• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Is it okay for people to live together before getting married?

Query: Is a married person having a fling on the side more committed to their spouse than the 35-year old couple who have been living together for the past 9 years?
For me it is the married person because they have still committed to the other person. The couple living together or just a couple living together.
:lol: This is so typical of a certain mind-set that it's hilarious. Good luck! :lol:

Words mean shit. Promises mean shit. What matters, what really matters, are actions.

What if only a small number of people are offended and the majority are ok with it? What does one do then?
I would suggest minding your words, or don't be surprised when people are gonna call you on your behaviour.

Maybe it is because I am in the US, but it seems like a lot of you just live in a different world than the rest of society.
Turn it around: it seems like a you are living 50 years ago with respect of the rest of society.

Ok so let me get this straight. Since living together is the exact same thing as getting married, why are some of the same people saying this in favor of gay marriage. I mean if it is the exact same thing what is all the fuss about
Oh Jesus. Because some gay people want to be married. Who am I to tell they can't? Alice and Bob want to be married? Good for them. Bob and Charlie want to be married? Good for them, too. I would advise both couple, however, to live together for some time before getting to the paperwork. :techman:

And for the record, I have been married for a very long time. Wife thinks even more strongly about this than I do. So does ever single woman I know. As I said before they think any woman that would just live with a man and not get married is a @#$%! idiot as my wife and good female friend just told me.
Seems you are made for each other. Good for you!
 

John Picard

I am from the Bible belt too, still there and I don't know anyone that thinks everyone should be married. If you are talking about having sex out of marriage and just living with someone, then yeah they will have a problem with that as well they should if the truly believe their religion.
Don't play ignorant. You know I'm not talking sex out of marriage. The pressures on young men and women, in the Bible Belt (ages 18-24) to get married, are there. When family learns of a potential marriage they get all excited, rather than cautioning people that young against marriage or asking if the couple really understands what they're getting into.

That's certainly not anything I've experienced in my family. I haven't really done a lot of dating or ever been serious about marriage (as in, I have not yet been in a relationship I thought stood a serious chance of heading that way), and nobody has pressured me to get more aggressive about it. Rather, I've always been told to think carefully, and I think one reason I never dated a lot when I was in high school, etc. is that it seemed rather silly to date pretty much KNOWING you're going to break up and that you're not ready for a lifelong decision. I saw no purpose in leading others on to THINK that anything like that was in the offing.


Also, I do not think you have to LIVE with someone to get to see what they're like--at least, we wouldn't if our culture didn't insist on prim and proper behavior on dates all the time. When I dated, I got to see the full range of crazy behavior out of my boyfriend and out of his family, and that ultimately made it clear that no, I did NOT want to pursue it any further. Since there was nothing hidden, that was a really important thing.

That brings up another interesting point. If possible, meeting the family of those you're dating can SOMETIMES--though NOT always--give you an idea of a person, too, or at least, where they came from. Mind you, this is not always true...one of my parents comes from a very dysfunctional home, but you'd never be able to tell which one by looking at how they relate to each other (in a very, very happy and stable marriage). Still, in some cases that can be something to take notice of, to ask about and perhaps even observe if you can.
 
Last edited:
(i) Middle Georgia, USA
(ii) Raised Southern Baptist, Atheist now
(iii) I think that anyone who wants to get married (straight or gay) should be able to get married, I was taught that everyone was equal (races, sexes, beliefs, etc) my parents are fairly liberal, plus I was raised on Star Trek. If a couple wants to live together before getting married then I'm all for it. My parents did for a little while based on what I've heard about it from them. The world isn't like some 50s sitcom, people have weird quirks and living together at least lets you know what to expect.
 
John Picard said:
Anyway, reread Galactacus' posts. He *thinks* that the US has a closed perception toward people living together than the Europeans. In fact, it has become more and more common in this country.

Well, yes, it is really common here. I don't know very many people who didn't live together before they got married, including my husband and me, and that includes lots of actively religious people, too. I said this earlier, but that was many posts back, so I'll just repeat that I'm actually a religious person, at least I try to be - I'm an elder in the Presbyterian Church USA.

But just because it's common doesn't mean I'm personally going to say that it's something everybody should do. There are benefits...and there are pitfalls. One way that is like marriage (note that "one way," John ;) ) is that how successful it is depends a lot on the effort you put into it - into how seriously both people take this step.

I can say one other definite thing: If it's against your beliefs, then you shouldn't do it. No good will come of having one person abandoning his/her morals for another person.
 
