It's very interesting to me that your opinion is based primarily on finances and reward potential vs outcome potential. It's also very interesting that your opinion is based heavily on your married sister and sister-in-laws experiences as attorneys. Would a prenuptial agreement not help avoid financial loss in the event of a divorce as the terms have already been agreed to?

Well, they bust pre-nups all the time its not even a thing, pre-ups are a joke for them.

I'm also curious as to whether you've considered that even if you're not legally married common-law still applies if you've been living with your partner for whatever the time for your legal jurisdiction deems is common law.

Wait but you know about my sister and sister-law? Yes I know, no it is not a concern.

If the breakup is civil enough each partner leaves with what is theirs. But a bad breakup can also mean huge financial loss for one or both parties as well (especially if you weren't careful about who's name is on what, or if land or other assets jointly owned are involved). I lost $2000 because of common-law, which in the grand scheme isn't that much (could have been much worse), but it was still very annoying.

So we both agree this is crazy and has no business in this conversation.

Do you have other objections to marriage other than financial ones? I'm curious. My bother is of the same opinion, that the financial reward potential vs outcome potential doesn't make marriage feasible, but his argument usually stops at finances.

Well financially we all agree now it is a horrible idea, no person in their right mind would ever consider it. Your brother is an intelligent man. Finance is the greatest voice against marriage, unless you are religious then we've found the solution to the discussion.