Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The risks of cohabitation
Minneapolis Star Tribune ^ | 7/17/02 | Katherine Kersten

Posted on 07/17/2002 2:06:41 PM PDT by rhema

Edited on 04/13/2004 3:36:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Everyone knows that American family structure is changing. In recent decades, large increases in divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing have dramatically altered the social landscape. But a related social change has received little attention. That's the extraordinary rise in cohabitation, in which an unmarried man and woman share a household as sexual partners.


(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: children; christianlist; cohabitation; divorce; family; marriage; morality; morals; sin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 next last
To: marcleblanc
he should first NOT be preparing monsters that kill small children for the pure joy of it.

Stick to a belief. You are all over the place here.

101 posted on 07/18/2002 6:46:29 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze
What exactly are you saying here? Men who date your daughter should be subject to your idiosyncrasies? Who about if you are just friggin’ nuts what then? What are you saying I have no rights and must kowtow to you to be able to date your daughter?Absolutely. That's what being a Christian father is all about. Take a look around pal, do you see the world revolving around you, didn’t think so. I stand on my statement; Girls who possess troublesome families are not worth the effort, regardless of thow that trouble manifests itself. See, it works. By requiring eligible suitors to recognize my God-given authority over my daughter's life, a multitude of unqualified types like yourself have been eliminated from the process. It saves my daughter a lot of grief, and saves you a lot of energy. Instead of being resentful, you ought to be thankful.
102 posted on 07/18/2002 7:12:43 AM PDT by Sangamon Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God... (2 Timothy 3:2-4)
103 posted on 07/18/2002 7:24:48 AM PDT by Sangamon Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Yes but now you know why they weren't married in the first place. You couldn't get along with them. It had nothing to do with their dating practices.

I got the impression that it was their lifelong singleness that made them bitter, since that was all they ever wanted to gripe about in the singles group (which was for people of all ages).

104 posted on 07/18/2002 7:37:20 AM PDT by Lamont Cranston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
Sorry, wrong answer with me, you may believe it, but I do not. I am not a Christian, so I do not believe in your socalled moralist values of marriage etc.

I think that cohabitation and sex before marriage is necessary to make sure that you are indeed compatible and will be happy together before you take the step of getting married to have children. Marriage is for the financial and emotional security of children, if you are NOT going to have children, then marriage is not necessary.

Marriage may have been necessary before because the technology of birth control etc was not around, because if you were going to have sex, then you sure as heck had better be ready to have children, therefore marriage before sex was again necessary for the security of the resulting children. This is no longer the case. Therefore, cohabitation and sex before marriage is not only a good idea as far as I am concerned, it is a necessity.
105 posted on 07/18/2002 7:38:58 AM PDT by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000; *Christian_list; logos; BibChr; FreedomFriend; Sangamon Kid; Springman; SamAdams76; ...
Sorry, wrong answer with me, you may believe it, but I do not. I am not a Christian, so I do not believe in your socalled moralist values of marriage etc.

I think that cohabitation and sex before marriage is necessary to make sure that you are indeed compatible and will be happy together before you take the step of getting married to have children. Marriage is for the financial and emotional security of children, if you are NOT going to have children, then marriage is not necessary.

Sounds like it's time to let one of those antediluvian Christian types weigh in on the subject. No, it's not yours truly (although I'd qualify); it's Chuck Colson, who with Nancy Pearcey authored the book How Now Shall We Live?

Colson makes two points that are germane to this particular thread:

(1) [Judeo-Christian] Morality, says Colson, is not merely an arbitrary constraint on individual choice but a protection against social disintegration. Even a confirmed secularist like Guenter Levy, who started out to write a book defending secularism, wound up arguing (in Why America Needs Religion) that many empirical studies are showing that belief in God (and adherence to scriptural principles, not mere profession of them) makes people happier and more fulfilled. Colson's book cites data from many of the medical studies that "are confirming that shose who attend church regularly and act consistently with their faith are better off, both physically and mentally."

(2) When it comes to marriage, divorce, cohabitation and the like, Colson says the Christian church has often been part of the problem: "In fact, three-quarters of all weddings are blessed in a church or synagogue, which means churches are implicated in the nation's staggering divorce rate."

