Is Cohabitation Immoral?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:42:17 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Is Cohabitation Immoral?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Poll
Question: Is cohabitation immoral?
#1
Democrat -Yes
 
#2
Democrat -No
 
#3
Republican -Yes
 
#4
Republican -No
 
#5
independent/third party -Yes
 
#6
independent/third party -No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 109

Author Topic: Is Cohabitation Immoral?  (Read 16134 times)
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: November 09, 2013, 11:49:26 AM »

Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: November 09, 2013, 04:37:48 PM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.
Logged
Flake
JacobTiver
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,688
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: November 10, 2013, 10:15:49 AM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. 1. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. 2. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. 3. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.

1. When the couple decides to get married, they'll know that they have much more chemistry and they stay together for a longer period than most married couples, many times until death.
2. As stated in point 1, that is not the case.
3. So integrity for marriage is determined not by how long the couple stays together and their relationship, but how early they get married?
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: November 10, 2013, 10:52:52 AM »

Still waiting for one of the immoral folks to explain why it is...
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: November 10, 2013, 01:18:42 PM »

Still waiting for one of the immoral folks to explain why it is...

I was explained here.

No major Judeo Christian belief system condones it.  If you don't have Judeo Christian beliefs then you are in the clear.  Why worry about it?
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,175
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: November 10, 2013, 01:54:06 PM »

No (Christian)
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: November 10, 2013, 02:09:00 PM »

serious question for those answering "yes, immoral" from a Judeo-Christian standpoint.  how should we take into account the fact that in Biblical times lifespans were much shorter and people married in their early to mid teens, vs the reality now?  certainly it is much more reasonable to ask celibacy before marriage if that marriage happens as the sex drive materializes vs 10-15 years thereafter.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: November 10, 2013, 04:15:37 PM »

serious question for those answering "yes, immoral" from a Judeo-Christian standpoint.  how should we take into account the fact that in Biblical times lifespans were much shorter and people married in their early to mid teens, vs the reality now?  certainly it is much more reasonable to ask celibacy before marriage if that marriage happens as the sex drive materializes vs 10-15 years thereafter.

The rules are the rules.  If you are going to rationalize everything then why even bother?  I'm pretty sure the life spans in the Bible were not uniformly shorter.  I mean Methuselah anyone?

Cohabitation is not really something that is controversial.  You go from culture to culture all over the world on all the inhabited continents and no one is going to look at you funny because you didn't shack up with every girl you dated.

I guess the real question is what is morality.  To me if you are just going to massage a religion to condone whatever desire your other head wants then there really isn't a point to having the religion.  It's no longer a religion.  It's more of a fashion statement.  Which is fine.  I'm friends with atheists.  They are some pretty honest people.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,175
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: November 10, 2013, 07:29:45 PM »

serious question for those answering "yes, immoral" from a Judeo-Christian standpoint.  how should we take into account the fact that in Biblical times lifespans were much shorter and people married in their early to mid teens, vs the reality now?  certainly it is much more reasonable to ask celibacy before marriage if that marriage happens as the sex drive materializes vs 10-15 years thereafter.

The rules are the rules.  If you are going to rationalize everything then why even bother?  I'm pretty sure the life spans in the Bible were not uniformly shorter.  I mean Methuselah anyone?

Cohabitation is not really something that is controversial.  You go from culture to culture all over the world on all the inhabited continents and no one is going to look at you funny because you didn't shack up with every girl you dated.

I guess the real question is what is morality.  To me if you are just going to massage a religion to condone whatever desire your other head wants then there really isn't a point to having the religion.  It's no longer a religion.  It's more of a fashion statement.  Which is fine.  I'm friends with atheists.  They are some pretty honest people.

As someone who is not only religious, but plans on wearing the collar after I leave seminary, I have to disagree.  Not everyone believes morals are to be followed simply because they are morals, or that tradition should be followed simply because it's tradition.  Speaking for myself, I believe that morals are ground in natural law and pragmatism and that's what makes those morals worth following.

As Ernest eloquently explained, the primary reason for faithful monogamy was economic, and that is assuming a child is involved.  If people were promiscuous, then many children as well as their mothers could have easily ended up without support because no one would be sure of who the fathers are.

