Should people "shack-up" before marriage?

[Nickman]

I personally think that when two adults shack-up prior to marriage, they have a better chance of staying married and avoid divorce. This I have concluded from my own logic and experience. If we get to know a person prior to marriage on that level we are able to make a better decision about whether or not we can be married to that person. If we don't shack-up we won't be able to see how that person truly is in that setting. Christians tend to be against shacking-up which I feel has led to the statistics showing that they are more susceptible to divorce than atheists who do tend to shack-up.

What do you say? Should we shack up? Is it beneficial? If not why not?

P.S. Just because "god said so" is not a good answer. Please provide why it is harmful or wrong and the potential problem it could cause.

[Nickman]

In the Jewish religion, it is tradition that those people who are born of specifically restricted sexual practices are 'unclean', and can not 'marry' religiously, but it no shame to 'shack up' so to speak.

I used religious rather loosely, I didn't want to have list all the specific ones. Thanks for the correction.

[Clownboat]

We now live in a more sophisticated and ideal society

Please provide evidence for this claim that we live in a more sophisticated and ideal society or retract the claim. I will accept scientific studies that are published on the web. I will not accept someone's opinion.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... -ever.html

I will grant you some points on that one. It does occur to me though that instead of killing each other we now get even with litigation. According to the Bible it is just as bad to hate your brother as it is to kill him. Is it more sophisticated to sue people than it is to kill them? Some people might think it is; I say it is exactly the same thing.

Would you rather be hated or killed by someone? I assume you have no preference since you claim they are exactly the same thing.

Hate me or kill me. You choose, I don't care.

[Moses Yoder]

It kind of irritates me when theists are taken to task for making a claim with no evidence to back it up and atheists are allowed free reign. "Sophisticated" and "Ideal" are subjective terms with no scientific basis. In your opinion the world is now more sophisticated. In mine, it is not. Feel free to attempt to convince me. My cousin has what I call an ideal sophisticated life. He is Amish. All their farming is done with horses, they own and operate a bakery with wood fired stoves, etc. How is it sophisticated to complicate your life? Just answer one thing; is a cell phone sophisticated and ideal? In my opinion it is not. For one thing, in a movie I saw the cell phone was sugically implanted into the hand. Compared to those ours are not sophisticated. Another thing, I would greatly prefer to speak to someone in person; how can it be sophisticated to eliminate human contact? Is the concept of "The Matrix" sophisticated?

I gave examples of being more sophisticated in our modern world. You gave the seven wonders of the ancient world. I then gave more sophisticated examples. You may believe that the ancient wonders of the world are more sophisticated than our modern technology, thats up to you. I think that an Iphone or laptop, or spaceshuttle, or Mars probe, or hubble telescope are far more sophisticated and advanced. I think others would agree. Thats not the topic of the debate. The topic is whether or not shacking-up before marriage is more reasonable and logical than marrying without the knowledge you gain from shacking-up.

I provided the Barna survey not specifically as evidence but just for a debate topic. Although the survey showed that atheists divorce less, doesn't mean that shacking-up is the direct reason. Thats why we are debating and trying to figure this out. I'm not sure why you seem defensive on this topic.

You also said,"How is it sophisticated to complicate your life?"

Because the definition of sophisticated is thus:

so·phis·ti·cat·ed (s -f s t -k t d). adj. 1. Having acquired worldly knowledge or refinement; lacking natural simplicity or naiveté. 2. Very complex or complicated: the latest and most sophisticated technology.
3. Suitable for or appealing to the tastes of sophisticates: a sophisticated drama.

So my examples I gave are in fact more sophisticated. I feel that you didn't quite understand the definition of sophisticated and have replaced the true definition with that of the words naive or simple.

Questions for you Moses;

Is it more reasonable to shack-up prior to marriage, if you want to find out the most you can about a person before you marry them? Like buying a car.

If it is more reasonable, then why do the religious maintain that they should not shack-up or look down upon those who do?

I build kitchen cabinets. When we do a job that is very clean looking with no moldings it looks simpler but is in fact much hard to build. With molding you can hide uneven floors or ceilings and irregular cabinets. This makes it harder to build a kitchen with no moldings, (the construction is more complex) thus what looks simpler is in fact more complex. The same is true of telephones; what looks simpler is in fact more complex. In "Total Recall" where they have phones surgically implanted in the hand the phone is invisible. They can put their hand against glass and access the computer built into their phone. The more sophisticated something is, the simpler it looks. According to your definition of sophistication an oil lamp is more sophisticated than an electric light bulb because the oil lamp is more complex.

Christians oppose cohabitation for a number of reasons, mainly because it indicates a lack of commitment to the relationship (speaking for myself.) What happens to all those poor people who shack up then one of them decides the other is not for them?