Colson (with Mike McManus of MarriageSavers.org) discusses five areas in which churches need to be proactive [and predictably, they'll be accused of Victorian prudery and benighted naivete when and if they are]:

1. Smart Dating. Colson writes, ". . .the church must begin by helping dating couples, and the first message they need to hear is that if you want a good marriage, avoid premarital sexual relations. The National Survey of Family Growth found that women who were not virgins when they got married have a 71 percent higher divorce rate."

2. Trial is Error. Colson writes, "About 90 percent of the couples who live together say they want to get married, but the National Survey of Families and Households found that almost half break up before signing a marriage license. Those who do marry are 50 percent more likely to divorce [than those who didn't live together before marriage]."

3. Engaging Couples.Colson recommends that churches get on board with programs like PREPARE (Premarital Personal and Relationship Evaluation), which helps couples identify their strengths and weaknesses so they can iron out major conflicts before marriage. "Another effective program is Engaged Encounter, an intensive weekend program that teaches couples how to relate more effectively." Mrs. Rhema and I -- married 26 years this June -- went to an Engaged Encounter.

4. Wedding Shock. Colson says that many divorces trace back to habits established in early years, after the romantic attachment wears off. Citing the church tradition (in Deuteronomy 24) of exempting a newly married man from military and other duties for a year as precedent that it's biblical for churches to protect and nurture young couples, Colson mentions programs like ENRICH, which helps fledgling couples inventory their strengths and weaknesses, identifying key problem areas.

5. Divorce Insurance. Colson mentions a number of programs:
*Marriage Encounter, an intensive weekend retreat with a 90 percent success rate in strengthening marriages
*Retrouvaille, for seriously troubled marriages, which involves personal counseling by couples who themselves have worked through serious marriage problems. "Of the couples who have attended Retrouvaille, nearly half were already separated or divorced, yet 80 percent have reunited and stayed together."
*Marriage Savers, whose Community Marriage Policies program (in which many community churches agree together to require couples to undergo marriage preparation, take a premarital inventory, and meet with a mentor couple) has seen divorce rates plummet by 30 and 40 percent in the communities that have tried it. "By the end of 1998, a hundred cities had adopted Community Marriage Policies, and nine have been in place long enough to produce a measurable drop in the local divorce rate."

Colson summarizes: "Back in the 1970s, books touted divorce as liberation . . . But the moral tides are turning, and people are showing a growing concern for the social cost of family breakdown, reflected in titles such as The Case against Divorce (Diane Medved), Divorce Busting: A Revolutionary and Rapid Program for Staying Together (Michele Weiner-Davis) . . .There are even efforts under way to eliminate no-fault divorce, which gives all the legal power to those who walk away from their family commitments. . ."

(I'll revisit the thread later today or early tomorrow to check in on the interesting and impassioned disputations to Colson's arguments.)

106 posted on 07/18/2002 9:01:05 AM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: rhema
Like I said before, marriage is for the security of children, nothing more. If a couple wishes to live together without getting married, because they are NOT having children, more power to them.

I am an example of cohabitation and premarital sex that has turned into a VERY strong marriage and family unit. I am NOT typical, and not claiming to be, but the fact is, it is a choice that people make, and I believe that it works.
107 posted on 07/18/2002 9:38:46 AM PDT by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
....Marriage is for the security of children, nothing more, other then that, it is not necessary.

16 posted on 7/17/02 5:05 PM Central by Aric2000

...Marriage is for the financial and emotional security of children, if you are NOT going to have children, then marriage is not necessary....

105 posted on 7/18/02 9:38 AM Central by Aric2000

Like I said before, marriage is for the security of children, nothing more. If a couple wishes to live together without getting married, because they are NOT having children, more power to them.

107 posted on 7/18/02 11:38 AM Central by Aric2000

Enough already. You say it any more often and you might even convince yourself that what you're saying is true.

108 posted on 07/18/2002 11:01:23 AM PDT by Sangamon Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: rhema
bump for later
109 posted on 07/18/2002 11:30:22 AM PDT by the bottle let me down
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sangamon Kid
Sorry, in ALL cultures, that is the MAIN reason for marriage, to provide for the financial and emotional security for children. It IS true, IT IS a fact.