I think this was a problem back then mostly because there was limited birth control and no scientific way of identifying who the fathers are.  To be fair, there are obviously many Christians who oppose birth control, but I don't see what is wrong with cohabitation unless pure lust is involved or the life of a child is somehow jeopardized because of it.  Again, that is my view.  But the bottom line is morals can and should be rationalized.  It makes very little sense to follow them if there's no reason to.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: November 10, 2013, 09:07:21 PM »

As Ernest eloquently explained, the primary reason for faithful monogamy was economic, and that is assuming a child is involved.  If people were promiscuous, then many children as well as their mothers could have easily ended up without support because no one would be sure of who the fathers are.
Actually, I said economics was the primary non-religious reason for the immorality of cohabitation, not that it was the primary reason. I said it that way because different people place different weight on religious reasons and I was trying to make my argument as broadly applicable as possible. Also it wasn't just the economic security of the children, but the woman that was protected by an insistence upon marriage instead of mere cohabitation, even if no children at all were involved.

Again, that is my view.  But the bottom line is morals can and should be rationalized.  It makes very little sense to follow them if there's no reason to.

On the other hand, we humans sometimes have insufficient data to understand the rationale of God, so just because we can't comprehend the reasoning is by itself an insufficient reason to reject the moral teachings of one's religion.  I'm also going to have to disagree with you Scott in your belief that cohabitation is not immoral according to the scriptures.  However, like all sins, cohabitation can be corrected, in this case either by marrying or by ceasing the sin.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,175
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: November 10, 2013, 09:18:33 PM »

As Ernest eloquently explained, the primary reason for faithful monogamy was economic, and that is assuming a child is involved.  If people were promiscuous, then many children as well as their mothers could have easily ended up without support because no one would be sure of who the fathers are.
Actually, I said economics was the primary non-religious reason for the immorality of cohabitation, not that it was the primary reason. I said it that way because different people place different weight on religious reasons and I was trying to make my argument as broadly applicable as possible. Also it wasn't just the economic security of the children, but the woman that was protected by an insistence upon marriage instead of mere cohabitation, even if no children at all were involved.

But do all women who cohabitate need to be married and economically dependent on the man in order to live a good life?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

On the other hand, we humans sometimes have insufficient data to understand the rationale of God, so just because we can't comprehend the reasoning is by itself an insufficient reason to reject the moral teachings of one's religion.  I'm also going to have to disagree with you Scott in your belief that cohabitation is not immoral according to the scriptures.  However, like all sins, cohabitation can be corrected, in this case either by marrying or by ceasing the sin.
[/quote]

I suppose we have different philosophies in regard to what makes sin sin, though I should ask you: how can we be sure that cohabitation violates the Judeo-Christian God's law?  Even Jesus said nothing about cohabitation, IIRC.  His main issue was with lust, which doesn't necessarily result from cohabitation (though it certainly can if taken the wrong way).
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: November 10, 2013, 10:18:25 PM »

serious question for those answering "yes, immoral" from a Judeo-Christian standpoint.  how should we take into account the fact that in Biblical times lifespans were much shorter and people married in their early to mid teens, vs the reality now?  certainly it is much more reasonable to ask celibacy before marriage if that marriage happens as the sex drive materializes vs 10-15 years thereafter.

The lifespan thing doesn't seem to be much of an issue. How many people get divorced in their 70's?

As for the difference in marital ages, the conservative reformed types in my community take a number of steps to reduce pre-marital sex.

First, we encourage younger marriages. Girls are usually married off in their late teens and early twenties to guys who have stable jobs. Boys are steered into training that leads to careers. Two year programs are very popular. Second, children don't go away for post-secondary training, and are given a much shorter leash than their secular teenage counterparts with the opposite sex so there's less opportunity for pre-marital relations.

This drastically cuts down on the average age of marriage, reducing the number of decade long waits. I'm getting married next summer; I'll be 21 and my wife will be 19. This is pretty common for my community.

I agree with your general concern. The lifestyles of most people are adapted for a world where pre-marital sex is ok. That some Evangelicals and Catholics encourage abstinence without changing other aspects of their lives to accommodate is is asinine.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: November 10, 2013, 10:21:50 PM »

But do all women who cohabitate need to be married and economically dependent on the man in order to live a good life?