[Clownboat]

Christians oppose cohabitation for a number of reasons, mainly because it indicates a lack of commitment to the relationship (speaking for myself.) What happens to all those poor people who shack up then one of them decides the other is not for them?

They don't get married. That is the point Moses.

[Nickman]

I build kitchen cabinets. When we do a job that is very clean looking with no moldings it looks simpler but is in fact much hard to build. With molding you can hide uneven floors or ceilings and irregular cabinets. This makes it harder to build a kitchen with no moldings, (the construction is more complex) thus what looks simpler is in fact more complex. The same is true of telephones; what looks simpler is in fact more complex. In "Total Recall" where they have phones surgically implanted in the hand the phone is invisible. They can put their hand against glass and access the computer built into their phone. The more sophisticated something is, the simpler it looks. According to your definition of sophistication an oil lamp is more sophisticated than an electric light bulb because the oil lamp is more complex.

Im not gonna argue with you about the definition of the word sophisticated. It means complex and complicated. We do live in a more sophisticated and complex society than our ancestors did. We have more people on the earth. This makes things more complicated and complex. Arguing about whether a cell phone is more complex than a make believe movie scene is irrelevant. We are in fact in a more complex society worldwide. That was my point, and in a more complex society I am saying that shacking up before marriage will help us decide if marriage with a specific partner is practical and optimal before getting into something that will be hard to get out of. Divorce is a higly difficult situation compared to a shackup breakup. There is less on the line. Yes, in some cases a shackup breakup can be just as difficult, but with out having to go through the same legal processes such as the divorce itself. Now, if two people live together before marriage and go about it the right way. They won't have kids until they know they are completely compatible and desire nothing more than to be with each other. Then once they know for sure that they are ready, they get married and have children. This, to me, is much more reasonable, practical, and logical than getting married without this information and understanding. Would you agree?

Christians oppose cohabitation for a number of reasons, mainly because it indicates a lack of commitment to the relationship (speaking for myself.) What happens to all those poor people who shack up then one of them decides the other is not for them?

How does it indicate a lack of commitment? Can a couple be just as committed without actually getting married? I say Yes. Marriage is a way to express commitment outwardly and publicly. Marriage does not make a couple more committed. Most people who are married were just as committed before they tied the knot as they after. In some cases people become less committed after they tie the knot. Commitment is not monopolized by marriage.

You ask, "what happens to those poor people who shackup and one decides the other is not for them."

For them it is much easier and better to realize that before marrying someone that is not committed. If their not committed before marriage, their probably not gonna be committed after they are married. Thats why I say marriage does not have a monopoly on commitment.

[Nickman]

Christians oppose cohabitation for a number of reasons, mainly because it indicates a lack of commitment to the relationship (speaking for myself.) What happens to all those poor people who shack up then one of them decides the other is not for them?

They don't get married. That is the point Moses.

Thank you CB, I can't figure out why some people are not getting this. It is very simple. Test the waters before you jump in. Living under the same roof will tell you almost everything you need to know about a person in order to make such a serious decision. I married my ex-wife after 6 months of knowing her. We thought we were so great together. When we lived under the same roof, we realized we were not great together and didn't really love each other that much. No matter how much counseling we did.
Some people can marry in such short timeframes and be fine, but not most. I think it is best to test the waters before marriage, and I come to this conclusion from experience. Had me and my ex moved in prior, we would have seen that we were not "made" for each other and things would have been much easier.

[Moses Yoder]

I build kitchen cabinets. When we do a job that is very clean looking with no moldings it looks simpler but is in fact much hard to build. With molding you can hide uneven floors or ceilings and irregular cabinets. This makes it harder to build a kitchen with no moldings, (the construction is more complex) thus what looks simpler is in fact more complex. The same is true of telephones; what looks simpler is in fact more complex. In "Total Recall" where they have phones surgically implanted in the hand the phone is invisible. They can put their hand against glass and access the computer built into their phone. The more sophisticated something is, the simpler it looks. According to your definition of sophistication an oil lamp is more sophisticated than an electric light bulb because the oil lamp is more complex.

Im not gonna argue with you about the definition of the word sophisticated. It means complex and complicated. We do live in a more sophisticated and complex society than our ancestors did. We have more people on the earth. This makes things more complicated and complex. Arguing about whether a cell phone is more complex than a make believe movie scene is irrelevant. We are in fact in a more complex society worldwide. That was my point, and in a more complex society I am saying that shacking up before marriage will help us decide if marriage with a specific partner is practical and optimal before getting into something that will be hard to get out of. Divorce is a higly difficult situation compared to a shackup breakup. There is less on the line. Yes, in some cases a shackup breakup can be just as difficult, but with out having to go through the same legal processes such as the divorce itself. Now, if two people live together before marriage and go about it the right way. They won't have kids until they know they are completely compatible and desire nothing more than to be with each other. Then once they know for sure that they are ready, they get married and have children. This, to me, is much more reasonable, practical, and logical than getting married without this information and understanding. Would you agree?

