged this past April after being together for 6 years and we have been living together for 2 years. I personally am in no rush to get married as I feel that the only thing that will change is my last name and we will have a piece of paper called a marriage certificate. Before we even got engaged family and friends were always asking us "when are you going to get married?", and my reply was always "if we get married are we going to love each other more, or care more about each other just because we are married?"
Does living together and not married make us any less committed than a couple that is married? I don't think so.
Some people just do not believe that they need a marriage certificate to validate their relationship.
Also my fiance sponsored me under Common-Law category.

 

[swervetech69]

I knew i wouldnt make too many friends with my comments but dont take them to harshly. I dont think that only marriages are legit, but they are legally harder to get out of, which in one sence makes them the most serious relationship "legally". Not so easy to dump your partner the day you get to Canada if you are married.

 

[sidkrose]

I knew i wouldnt make too many friends with my comments but dont take them to harshly. I dont think that only marriages are legit, but they are legally harder to get out of, which in one sence makes them the most serious relationship "legally". Not so easy to dump your partner the day you get to Canada if you are married.

But it's easy to live with them and combine your affairs with them for a year before hand? Think before you speak. I have never heard of a case of fraud where the couple applied common-law. (they might be out there, but I've certainly never heard of them).

 

[swervetech69]

I do think before i speak thanks. So how is a common law relationship more binding legally than marriage please tell me? Im not talking about fraud because im not an expert and dont work for Canadian immigration do you? If you do then ill admit you must be correct. Im talking about which path shows the most comittment LEGALlY.

 

[sidkrose]

I was mostly commenting on the "not so easy to dump your partner when you get to Canada" bit. I think it's pretty hard to "dump" your partner if you have lived with them, combined your financial and other affairs. Plus, technically, under the law, common-law and marriage are for all intents and purposes, the same. You could go through the same problems of separating all your property, assets, custody issues that you would in a divorce. If me and my partner separated (god forbid), I would have to remove him as my beneficiary, I'd have to change my status in a bunch of official paper work, and we'd have to figure out various other financial things that we have entangled. The only thing different there, from a divorce, is that you don't have to sign and submit certain papers saying a previous contract is void.

I just don't think you know much about common-law relationships. That's fine, but just stop making generalizations that marginalize our relationships. Thanks.

 

[swervetech69]

Well in the few hours since I posted I had a good oppertunity to ask an immigration worker here in Taipei many questions in person. I went to the consulate to get my marriage certificate notarized and the person who I talked to actually issued visas up untill 3 months ago when immigration from taiwan was moved to Hong Kong. She said yes all applications are filed according to whatever section they fall into, ex common law filed differently from marriage ect, and that there isnt a big difference between any of them with regards to processing times.

She said marriage is still the strongest way to show a level of comittment legally, and that because of this some are faked. She said the hardest type to prove in conjugal, followed by common law and marriage. She also said the percentage of refusals is highest among conjugal, and lower in theother catagories. Taiwan isnt a very traditional or religous place so she said conjical couples are scrutinized very careflly because its harder to justify why they didnt at least make the effort to be common law. This is just in Taiwan and according to her experience there. I dont maen to piss on anyones relationship, sorry if it sounded harsh. Im by no means religous or old faishoned. I just think marriage, a pice of paper if thats all you think it is does show some legal ties that helpback up legitimacy.

 

[sidkrose]

Well in the few hours since I posted I had a good oppertunity to ask an immigration worker here in Taipei many questions in person. I went to the consulate to get my marriage certificate notarized and the person who I talked to actually issued visas up untill 3 months ago when immigration from taiwan was moved to Hong Kong. She said yes all applications are filed according to whatever section they fall into, ex common law filed differently from marriage ect, and that there isnt a big difference between any of them with regards to processing times.

She said marriage is still the strongest way to show a level of comittment legally, and that because of this some are faked. She said the hardest type to prove in conjugal, followed by common law and marriage. She also said the percentage of refusals is highest among conjugal, and lower in theother catagories. Taiwan isnt a very traditional or religous place so she said conjical couples are scrutinized very careflly because its harder to justify why they didnt at least make the effort to be common law. This is just in Taiwan and according to her experience there. I dont maen to piss on anyones relationship, sorry if it sounded harsh. Im by no means religous or old faishoned. I just think marriage, a pice of paper if thats all you think it is does show some legal ties that helpback up legitimacy.

All of this sounds about right. The only only other thing I'll say is that, obviously, in the case of my application I didn't need to be married to provide a "piece of paper" that showed some "legal ties that help back up legitimacy". We signed the Declaration of Common-Law Union in front of the equivalent of a German city hall notary (who could also perform marriages). His comment was that it was like getting married And again, I really don't feel the need to justify why we chose not to "just marry". It's personal. Some things are. Though they are precious few when you've submitted a spousal sponsorship application.

 

[Zouk Princesse]

How about "marriage is an antiquated institution and I don't see the need for it?" How about "if I do get married, the only difference in our relationship will be that we threw a bit party for all our friends and family, and maybe went on a trip together afterwards, and since we're poor students, who are broke as f***, that isn't likely to happen any time soon".

Says who? Your marriage is what you make it and no one else defines it but you. It's only an antiquated institution if you choose to make it so. As for spending bajillions of dollars for a piece of paper, that's a wedding, which in my opinion has very little (if anything) to do with marriage. When we got married, all that mattered to us was taking the time to say to each other in our own words why we wanted to spend the rest of our lives together and making special promises that held personal meaning for us, with the people who mattered most in our lives there to share that day with us - and you can do that for less than it costs to fill your tank with gas.

I think people are getting caught up in the terminology here, rather than the strength of the relationship and the commitment between two people. If you pledge your life to someone, are bonded in every way, and know to yourself the strength of your relationship, then in my books you're "married" paper wedding or not, and would deserve the accorded respect. By the same token, lots of people who are legally "married" don't have a relationship worth a crap and I wouldn't take them any more seriously than a sandbox relationship at playschool.

There are slackers in both categories...some people who are legally married aren't worth any more than the paper they signed, and some people who are commonlaw really just want free milk without buying the cow. If you know you don't fall into either category, then why get upset? Just say "they're not talking about me" n move on.

 

[sidkrose]

I was answering your comment about no common-law couples you knew not having a "good excuse" for getting married, other than that they aren't ready. Those are just two of the answers I have. For me, one of the only reasons to actually get married, rather than remaining common-law, would be to have a wedding. And right now, I'm too poor to throw the kind of wedding I would actually want. So there's no point. For me.

Anyway, didn't mean to confront people so much. Possibly just taking out some finals week frustration and defending the honour and good intentions of common-law couples everywhere