While there is no need for one way economic dependence in either direction, marriage is to a large extent about interdependence, regardless of whether or not we have rigidly defined roles for what men and women do.  The mutual support and the ability to count upon it are important.  As God says in Genesis 2:18 "It is not good for the man to be alone."  While marriage is not the only cure for aloneness, I would say that cohabitation is insufficient to address that problem.

I suppose we have different philosophies in regard to what makes sin sin, though I should ask you: how can we be sure that cohabitation violates the Judeo-Christian God's law?  Even Jesus said nothing about cohabitation, IIRC.  His main issue was with lust, which doesn't necessarily result from cohabitation (though it certainly can if taken the wrong way).

Well, most people don't interpret cohabitation as being platonic.  Certainly if it were only a living arrangement and nothing more there would be no sin, but that isn't what most people mean when they think of cohabitation.  If it weren't, would people be wondering when Bert and Ernie are going to come out of the closet on Sesame Street?
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: November 11, 2013, 12:04:06 AM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. 1. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. 2. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. 3. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.

1. When the couple decides to get married, they'll know that they have much more chemistry and they stay together for a longer period than most married couples, many times until death.
2. As stated in point 1, that is not the case.
3. So integrity for marriage is determined not by how long the couple stays together and their relationship, but how early they get married?

No it's just the opposite of number 3 and I thought I was extremely clear on it. The best thing to do is to take things slow and wait to live together and get married if you can help it. In our situation it's a little different because my girlfriend still doesn't feel ready to move out and I left my life in a different state to be here with her. There are circumstances where it's ok and works out, but generally it's best to wait. The relationship can end prematurely. Is the integrity of a relationship based on how early two people can move in together? Come on man, take it slow!
Logged
pugbug
Rookie
**
Posts: 29
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: November 11, 2013, 10:27:20 AM »
« Edited: November 11, 2013, 10:33:26 AM by pugbug »

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.

Well, for some it's not the full distance, possibly just a point within a long line of events. For some couples, the full distance is having x number of kids, or it's living together for x amount of years. If they already have all that, an official marriage (as opposed to becoming common-law) may seem pointless. What works for you may not work for others.

What is it exactly that perplexes you? I'm curious.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: November 11, 2013, 11:40:51 AM »


What is it?  Hasidic?  Opus Dei?
Logged
pugbug
Rookie
**
Posts: 29
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: November 11, 2013, 11:46:25 AM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.

Please elaborate on your points, because right now, it doesn't make that much sense.

How can cohabiting devalue your marriage? If you realize too late that your marriage doesn't work and it ends in divorce, wouldn't that devalue it far more than cohabitation beforehand?

Yes, many relationships that involve cohabitation before marriage end prematurely, but many also last a long time and result in marriage. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater! Also, if you have any statistics that support your claim, please show them.

I'm glad you acknowledge that marriages can end prematurely (ie. in divorce), but I still don't understand why that's better than cohabiting beforehand. Why would divorce be better than cohabiting?
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: November 11, 2013, 12:02:24 PM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.

Please elaborate on your points, because right now, it doesn't make that much sense.


You'll find that a common theme in bbag's postings.  He's like 20 something (or less) and knows it all, you see.  Roll Eyes

Oh, and welcome.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: November 11, 2013, 12:39:33 PM »

didn't barfbag say he is 28?
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: November 11, 2013, 01:32:10 PM »

But the bottom line is morals can and should be rationalized.  It makes very little sense to follow them if there's no reason to.

Well you overlooked the flip side which is there is no reason not to follow them.

Besides I've spent a considerable number of years on the dating scene and with the exception of a few characters in Europe most ladies find it a positive that I have never cohabitated with anyone.  Underneath their cavalier exterior deep down they value it.  Particularly as they get older.  Once they aren't 18 or 22 anymore and real life hits they really start to value a stable guy with a code of conduct.  By your late twenties so many people have blown up their academics, career and personal life it's pretty easy to get a date just being even keeled and conservative.  Life is just simpler if you do the basics.  No one's life got screwed up because they didn't cohabitate with a woman.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: November 11, 2013, 02:23:56 PM »

But the bottom line is morals can and should be rationalized.  It makes very little sense to follow them if there's no reason to.

Well you overlooked the flip side which is there is no reason not to follow them.

