Living With Your Significant Other Before Marriage

[Remté]

Yep. Dumb idea. Doesn't work, either. According to at least one source (US attorney legal services...who got their info from the US census) while the probability of a first marriage ending up in separation or divorce within five years is 20%, whereas the probability of a marriage preceded by cohabitation is more along the lines of 49%.

Oh, and in case one thinks that it would be better to just stay 'co-habitated' rather than get married, it seems that the probability of a first marriage breaking up in ten years is 33%, whereas a co-habitation breaking up is 69%

What do first marriage and co habitation before marriage have to do with each other?

Depends who you ask.

 

[dianaiad]

What do first marriage and co habitation before marriage have to do with each other?

Depends who you ask.

Opinions are like ..opinions. everybody has one. However, divorce statistics that simple are generally to be trusted, when only two variables are in play.

Seems that if a couple co-habitates before they marry one another, that marriage is more likely to fail (by a huge margin) than marriages where the couple does NOT live together before they wed.

A little hard to argue with that, y'know?

I think I even have a suspicion as to why that might be, but again, that would only be my opinion, and THAT would absolutely depend upon 'who you ask."

 

[Remté]

Opinions are like ..opinions. everybody has one. However, divorce statistics that simple are generally to be trusted, when only two variables are in play.

Seems that if a couple co-habitates before they marry one another, that marriage is more likely to fail (by a huge margin) than marriages where the couple does NOT live together before they wed.

A little hard to argue with that, y'know?

I think I even have a suspicion as to why that might be, but again, that would only be my opinion, and THAT would absolutely depend upon 'who you ask."

You said "first marriage" twice in your first post. Did you mean marriage before co-habitation? Is that what the statistics said?

But in any case we must take into account that in western societies it is unusual for young people to get married before living together while for older people it wouldn't be so unusual.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Do you think that living with your significant other before marriage is a sin? Even if your intentions are to evaluate how compatible you two are together before "tying the knot"?

It's far worse to rush into a marriage and then discover that you can't get along.

 

[dianaiad]

You said "first marriage" twice in your first post. Did you mean marriage before co-habitation? Is that what the statistics said?

But in any case we must take into account that in western societies it is unusual for young people to get married before living together while for older people it wouldn't be so unusual.

No. I think I made that clear.

People who co-habitate before their first marriage are far more likely to get a divorce than people who do not co-habitate before their first marriage. By a large margin.

When you get to second and third marriages, it gets more complicated. More variables, I suppose. However, it is also true that second and third marriages are more likely to fail than first (and only) ones are.

I was attempting to both keep things simple....and accurate.

the question, after all, was whether the reader thought that cohabitation before marriage was a sin. I do.

........even if the goal was to find out if the two people were compatible. It still is a sin, according to my beliefs, but it's ALSO a bad idea and counter productive. Now whether or not something is a 'sin' depends upon belief systems and opinions, and also on the culture. However, the fact that doing so is counter-productive in terms of establishing combatibility? THAT can be evaluated and conclusions drawn by looking at divorce stastistics.

So...people who live together before marriage (at least their first one) are more likely to get divorced than people who don't.

So much for that idea.

 

[Remté]

No. I think I made that clear.

People who co-habitate before their first marriage are far more likely to get a divorce than people who do not co-habitate before their first marriage. By a large margin.

When you get to second and third marriages, it gets more complicated. More variables, I suppose. However, it is also true that second and third marriages are more likely to fail than first (and only) ones are.

I was attempting to both keep things simple....and accurate.

the question, after all, was whether the reader thought that cohabitation before marriage was a sin. I do.

........even if the goal was to find out if the two people were compatible. It still is a sin, according to my beliefs, but it's ALSO a bad idea and counter productive. Now whether or not something is a 'sin' depends upon belief systems and opinions, and also on the culture. However, the fact that doing so is counter-productive in terms of establishing combatibility? THAT can be evaluated and conclusions drawn by looking at divorce stastistics.

So...people who live together before marriage (at least their first one) are more likely to get divorced than people who don't.

So much for that idea.

I just don't trust those statistics. What if, for instance, a large part of those who got married first were Muslims who do it out of obligation. If they felt that obligation they would also feel obligation not to get a divorce.

 

[dianaiad]

I just don't trust those statistics. What if, for instance, a large part of those who got married first were Muslims who do it out of obligation. If they felt that obligation they would also feel obligation not to get a divorce.