Christians oppose cohabitation for a number of reasons, mainly because it indicates a lack of commitment to the relationship (speaking for myself.) What happens to all those poor people who shack up then one of them decides the other is not for them?

How does it indicate a lack of commitment? Can a couple be just as committed without actually getting married? I say Yes. Marriage is a way to express commitment outwardly and publicly. Marriage does not make a couple more committed. Most people who are married were just as committed before they tied the knot as they after. In some cases people become less committed after they tie the knot. Commitment is not monopolized by marriage.

You ask, "what happens to those poor people who shackup and one decides the other is not for them."

For them it is much easier and better to realize that before marrying someone that is not committed. If their not committed before marriage, their probably not gonna be committed after they are married. Thats why I say marriage does not have a monopoly on commitment.

Lets say I agree with you. How then would I defend the idea of marriage at all? If marriage were eliminated then the divorce rate would drop to zero, and we would have no more relationship problems.

[Nickman]

Lets say I agree with you. How then would I defend the idea of marriage at all? If marriage were eliminated then the divorce rate would drop to zero, and we would have no more relationship problems.

You don't have to throw marriage out altogether, and I am not advocating that. Marriage Shouldn't be replaced with non marriage relationships. What I am proposing is being careful, responsible, logical, and smart about marriage. Marriage is the goal, and marriage that doesn't end in divorce. That is my entire point and topic. By teaching our youth that it is OK to shackup before marriage in order to get a proper understanding of their relationship and partner under one roof, without shunning such practice, would dramatically decrease divorce rates across the board and promote marriages that last for the "long haul". When we shun such practices (which are practical, reasonable, and beneficial) with our religious biases that come from a 3000 year old society, we are adding to the divorce rate and unsuccessful marriages. It is time for our modern societies to wake up and look at what is beneficial and actually works.

Please tell me why is it wrong for people to shackup? You said, "it indicates a lack of commitment" but I clearly think that is false and have shown why. So what is it that is so wrong with it? Is it just religious bias?

[Woland]

[quote="Nickman]

My daughter is 22 years old. She wouldn't do this (shack-up) out respect for herself and for us.

How would cohabitation indicate a lack of respect for herself or you? I can see how it might indicate lack of respect for your values.

Yes, exactly that.

How in the world would cohabiting in a normal, healthy human relationship with a person you love before committing to a life with that person meaningfully be a lack of respect to anyone else?
As far as I know, respect is distinctly different from subservience.

This seems to be a case where a perceived lack of respect could quite easily not be one at all in fact.

Does the distinction matter to you?

And at the expense of potentially sounding "insensitive to others' values"...
Arranged marriages? Really? Choosing who your child will spend his/her life with?

This seems like something terribly patronizing and selfish to me.
Usually it seems to come from the notion that one knows better than one's child what's good for them.

I wonder what these people feel like when their children's arranged marriages turn sour, because this must happen quite a large number of times each day worldwide.

Do they blame the spouse? Their child? Themselves? All three? The first two, but not the third? The latter two, but not the first? The first and last only?

I wonder if they regret imposing their will on the child.
I'd be very curious to know how often the "parent repents" event happens as a percentage of failed arranged marriages.

-Woland

[Moses Yoder]

Lets say I agree with you. How then would I defend the idea of marriage at all? If marriage were eliminated then the divorce rate would drop to zero, and we would have no more relationship problems.

You don't have to throw marriage out altogether, and I am not advocating that. Marriage Shouldn't be replaced with non marriage relationships. What I am proposing is being careful, responsible, logical, and smart about marriage. Marriage is the goal, and marriage that doesn't end in divorce. That is my entire point and topic. By teaching our youth that it is OK to shackup before marriage in order to get a proper understanding of their relationship and partner under one roof, without shunning such practice, would dramatically decrease divorce rates across the board and promote marriages that last for the "long haul". When we shun such practices (which are practical, reasonable, and beneficial) with our religious biases that come from a 3000 year old society, we are adding to the divorce rate and unsuccessful marriages. It is time for our modern societies to wake up and look at what is beneficial and actually works.

Please tell me why is it wrong for people to shackup? You said, "it indicates a lack of commitment" but I clearly think that is false and have shown why. So what is it that is so wrong with it? Is it just religious bias?

Which part of sensible courtship is not careful, logical, reasonable and smart? Why do you actually have to live together before knowing whether you are compatible? That doesn't sound very smart to me.

What is the reason behind the Ten Commandments and the Mosaic law?