Ethics Issue

[Viking Wizard Eyes]

Opinion is fine, but you have no experience to base your opinion on. Like the alcohol thread, tons of people who have experience have offered a counter opinion that is widely accepted yet you have had trouble grasping them.

In a few years you will know what we're talking about on both accounts.

Being friends/partners with someone does not guarantee you can live with them. Since marriage involves long term cohab it's essential you are able to live with them. Heavy price for getting it wrong.

MUST.LIVE.TOGETHER.BEFORE.MARRIAGE. Repeat until etched in memory.

Well said, now close this thread.

 

[ExTasDeeMan]

So Drum, we can assume that you haven't had sex yet, and are not going to have sex until you are married (assume around 28 - 35 or so) -

Therefore, is it safe to assume you will be going the pull? Or is that against your ideals as well?

 

[Mikes4]

So Drum, we can assume that you haven't had sex yet, and are not going to have sex until you are married (assume around 28 - 35 or so) -

Therefore, is it safe to assume you will be going the pull? Or is that against your ideals as well?

Cue Monty Python song.

 

[littleduck]

What exactly is the ethical dilemma here?

Such a dilemma only arises when the issue is viewed through the framework of following religious beliefs.

Is this thread about religion?

 

[hawkeye23]

Did you contradict yourself with this statement? You said you disagreed with me that couples become expendable without some sort of commitment, yet this statement confirms that attitude as every day there is a decision whether or not to continue being a couple.

But, I agree that a piece of paper doesn't mean as much as emotional commitment, and you obviously aren't being flippant about the issue from your last post. I too would rather not have the whole ceremony and piece of paper but rely on the day to day. If they go, they go.

Not at all, I'm saying that commitment on a piece of paper means nothing more than a contract. I'd rather them commit to me on a daily basis, ie making a conscious choice EVERY DAY to see where this is going, rather than being held there by a contract. For me, its choice vs contract. Choice wins for me.

 

[hawkeye23]

hawkeye23 these may interest you.

A significant proportion abandoned cohabitation because "they no longer believed in it"; over 85 percent thought there was "no future or real purpose in cohabitation" or "no real differences between marriage and cohabitation".

What did they abandon it for????? going back to mum????

 

[hawkeye23]

Shouldn't dating bring out the habits that could possibly deter you from a commitment?

I doubt I'd find out about a penchant for dutch ovens or toenail picking in front of the TV in a fine dining restaurant!

 

[~GURU~]

You MUST try before you buy.

Thats exactly the way to put it!

 

[Bombers 2003]

I doubt I'd find out about a penchant for dutch ovens or toenail picking in front of the TV in a fine dining restaurant!

You would if you took Drummond out.

 

[Murray]

I doubt I'd find out about a penchant for dutch ovens or toenail picking in front of the TV in a fine dining restaurant!

Ah Dutch Ovens - Love that game

 

[hawkeye23]

Ah Dutch Ovens - Love that game

I like the TV ad with the two hippos in bed. Never fails to make me giggle!

 

[Andre]

I definitely say living together before marriage makes sense. You can talk about dating discovering whether your personalties match and it does. However it's only when someone's 'in your face' 24 hours a day, 7 days a week can you see if their annoying habits/personality quirks are going to drive you nuts and whether he/she will compromise on issues.

My wife and I lived together for 3 years before we tied the knot - so we had all those potential conflict points resolved long before going to the altar.

And you can talk about marriage being meaningless and a de-facto can care just as much for you - but that's a crock of ******** to me. If someone cared for you and wanted to spend the rest of their life with you, then they'd be willing, no make that eager, to marry you. The term De-facto husband/wife and all associated benefits should be stricken from the law. You are either married or not. De-facto is just another term for 'like them, but not willing to commit'.

When you get kids involved the term de-facto is even more a blight. You aren't willing to commit enough to this person to marry them, yet you are going to have kids with them ?? What the hell ?!?

 

[Qsaint]

Here is all the proof you need:

"However, contrary to the expectations of many couples who perceive cohabiting before marriage as a safeguard against marital failure, the evidence to date strongly suggests the opposite: couples who cohabit before marriage are ending their marriages at significantly higher rates than couples who never lived together before the wedding."

You can't be serious, you're quoting for one hell of a biased organisation, one who's leader cheared when the security guard at the abortion clinic got shot


http://www.family.org.au/journal/2000/j20000424.html

The article is pure (religious) opinion with no academic rigure. No Facts No studies no proof. HTF that person got a degree I have no idea

 

[PowerKat]

The ideals of youth Drummond! Girls at 16 say they want to 'save themselves', but many change their minds when their 'knight in shining armour' doesn't arrive in time.

From observing the experiences of myself, family and friends, living together first is the only option. The majority have chosen that path. Most relationships are successful, some are not. In my teens I said I would not live together before marriage, in my 20's I did it, in my 30's I got married. Your perspective and reasoning change as you get older.

NEVER SAY NEVER!