Is Cohabitation Morally Wrong?

[Perianne]

I am a traditionalist and view cohabitation as... well, the way it used to be looked at. This modern generation (of which I am part) thinks changing everything is an enhancement. I don't. I wish morals were looked at the way they used to be, that is, pre-1960s.

[Common Sense]

Without some basis from a "higher" authority how is morality established?

Do you only act morally because of your belief in a higher authority?

[nathanbforrest45]

The issue of cohabitation may or may not be immoral but it is certainly fiscally irresponsible. Suppose Susie moves in with Jethro. She brings half of the income and all of the furniture into Jethro's apartment. Because they are not married she is not on the lease. One night in a rage Jethro throws Susie out with only the clothes on her back. Since it is Jethro's apartment if she attempts to return she can be charged with trespass. Furthermore, the furniture can be seen as a gift or payment for rent so Jethro gets to keep the furniture. Susie has no rights to regain her property. Furthermore they have had two children together during cohabitation. She may or may not be able to collect child support, especially if he is not listed on the birth certificate. If they were legally married that would not be the case.

Better to assume its the moral path and avoid these issues.

[Cletus]

Without some basis from a "higher" authority how is morality established?

Reason, logic, common sense.

[nathanbforrest45]

I don't see it as morally wrong.

I honestly don't understand how people can get married without ever living together first. It's a recipe for disaster.

But then again, when have you ever found anything that was outside the cultural norm to be wrong?

Most cohabitations do not last nearly as long as most marriages. Living together without any commitment is a recipe for disaster.

[nathanbforrest45]

Do you only act morally because of your belief in a higher authority?

Define morally that does not come from a higher authority. I believe that the "higher authority" determines what is and what isn't moral. That morality could be God, or some other belief system that transcends just what you have established in your own mind.

[nathanbforrest45]

Reason, logic, common sense.

On what basis do we ascribe these attributes? Common sense to who? We have a poster who calls himself common sense but he is anything but so by who's standards is common sense established. What drives the logic? (reason and logic are of the same family so I won't list the question twice)

[carolina73]

The issue of cohabitation may or may not be immoral but it is certainly fiscally irresponsible. Suppose Susie moves in with Jethro. She brings half of the income and all of the furniture into Jethro's apartment. Because they are not married she is not on the lease. One night in a rage Jethro throws Susie out with only the clothes on her back. Since it is Jethro's apartment if she attempts to return she can be charged with trespass. Furthermore, the furniture can be seen as a gift or payment for rent so Jethro gets to keep the furniture. Susie has no rights to regain her property. Furthermore they have had two children together during cohabitation. She may or may not be able to collect child support, especially if he is not listed on the birth certificate. If they were legally married that would not be the case.

Better to assume its the moral path and avoid these issues.

Instead Susie calls the police on Jethro and says he was verbally abusive and has him taken out and then files a restraining order.

Jethro ends up paying the rent for Susie until the judge decides to give her alimony. Obviously , the story changes when you have kids but going you separate ways is much easier than the drama created by divorce, when you do not have kids.

[The Xl]

Marriage is a dangerous proposition for men considering how the courts treat them in divorce. Men have to protect themselves.

[Common Sense]

The issue of cohabitation may or may not be immoral but it is certainly fiscally irresponsible. Suppose Susie moves in with Jethro. She brings half of the income and all of the furniture into Jethro's apartment. Because they are not married she is not on the lease. One night in a rage Jethro throws Susie out with only the clothes on her back. Since it is Jethro's apartment if she attempts to return she can be charged with trespass. Furthermore, the furniture can be seen as a gift or payment for rent so Jethro gets to keep the furniture. Susie has no rights to regain her property. Furthermore they have had two children together during cohabitation. She may or may not be able to collect child support, especially if he is not listed on the birth certificate. If they were legally married that would not be the case.

Better to assume its the moral path and avoid these issues.

It all depends on where Susie and Jethro have been shacking up together. Depending on where they live, the law most likely sees them as common law married. Susie would be protected by the law the same way any spouse would.