John Picard said:
Anyway, reread Galactacus' posts. He *thinks* that the US has a closed perception toward people living together than the Europeans. In fact, it has become more and more common in this country.

Well, yes, it is really common here. I don't know very many people who didn't live together before they got married, including my husband and me, and that includes lots of actively religious people, too. I said this earlier, but that was many posts back, so I'll just repeat that I'm actually a religious person, at least I try to be - I'm an elder in the Presbyterian Church USA.

But just because it's common doesn't mean I'm personally going to say that it's something everybody should do. There are benefits...and there are pitfalls. One way that is like marriage (note that "one way," John ;) ) is that how successful it is depends a lot on the effort you put into it - into how seriously both people take this step.

I can say one other definite thing: If it's against your beliefs, then you shouldn't do it. No good will come of having one person abandoning his/her morals for another person.
I only know one couple that only moved in together after they married, both of them had really religious parents and they are also very religious. Although guy's younger brother did live with his girlfriend for a long time despite his parent's not approving.
 
I can say one other definite thing: If it's against your beliefs, then you shouldn't do it. No good will come of having one person abandoning his/her morals for another person.

Indeed--that is VERY important.

A person's beliefs are so important to how they will lead their lives that I think in the majority of relationships, a fundamental belief change to be with that person is simply one bridge too far.

I've had that work both ways for me, as a Christian...in one case, I was considering asking one of my friends out.

As a little foreshadowing, I as a woman am much more comfortable when I am in the position to initiate the relationship than when a man does it. I do not like feeling pushed into things by men...now, if the right man asked, that MIGHT be a different scenario, provided they had allowed time for a good friendship to build and they were extremely respectful in how they asked. But overall, I will be honest and say that the way it plays out in my head, I do imagine being the one to "formally" initiate the relationship that leads to marriage.

Another peculiarity in my case is that I feel it is a VERY strong possibility that at some point in my life I will be called to become a minister. Whether I am married when that happens, or whether the ministry will be my only calling--I do not know. But that is definitely something that WOULD affect a relationship should I get into one.

So anyway, I was considering asking this guy out on a date, that I'd been spending a lot of time talking to and getting into some very good, deep general and theological conversations. I was really enjoying his conversation and personality AND finding him extremely attractive...so, I started thinking about it.

Then the topic of women in the church, in marriage, and so on came up. And oh boy did an ugly theory come out of this guy's mouth. Smart man, studying to be a doctor--but OH BOY that was the wrong button to push. And I knew right then and there that not only was dating not viable, but even the friendship wasn't going to last beyond that.

I did something then that some of you might find cruel, but I think that if you had been there you would have hopefully seen that I was not trying to really hurt this guy. I flat-out told him. I not only told him that I disagreed (and backed him into a pretty tight corner, logic-wise, that he was really starting to have problems getting out of), but I DID say I had been considering asking him out and that this would not work in light of his inability to accept me as an equal. I said the trust for that--and even for the continuance of a friendship--was gone if I could not know that I would not automatically be judged inferior on basis of gender.

I don't feel badly about this because like I said, I was not trying to hurt him. I delivered this in the same "logical conversation" tone that I had all of our other discussions. It is my hope that someday, if he hasn't already, he WILL find someone he can be happy with...but I hope that the experience is something that would convince him to rethink the way he was behaving and the way it came off to people so that he and his future wife could be more successful without one person having to dominate the other.

(Oh...and though this guy seemed to think he was better than me because he was male, my suspicion is that at that particular point, I intimidated the living hell out of him with what I did. In all seriousness I did NOT enjoy doing that, but I suspect that's how it would've been received immediately. Thinking on it would probably have come much later, in reflection.)


Now, completely in the reverse...another friend that I considered dating was someone whose company and sense of humor I really enjoyed--but what broke the deal for me was some of the rather contemptuous remarks he made about religious beliefs (I don't believe he realized I was a believer, at the time). Now, in his case I did not break the friendship, because he was not looking down on me the same way the other guy I mentioned was--he didn't see me as inherently inferior, just as someone with whom he disagreed (and after he eventually figured out that I did believe, he didn't make those remarks again, realizing it would be rude), but I did ditch the idea of asking him out.


But it does make me wonder, though...one reason I have not done a lot of dating is because I do tend to really take things in a logical manner as far as long-term relationships are concerned, and even when I am VERY attracted to someone, I give a lot of thought to how realistic the possibility of a relationship really is, whether we would be compatible in terms of beliefs and goals...and I don't even go through to the dating stage if I don't see sufficient reason that the relationship would last. I know that's a very rigorous scrutiny. But I know that however quiet I am, I AM a rather intense person and if the relationship would not withstand that intensity, there's no point in deluding anybody.
 
Anyway, reread Galactacus' posts. He *thinks* that the US has a closed perception toward people living together than the Europeans. In fact, it has become more and more common in this country.

Surely you are not saying that the views of the Trekbbs are reflective of society as a whole? Why don't you find me a poll that says that the majority of people are ok with never getting married and I will believe what you say. Until then I will go with the billion dollar industry that is weddings to say that most people probably think marriage is ok and get married.

You often speak about the US like it is on the verge of some great revolution where everything that you dislike about this society will suddenly be changed. I am sorry but I see a bunch of people either acting like they always have or worse.
 
I have to agree with Galactus: I do not think Star Trek fans are a representative sample of society in general. In most social areas, ST fans are likely to present a skewed sample. I think a breakdown of the numbers by country, as far as general populations, would be best at showing what the prevailing opinion is in each locale.
 
Kate, I just want to say that I think any conflicts (?) you might be having in this thread aren't really about opposing opinions. In fact, I think it's a good example of the fact that marriage, the paper, the act, whatever ... is more significant to some rather than others. It seems like you may place more significance on marriage itself than some of the people in this thread. But I want to highlight that the vast majority of people in this thread seem to place the same significance on commitment itself. It just appears to be taking different forms.

Sorry, I know that was random but it seemed like you felt the need to defend yourself and I really don't think you're much at odds here in the first place. :)

Also, who thinks I should print this thread and hand it out to my clients? :D
 
I don't think it's wrong for people to live together before getting married- it's just not for me. But I understand the reasons some people have for living together first, and I'm not offended or anything when they do. Sometimes it works for couples, other times it's a disaster, but that's how people learn.

Grew up in New York City and Colorado (I'm not counting the two years of hell I lived through in South Dakota!); brought up United Methodist and still am; religious but fairly liberal family. I was taught to keep my nose out of other people's business (unless they ask for my opinion or advice).
 
Of course it's okay for people to live together before they get married. It's also okay for:

1. People to live together in lieu of marriage
2. People to get married without ever living together
3. People entering into open marriages
4. People going from one casual relationship to another
5. People entering into exclusive group intimate relationships
6. People entering into non-exclusive group relationships
7. People living a life of celibacy

The responses in this thread make it very clear that people have very different ideas about intimate relationships. One size does NOT fit all. To each his and her own.

i Greater New Bedford, Massachusetts
ii Raised in a not very religious household. I'm atheist/agnostic.
iii Logic and secular sensibilities.
 
No one has been attacking and demeaning, just hey are anti-religious.

No, no they're not. Disagreeing with your personal religious beliefs which are not even shared by all Christians much less all the people of other religions or the non-religious does not make one anti-religious, and I'd appreciate it if you would not cry wolf on a problem that didn't exist in this thread until you brought it up.

Yes, there are people who make anti-religious comments on this board and in TNZ, and generally believe it or not the members themselves (religious or not) are pretty good at policing that behavior when it gets out of hand.

But just as often there are those who are looking for a problem where it doesn't yet exist and pre-judging others as a result, thus causing the very issues they had wanted to avoid many times. Please do not do so again.
 
1. Raised as Lutheran in rural South Australia
2. Weak, Practical Atheist
3. On social issues I'm personally conservative but ideologically radical. In many respects I think the institution of marriage is an anachronism hearkening back to the notion of folks (particularly women) as property. Certainly the legalisation of same-sex marriage and polygamy are the minimum advances required to salvage any semblance of civilization from this social relic.

Yeah, it's fine. It also strikes me as a good idea. Suit yourself, though.
 
Also, I do not think you have to LIVE with someone to get to see what they're like--at least, we wouldn't if our culture didn't insist on prim and proper behavior on dates all the time. When I dated, I got to see the full range of crazy behavior out of my boyfriend and out of his family, and that ultimately made it clear that no, I did NOT want to pursue it any further. Since there was nothing hidden, that was a really important thing.


That's debateable. There are people out there who are totally different once you move in with them. When people start dating, it's a 'first impressions' kinda thing. You know that farting and burping wont attract people to you so you act proper. Once people move in together and get comfortable with each other, their normal habits start coming out.


It's not the same for everyone because there are people out there who do act the way they normally do during the dating period but there are also a lot whom you really don't know truly until you move in together and see their normal self.
 
As a little foreshadowing, I as a woman am much more comfortable when I am in the position to initiate the relationship than when a man does it. I do not like feeling pushed into things by men...now, if the right man asked, that MIGHT be a different scenario, provided they had allowed time for a good friendship to build and they were extremely respectful in how they asked. But overall, I will be honest and say that the way it plays out in my head, I do imagine being the one to "formally" initiate the relationship that leads to marriage.

Clarify please.
 
Why don't you find me a poll that says that the majority of people are ok with never getting married and I will believe what you say.

Why would he provide a poll proving something he hasn't said? No-one has said the majority don't ever want to get married. Read the thread title - living together before getting married, not instead of.


Until then I will go with the billion dollar industry that is weddings to say that most people probably think marriage is ok and get married.

And a great many live together before that. Get over it.
 
Adults stumble over what to call their romantic partners

The need for just the right descriptor is a signal of the societal changes surrounding social identities, says linguistics professor Arnold Zwicky, a visiting professor at Stanford University.
According to the most recent Census data, 42% of U.S. residents — about 92 million Americans ages 18 and older — are unmarried. More than 30 million live alone, making up 27% of all households; that's up from 17% of all households in 1970.
And the number of unmarried opposite-sex couples who live together has also increased to 5 million cohabiting households.
"People are living longer. People are divorcing more. One member of a couple is alone after a spouse dies. People who might not have been on the sexual marketplace years ago now find themselves in it or choosing not to go into it," Zwicky says. "Now, it's an issue for a lot of people."

Couples study debunks 'trial marriage' notion of cohabiting

Most unmarried couples who live together aren't trying to test their relationship. They just want to spend more time together.
That finding, from a new national study of dating and cohabitation, seemingly contradicts the popular wisdom of cohabitation as a trial marriage. It's among early results from the study, scheduled to continue for years, and it gives researchers new insight into the burgeoning number of couples who cohabit.


Cohabitation has increased so rapidly that the data about it haven't kept pace with the growing numbers, researchers say. The latest U.S. Census for 2008 reported 13.6 million unmarried, heterosexual couples living together. Researchers say 50% to 60% of couples who marry today lived together first; some note that 70% of young adults will cohabit. Most couples who live together either marry or break up within two years.

Living together no longer 'playing house'

"There's been a sea change in societal, cultural and individual acceptance of cohabitation," says Pamela Smock, a sociologist at the Population Studies Center at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor. "A lot of the earlier studies were relying on data that may have been gathered in the late '80s and mid-'90s. We're talking about a moving target. The evidence is a lot more mixed."
CENSUS: More unmarried couples living together
Researchers say changing times have produced more extensive information about cohabiters and more sophisticated research methods.
Census data out today show 9.6% of all opposite-sex couples living together in 2007 were unmarried. "Cohabitation has become a common experience in people's lives," Smock says.
"The nature of cohabitation has changed," says Jay Teachman, a sociology professor at Western Washington University in Bellingham. "Cohabitators 20 years ago were the rule breakers, the rebels, the risk takers — the folks who were perhaps not as interested in marriage, and using cohabitation as an alternative to marriage."



"Twenty or 25 years ago, if you were cohabiting and then married them, the marriage was more likely to dissolve and end in divorce," he says. "Today, that's not the case. You can cohabit with your spouse and not experience increased risk of divorce. We're making these finer distinctions that we didn't make before."
Teachman's analysis of federal data on 6,577 women whose first marriages occurred between 1970 and 1995 found that a woman who has lived only with her future spouse has no greater risk of divorce. But for women who lived with someone else in addition to the eventual husband, there is a greater risk of divorce, found the study, published in 2003.
Unmarried-couple households boom


Americans in the 1990s continued a 30-year trend away from the traditional married-with-children model, a movement that gradually is rewriting the notion of family, U.S. Census Bureau data being released today show.
Households composed of unmarried partners became strikingly more common, growing by almost 72%, nearly five times as fast as the number of households overall. The number of Americans living alone grew almost twice as swiftly as the population, surpassing 27 ...
 
I knew i could count on you. The data I saw was different but I trust the census data more. No wonder half the country is losing their minds, their kids have gone crazy. Gay marriage and polygamy are just around the corner. You sir are correct and the tide is turning.
 
I lived with my wife before we were married.

I was raised in Oklahoma, pretty religious, not so much now, but enough that I felt compelled to hide the fact that I was "living in sin" from my parents. :lol: I just didn't want to hear about it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top