Besides I've spent a considerable number of years on the dating scene and with the exception of a few characters in Europe most ladies find it a positive that I have never cohabitated with anyone.  Underneath their cavalier exterior deep down they value it.  Particularly as they get older.  Once they aren't 18 or 22 anymore and real life hits they really start to value a stable guy with a code of conduct.  By your late twenties so many people have blown up their academics, career and personal life it's pretty easy to get a date just being even keeled and conservative.  Life is just simpler if you do the basics.  No one's life got screwed up because they didn't cohabitate with a woman.

Are you an extreme Catholic or what?
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: November 11, 2013, 03:35:40 PM »

Are you an extreme Catholic or what?

Lol.  I didn't say I never got laid.  I'm just not about making babies or getting stuck in any quagmires.  I go to school and work during the week.  Some weekends I go out and drink and get laid.  But I don't get caught up in all that stuff and have a girl start living with me 24/7.  Is that the makings of an extremist?  I know most people don't live their life the way I do so I guess in a sense I am an extremist.  I'm keeping it extremely simple.  I couldn't do all the interesting things I've done in my life if there was a woman in tow.  When the time comes to settle down I will do it right.  She won't be the first person I slept with but there will be other firsts.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: November 11, 2013, 03:38:39 PM »

Are you an extreme Catholic or what?

Lol.  I didn't say I never got laid.  I'm just not about making babies or getting stuck in any quagmires.  I go to school and work during the week.  Some weekends I go out and drink and get laid.  But I don't get caught up in all that stuff and have a girl start living with me 24/7.  Is that the makings of an extremist?  I know most people don't live their life the way I do so I guess in a sense I am an extremist.  I'm keeping it extremely simple.  I couldn't do all the interesting things I've done in my life if there was a woman in tow.  When the time comes to settle down I will do it right.  She won't be the first person I slept with but there will be other firsts.

Why did I think you were (or perhaps had been) engaged?
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: November 11, 2013, 03:48:40 PM »

Are you an extreme Catholic or what?

Lol.  I didn't say I never got laid.  I'm just not about making babies or getting stuck in any quagmires.  I go to school and work during the week.  Some weekends I go out and drink and get laid.  But I don't get caught up in all that stuff and have a girl start living with me 24/7.  Is that the makings of an extremist?  I know most people don't live their life the way I do so I guess in a sense I am an extremist.  I'm keeping it extremely simple.  I couldn't do all the interesting things I've done in my life if there was a woman in tow.  When the time comes to settle down I will do it right.  She won't be the first person I slept with but there will be other firsts.

Haha, fair enough.  You sound sort of normal.  I've never really lived with anyone voluntarily.  I mean, I have briefly lived with girlfriends due to one, or the other, or both of us being really really impecunious.   Rather than get jobs we'd live together for a very short time.. but never more than a few months at most.  Can't bear living with people and hate to sleep in the same bad with another person.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: November 11, 2013, 05:24:47 PM »

No, but I can tell you from personal experience that it leads to many dramatic problems couples can avoid if they wait until they're married to live together. It also devalues the marriage which becomes simply something that happens throughout your history of living together rather than the start of your life together. Many relationships where couples live together before marriage end prematurely. This happens in marriage too, but at least married couples get that far.

Please elaborate on your points, because right now, it doesn't make that much sense.

How can cohabiting devalue your marriage? If you realize too late that your marriage doesn't work and it ends in divorce, wouldn't that devalue it far more than cohabitation beforehand?

Yes, many relationships that involve cohabitation before marriage end prematurely, but many also last a long time and result in marriage. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater! Also, if you have any statistics that support your claim, please show them.

I'm glad you acknowledge that marriages can end prematurely (ie. in divorce), but I still don't understand why that's better than cohabiting beforehand. Why would divorce be better than cohabiting?

Yes a divorce would devalue it much more. I'd love to see statistics if someone can find them. Remember a lot of people who break up want to deny they've ever lived with a boyfriend or girlfriend so I'm not sure how we can parse the statistics in order to get through lies. As for divorces, there's plenty of couples who live together, get married, and don't divorce until down the road as well. I would've preferred my marriage to have been the beginning of living together. It likely won't be now that I live with my girlfriend, but it happens and I love her all the same.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.073 seconds with 14 queries.