Wow, that's moving the goal posts with a vengeance. "Special pleading."

But then I have often found that people don't trust statistics that prove their own pet theories incorrect. You are not alone.

 

[sealchan]

Yep. Dumb idea. Doesn't work, either. According to at least one source (US attorney legal services...who got their info from the US census) while the probability of a first marriage ending up in separation or divorce within five years is 20%, whereas the probability of a marriage preceded by cohabitation is more along the lines of 49%.

Oh, and in case one thinks that it would be better to just stay 'co-habitated' rather than get married, it seems that the probability of a first marriage breaking up in ten years is 33%, whereas a co-habitation breaking up is 69%

Could be that cohabitation is a sign of lack of commitment rather than a desire to test the waters in practice.

 

[dianaiad]

Could be that cohabitation is a sign of lack of commitment rather than a desire to test the waters in practice.

Possible.

I think it's more likely that people who co-habitate always have the 's/he could drop me like a hot rock and leave at the drop of a dirty sock on the floor" idea at the back of their minds.

So...those who don't marry (and according to the stats, co-habitators break up three times as often as married people hit the divorce courts) end up breaking up over the added stress, and those who do eventually marry find out that even if they lived together for YEARS, 'married is different."

.........and they can't handle the difference. So...cohabitating is no measure of marriage compatibility.

But I could very well be wrong about that one. It's just my personal thoughts.

I have a couple of examples in the family to look at, y'see. One of 'em tried the cohabitation route, and I saw the difference between that and after marriage. I think they are going to 'make a go' of it, but I also think that their marriage is SO different from living together (she gave birth to their first child less than four weeks after the wedding, and they bought a house, and he retired from the military....) that they can't really compare the two in daily life. We'll see.

Hope it works, though. I love 'em both and would really hate to see this relationship go belly up.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Do you think that living with your significant other before marriage is a sin? Even if your intentions are to evaluate how compatible you two are together before "tying the knot"?

I'm conditioned to believe it is, but I try to see the argument that determining compatibility before signing on the dotted line is a good thing.

 

[Revoltingest]

Could be that cohabitation is a sign of lack of commitment rather than a desire to test the waters in practice.

Sound like the same thing to me, & perfectly reasonable.
Other times, people intend to marry, but living together simply predates the ceremony.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It wasn't sinful at all.
It was practical & good.

I read a confession in that.....

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think that if two people love each other, then they should legally marry as a sign of commitment if nothing else.

And would you think that for me and my (male) partner of 25 years (if that isn't a commitment, I don't know what is)? IOW, would you support gay marriage as "a sign of commitment?"

 

[Revoltingest]

I read a confession in that.....

I've been known to flout social convention.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I've been known to flout social convention.

Oh, do tell...

 

[Valjean]

Oh, do tell...

I hear he's one wild and crazy guy, of a Saturday night.

 

[youknowme]

Do you think that living with your significant other before marriage is a sin? Even if your intentions are to evaluate how compatible you two are together before "tying the knot"?

Who cares if it is. God's forgiveness is cheap, all you have to do is ask.

 

[Dell]

Do you think that living with your significant other before marriage is a sin? Even if your intentions are to evaluate how compatible you two r..are together before "tying the knot"?

No. But it's best before that happens to invest some time to develop good a communication and understanding of each other. That will save you from having to move out and relocate all over again when you realize the significant other is a complete idiot.

 

[BSM1]

And would you think that for me and my (male) partner of 25 years (if that isn't a commitment, I don't know what is)? IOW, would you support gay marriage as "a sign of commitment?"

Any marriage. That piece of paper means nothing except that you are taking a recognizable oath that you will not bail on your significant other simply because you can if things don't go as plan. If you are not ready to officially give up your life to this other person, then maybe you should re-evaluate your relationship.

 

[loverofhumanity]

In our religion marriage is described as ‘a fortress for well-being’ and is elevated to the station of an institution.

We have a 95 day engagement period but only to get to know the character of the person not sleep with them as compatibility with the person is the important thing not sex. Baha’i marriage is not a sexual relationship but a spiritual relationship of which sex is only a very minor part.

I married my wife after a 95 day engagement and we just celebrated our 40th wedding anniversary. We thank the teachings of Baha’u’llah for keeping us united for so long. We basically have nothing much in common except our love for Baha’u’llah even we can’t speak fluently each other’s language so neither sex nor language can match a good spiritual bond which lasts forever while worldly things fade away eventually.