Is Cohabitation Morally Wrong?

[Perianne]

co·hab·i·ta·tion

the state of living together and having a sexual relationship without being married.

It is very common today. Do you think it is morally wrong?

[Helena]

It's not advisable, but I can't say it's morally wrong. More and more of the senior population see no reason to to be married as children aren't a concern, they have their own finances and don't need to be unnecessarily enmeshed.

For people wishing to establish a family and have stability, (not just financial) I believe much of human history has shown that the traditional family unit is to be encouraged.

Eh... but there's so much in arguments for or against and the different reasons why or why not and for whom and what time of life they are in.

I wouldn't say definitively that it is morally wrong.

[nathanbforrest45]

An ancillary question would be "what constitutes being married?" Does it require a formal declaration before a religious or government official? Does it need to be sanctioned by the state by the issuance of a marriage license?

I will say almost every culture has some form of sanctioned and/or announced system of "marriage". If nothing else it establishes legal obligations.

[patrickt]

Synonyms for "morally wrong" are reprehensible, disgraceful, and shameful. Whether cohabitation is morally wrong or not would depend on the moral code of the world in which you live. For a sincere religious person it might be disgraceful and shameful but for a Democrat very little is disgraceful or shameful.

[Collateral Damage]

Synonyms for "morally wrong" are reprehensible, disgraceful, and shameful. Whether cohabitation is morally wrong or not would depend on the moral code of the world in which you live. For a sincere religious person it might be disgraceful and shameful but for a Democrat very little is disgraceful or shameful.

'Religious' and 'Democrat' are not opposites. Matter of fact, someone doesn't have to be religious to be moral. Neither is exclusive.

I cannot and will not make choices for other people, if no harm is done. Two consenting adults is all that is required to make a relationship.

[FindersKeepers]

I don't think it's "morally" wrong, but neither do I think it should be entered into lightly. I get where a couple might want to "try it out" before marrying, and I think that can work, but I also think it can be detrimental if children come into the picture because it's too easy for a parent to walk away.

[carolina73]

It depends on what your idea of marriage is.

Government sees it as a financial arrangement.

The churches see it as an emotional driven social responsibility used to produce children.

That is why the Liberals were so interested in tearing down the institution of marriage.

If I lost my wife, then I would not even think about getting married again. I would see it as a unnecessary commitment and a financial risk.
I also know couples that got married for the tax breaks, benefits, etc... meant for raising families. They both have careers, cannot have children or did not want them. They have separate bank accounts and share the rent and utilities.

[nathanbforrest45]

'Religious' and 'Democrat' are not opposites. Matter of fact, someone doesn't have to be religious to be moral. Neither is exclusive.

I cannot and will not make choices for other people, if no harm is done. Two consenting adults is all that is required to make a relationship.

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

[Common Sense]

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.

[Common]

Synonyms for "morally wrong" are reprehensible, disgraceful, and shameful. Whether cohabitation is morally wrong or not would depend on the moral code of the world in which you live. For a sincere religious person it might be disgraceful and shameful but for a Democrat very little is disgraceful or shameful.

WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! l