Too many relationships start of with "what's in it for me".
With that attitude you'd be better off living in seperate rooms, in seperate houses and only coming together at mealtimes and birthdays.
If you take the emotional thingy out of the equation that is what you have left, a contract of obligations that are fixed and binding by law.
So why don't you approach "marriage" as a contractual obligation.
Option 1
Two people who agree to live under the same roof but with limited freedom of movement and choices, to share expenses and obligations and having certain jurisdictions over one another.
Having verbally agreed to abide by certain obligations, before a group of friends and relatives, you are then bound by society to honour them, whatever the rules are.
So, "I will love honour and cherish, and I agree to provide a home for you and our children and to provide food and clothing" etc etc etc is a ball and chain situation of your OWN making, loosely enterd into by all those "daft in love" people that twelve months down the track are wondering why they entered into a state of servitude that binds them in chains that cannot be broken.
Option 2.
I don't offer you anything that you don't already have, but I will go halves with you on a house that we can afford to buy and both like, and if you want a boy friend to give you children and anything else that you you really want, good for you, whereas I will have my sex needs provided by anyone that I can buy with the money that I get on the dole or when my inheritenc comes in, and I will not expect you to provide me with cigarettes or beer money when I am broke.
Further more I will live in my own room in our house and you can have your own room too, while at the same time we will occupy the rest of the house as and when we need to, provided that it is agreed before hand by mutal agreement.
In addition I will come and go if and when I please without hinderence or criticism, at any hour of the day or night, without having to explain where I have been or with whom I have been with, and will agree to the same for you.
You could go on and on with all the you's and we's to clarify the situation , but at the end of the day, it is a contract of obligation, signed and binding in a court of law, without the let down of freedom erosion that people who are emotionally affected gloss over for a lifetime of worry.
You don't even have to like your partner, or even speak the same language or be required to sleep with them, (male or female), as long as you honour your contract.
Age would be no barrier, a male or female twenty year old college student with a 60 year old widow or bachelor could supply the security of tenure and the fundamentals of a relationship without the chains of attachment or stigmas of social scorn.
I don't think anybody brought up in a good Christian society would consider this as a real solution, but when things go pear shaped, it is the best situation to be in to resolve your differences amicably.
Contracts can be terminated provided both parties agree to the parting terms.
Marriages are made in Heaven but relationships are formed by consideration for emotional differences.
I expect the Pope will excommunicate me at the next meeting of the Vatican, big deal, he's never been married so what does he know?
Ian.