Sorry, but the truth hurts, don't it?
110 posted on 07/18/2002 1:19:51 PM PDT by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: rhema
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, obviously we are never going to agree on this issue, so I can't see any reason to beat a dead horse and discuss this issue any further except that if you seek seek government redress through legislation to enforce your beliefs. Other than having the panty sniffing police or the holy sexual inquisition break down my bedroom door with a warrant to search for sexual deviancy, I really could care less.
111 posted on 07/18/2002 2:07:36 PM PDT by TightSqueeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze
I can't see any reason to beat a dead horse and discuss this issue any further except that if you seek seek government redress through legislation to enforce your beliefs.

All legislation enforces someone's beliefs. Because the great unwashed public resoundingly rejects their beliefs, liberals usually try to get the judiciary to legislate for them.

Other than having the panty sniffing police or the holy sexual inquisition break down my bedroom door with a warrant to search for sexual deviancy, I really could care less.

When the facts don't support you, try hyperbolic rhetoric? I thought FReepers eschewed debate-by-empty-slogan.

112 posted on 07/18/2002 2:57:29 PM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: rhema
I thought FReepers eschewed debate-by-empty-slogan.

Guess I am just tired, sorry, go play with someone else.

113 posted on 07/18/2002 3:11:11 PM PDT by TightSqueeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: rhema
OK, my 2 cents. My sister-in- law
moved in with her now ex-hubbie after 2 dates.
My younger brother moved in with his ex wife after I married Mrs.Springman(7 years ago). They got divoriced and then remarried, her CORBA ran out and had and had back troubles.
MY older brother had his girlfriend move in, they got married, and now they are heading for a divorice.
Mrs.S and I got married and were are very happy. We never lived in the same house untill we got married.
114 posted on 07/18/2002 3:49:07 PM PDT by Springman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhema
The National Survey of Family Growth found that women who were not virgins when they got married have a 71 percent higher divorce rate."

What % of women were virgins until their wedding day?

115 posted on 07/18/2002 3:58:21 PM PDT by Koblenz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Koblenz
The National Survey of Family Growth found that women who were not virgins when they got married have a 71 percent higher divorce rate."

What % of women were virgins until their wedding day?

You'd expect the percentage to be small, wouldn't you, after 30 years of postmodernist propaganda from feminists, the education establishment, and the media. The CDC's study (circa 1995) puts the overall number at 18%, but those figures vary from 29% (between 1965-74) to 11% (1990-95).

116 posted on 07/19/2002 5:25:00 AM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Springman
OK, my 2 cents. My sister-in- law moved in with her now ex-hubbie after 2 dates. My younger brother moved in with his ex wife after I married Mrs.Springman(7 years ago). They got divoriced and then remarried, her CORBA ran out and had and had back troubles. MY older brother had his girlfriend move in, they got married, and now they are heading for a divorice. Mrs.S and I got married and were are very happy. We never lived in the same house untill we got married.

As Colson wrote, "The new scientific data [he was citing broader health studies than marriage alone] . . .shows clearly that if we ignore biblical principles, we end up living in ways that run against the grain of our being, and we pay a steep price in terms of stress, depression, family conflict, and even physical illness. Rather than being an arbitrary set of rules and restrictions that repress and distort our true nature, Christianity actually describes our true nature and shows us how to live in accord with it. And when we do, we enjoy the fruits of operating the way we were made to."

"Growing numbers of psychologists are finding religion, if not in their personal lives, at least in their data," reported the New York Times in Sept. 1991. "What was once, at best, an unfashionable topic in psychology has been born again as a respectable focus for scientific research." The data is showing that religion, far from being a mental illness, is actually beneficial to mental health, physical health, family strength, and social order.

117 posted on 07/19/2002 5:36:38 AM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: rhema
Heh heh heh living in an apartment with a hottie during college.
118 posted on 07/19/2002 9:15:49 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
You are right as usual. Of course marriage is a good deal for women ussually( its only good for the guy if hes much richer).
119 posted on 07/19/2002 9:18:04 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: goo goo g'joob
Why should I commit to something whereby some girl can take half my property at any time for any reason.
120 posted on 07/19/2002 9:27:58 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson