Is Cohabitation Immoral?

[TNF]

Not at all, but I can't understand couples that cohabitate for several decades and never marry. I don't disapprove, but the lack of desire to go the full distance kinda perplexes me.

Perhaps some people don't believe they need the state to legitimate their relationship with a shiny certificate?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Not at all, but I can't understand couples that cohabitate for several decades and never marry. I don't disapprove, but the lack of desire to go the full distance kinda perplexes me.

Perhaps some people don't believe they need the state to legitimate their relationship with a shiny certificate?

I'm not talking about the state (I support the abolition of the marriage license) but what I don't understand is how some religious couples I know do not want to get married in the church? It's not like they will go to hell if they don't, and I don't think even the most socially conservative Christians would care, but it just perplexes me.

[afleitch]

I agree with General Mung Beans and realisticidealist in principle but I recognize that many people's lives don't actually work that way and it's often not really their fault.

I think most people's lives work that way and never would have but for the veneer of a marriage as being the only way in which sexual relationships could be established. I think marrying prior to establishing sexual compatibility or even establishing a personal space can be quite dangerous.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I agree with General Mung Beans and realisticidealist in principle but I recognize that many people's lives don't actually work that way and it's often not really their fault.

I think most people's lives work that way and never would have but for the veneer of a marriage as being the only way in which sexual relationships could be established. I think marrying prior to establishing sexual compatibility or even establishing a personal space can be quite dangerous.

I definitely agree as far as the personal space side of things goes. I'd say it's a downright good idea to at least spend some time feeling out the basic elements of space-sharing and going about daily life together before getting married and perhaps before deciding to, and a bad idea not to. I don't feel that way about sex but, well, I wouldn't know, really.

[RI]

establishing sexual compatibility

"Sexual compatibility" as a static construct that people either have or don't have is a myth. Any couple in a healthy relationship where both parties communicate and compromise as needed are able to create sexual compatibility.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Can those arguing 'yes' please give a good argument other than "it hurts my feelings"?

[Lurker]

Of all the poll results I have seen here, this is one of the most ridiculous. 30% voting yes - are you guys serious?

[H. Ross Peron]

The idea that, five years into the 21st century, there was still one third of the voters who answered yes, scares the sh*t out of me.

The vote appears to be holding up well, 13 years in...

[opebo]

establishing sexual compatibility

"Sexual compatibility" as a static construct that people either have or don't have is a myth. Any couple in a healthy relationship where both parties communicate and compromise as needed are able to create sexual compatibility.

'Compromise as needed' = ridiculously low standards.  One should try to find what actually satisfies, not settle for third rate.

[Franzl]

If they're having sex, then yes. If not, then it depends.

Sex can be immoral, but whether that's the case has little to do with whether or not the people having sex have a marriage license.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

If they're having sex, then yes. If not, then it depends.

Sex can be immoral, but whether that's the case has little to do with whether or not the people having sex have a marriage license.

I don't think it's the civil aspect of marriage that people who believe this generally find important.

[Franzl]

If they're having sex, then yes. If not, then it depends.

Sex can be immoral, but whether that's the case has little to do with whether or not the people having sex have a marriage license.

I don't think it's the civil aspect of marriage that people who believe this generally find important.

I certainly hope not. But it appears to me that they value the status of marriage more highly than mutual feelings.

[afleitch]

If they're having sex, then yes. If not, then it depends.

Sex can be immoral, but whether that's the case has little to do with whether or not the people having sex have a marriage license.

I don't think it's the civil aspect of marriage that people who believe this generally find important.

I certainly hope not. But it appears to me that they value the status of marriage more highly than mutual feelings.

And such thinking undoutedly leads to the preservation of the marriage even if the feelings within the institution are no longer mutual.

[Link]

Is it even a question?  I don't know of any Judeo Christian belief system that condones it.  So yes it is immoral unless you don't believe in Judeo Christian beliefs.  Which is totally okay.

[DemPGH]

Not only is it not immoral, I think it's a fantastic idea. It's a much better idea in many instances than simply getting married so that people can live [sleep] together.

[Sol]

I think getting married without living together first is far more immoral.

[Goldwater]

No (normal).

[DC Al Fine]

I honestly can't think of a single poster here who I'd expect to vote "yes" and yet there will inevitably be some "yes" votes. Perplexing.

You need to start hanging out with the socons more

Yes - (GOP)

So it's immoral for a boyfriend/girlfriend pair to live together because they don't make enough money to maintain separate residences for themselves?

I don't view this as a sort of "minimum to get an excuse" issue. I can see some circumstances where it would be the best answer to a very bad situation, but I think such cases are relatively rare. In most cases, moving back in with Mom and Dad or finding a roommate on Craigslist are the better options.

[Indy Texas]

I honestly can't think of a single poster here who I'd expect to vote "yes" and yet there will inevitably be some "yes" votes. Perplexing.

You need to start hanging out with the socons more

Yes - (GOP)

So it's immoral for a boyfriend/girlfriend pair to live together because they don't make enough money to maintain separate residences for themselves?

I don't view this as a sort of "minimum to get an excuse" issue. I can see some circumstances where it would be the best answer to a very bad situation, but I think such cases are relatively rare. In most cases, moving back in with Mom and Dad or finding a roommate on Craigslist are the better options.

A lot of people don't live in the same city or region as their immediate or extended family.

And having roommates really isn't something one does past age 25 or so unless perhaps they live in New York City and aren't a One Percenter.

[PJ]

No

[Hifly]

No, with or without sex.

This.

[Person Man]

From what I understand, "cohabitation" has been part of American life for generations. A question like this is very similar to whether or not slavery should be legal.  Republicans keep saying that there is this silent epidemic of Sociopathy and Nymphomania and it just isn't there save for the Sociopathy created in the witch hunt itself.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Unless your Bushie, why is there more than one "yes" vote?   

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

...no? I don't see anything objectionable about it.

[opebo]

Republicans keep saying that there is this silent epidemic of Nymphomania...

Man, I wish!