"It has to be 'reasonable' or its not enforceable. Most people
dont know that and get roped into rip off deals by business
and government all the time... the fact that you signed does
not mean you have to pay if payment puts you into an unviable,
(not survivable or undue damaging position) therefore
unreasonable situation. "

This is one of the dumbest things I ever heard. So, you're saying if I
sign a contract to buy a boat for $200k, agreeing to make payments, and
then say, "It wasn't reasonable, If I have to continue to make payments
on it, then I'll have to sell my house and won't have enought money to
eat" , a court is gonna say, OK, no problem, it just wasn't a
reasonable contract, it's invalid, you're off the hook?

If that were the case, people would be bailing on all kinds of
contracts for all kinds of BS reasons. The court isn't there to go
back and decide how fair or reasonable the contract was. That was up
to the parties that entered into it. As someone else pointed out, as
long as it meets the important tests listed and doesn't violate law,
then it's going to be held valid. Getting a bad deal by signing a bad
contract doesn't mean a court is going to undo it and let you walk.