Comments about ‘Marriage gap grows; cohabiting becoming 'new norm'’

Thanks Lois for this well documented and reasoned article about an issue imprtant to us all. For those of us who believe in the instition of marriage and have benefited with overwhelming happiness it is hard for us to understand why someone wouldn't want that same thing in their own lives. We understand that with a commitment in our lives comes a measure of stability that can be a great comfort when trying times enter our lives.

Certainly there are those who live responsible lives outside the bonds of marriage and their own sense of values is not compromised. My son served a mission for the LDS church in Brazil and has often commented that for many families about to be baprized, their first order of business was to get the parents legally married. Many had lived together for long periods of time. had raised children in loving homes but never took the step to become legally married. Some would argue that what is most important is love and commitment between family members

I would agree with that but I personally feel that a commitment of marriage is the outward measure of that love and commitment. Thanks again Lois.

Get married.
But, at least living together there halfway there.
To me the issue with lota of people, is selfishniess, from not having kids. Makes them selfish people.
But, of course some folks cant have a child.
And of course some shoild never.

Cohabiting was never a consideration for my wife and I. We married nearly 36 years ago. We have worked through the array of disagreements that have come along, we have altered some of our spending habits, we have compromised on some of our desires, we have surrendered some of our idiosyncrasies, and we have made an effort to make our marriage work. As a result, we are more in love today than ever before. We can't stand to be apart. We do things for each other without being asked. We look after each other. We enjoy complimenting each other. We travel together. We still find a time to "go out" at least once a week if I am in town. And I make it a point to try to be in town more now than I used too.

My years of considerable business travel were years of the most difficulties we have had to work through, but our mutual dedication to our marriage got us through. We are now looking forward to retirement and have plans to spend even more time together doing service for others side-by-side.

We love marriage and highly recommend it to others.

Just who is it that is destroying the "sacred institution" of marriage again?

I've read many articles reporting on research that shows children are most likely to stay off drugs, stay in school and have successful adult lives if they grow up in a home with both parents and the parents are married. To me, cohabiting is wrong, but for those who approve of it, please think of the outcome for children involved. Children most at risk, according to statistics, are those living with an unmarried mom and her boyfriend. Anyone who ignores the welfare of children is also not concerned for the future of our local communities and our country as a whole.

Tragic. My nephew's daughter has been cohabiting without marriage and has a 2 year old daughter. I wonder if it has any connection with the fact that my nephew got his girlfriend pregnant before he got married.

My best friend's grand daughter has been cohabitating for a few years and now has 4 month old child. She told my friend that married people just fight and she is happier living with her boy friend without marriage.

More than one prophet has warned and forewarned us about the disintegration of the family and Pres. Hinckley clearly warned us to get our finances in order years before the current great recession.

Weddings have become increasingly ostentatious, as couples seek for visibly meaningful transitions from co-habitation to marriage. Unfortunately, the LDS community has followed suit. I find it tragic, especially in this economy, to see how much money people will waste on one day's stress-filled "celebration," when they would do better to spend their money on the newly-formed family, if they have it to spend, as most do not. Unlike other faiths, a temple marriage doesn't cost anything. Our daughter was married in the $150 simple, white dress that served in both temple ceremony and pictures / reception -- it is unnecessary to embellish the beauty of a worthy bride who has just been sealed for eternity to the worthy man that she loves. Why do so many young girls opt for garishly encrusted dresses, with a train, when there is no aisle in the temple? Ever see a poor bride wrestle her big dress in a small, sealing room? Not exactly graceful. No need for bridesmaids or groomsmen. $$$ The day is about the couple. A simple celebration is an opportunity for both sides of the family to meet and show their support.

So many narrow minded comments here. But there is hope, the USA has Chuck Norris.

I've never understood co-habitation without marriage. If you love someone, you get married. If you don't love them enough to committ to them, you have no business living with them. It's tragic for everyone--especially the children. It's so weird that people are willing to committ to children but not to each other.

"Playing House" destroys people spiritually and morally.....and it doesn't save any heartbreak when they break up. They are then left with a broken heart and a lot of assets to split up with none of the legal protections a marriage certificate provides. In addition, the statistics I have seen indicate that those who live together before marriage have a higher divorce rate--It's pretty hard to fix problems in the relationship when you're afraid your partner might run out the door at any time.

This is just another sign of how our society is ready go over the cliff. It's really scary!

There is another new trend re trial runs, although I don't know how prevalent it is. I know several singles whose Bishops advised them to have a civil ceremony first and wait the year for a temple marriage. I see this to be pretty similar (although at least the couple are married). I think that Bishops know when a couple hasn't spent the time they should have in getting to know each other before marriage. This is one of the reasons the divorce rate is so high.

"But, the structure of family they embraced and expected â meet, date, marry â is becoming far less certain as American couples increasingly choose to live together, instead. What that will mean for marriage as an institution and for families is a book not yet written."

==================

Actually, as many of the later-reference studies show, the "book" detailing what this will mean has been written many times. Unfortunately, the story is not a pleasant one.

I mourn for our nation and world. We're in for some very sad times because of this sign of the continuing dissolution of the family.

as any structured society must rely upon relevant codification and restrictions of a set of tradition and rules, marriage is one of those structures. it is shared among those who align themsleves with others who also accept, and ultimately use, that acceptance as a strengthening bond among a greater set of people.

love itself is not bounded by marriage rules, only limited. many couples love each other intimately, yet love many others non-intimately, but the concept is clear, marriage ensures a secure psychological enclosure for an intimate and trustworthy relationship. we all can love many people, enduring tremendous acrimony from those few who cannot separate the sexual component from the relationship they imagine is occurring. we love our children, but we do not sexualize them as we would a sexual partner.

the trend to cohabit is perhaps founded on many basic problems, most often an unsecured financial foundation or simply the need to be close without complete disclosure to another. there are secrets and there are secrets that some others cannot forgive. life is not as simple as it was, our society is far much more complex today than 100 years ago.

This is one more step in the disintegration of one of the foundational institutions of our society!It blurs the line between a committed marriage and casual sex. The main argument that can be made for being able to jump into bed with somebody after one or two dates is short term pleasure. Every other argument (including, physical and emotional health, morality , the good of society and long term satisfaction) favors reserving sex for marriage as God intended it to be!

Marriage is hard work.

I know Americans think they are the hardest workers in the world but it's not true. The fact that so many people are not committing to marriage is a sign of our laziness.

Philosophically people may feel they are as good as married by the way they treat each other if they live together happily and functionally for many years, but be aware that legally they are not married in many states.

This was a painful revelation for a couple I knew. She and her man had a joyful, supportive relationship for over 15 years. He contracted cancer and she caregave him and supported him through the terrible two years before he died. On his deathbead he wrote his wishes concerning what would happen to her, but his estranged daughter entered into the picture, went to court, and the woman was left with nothing.

The woman had thought that since they had cohabited for over 10 years she was as good as his wife, in a legal sense.

Ironically, 3 years later she met a man, they fell in love and she married him without cohabiting.

Lesson learned the hard way.

There is no incentive to marry. With the punitive punishment for divorce (financial devastation) why would anyone really want to take the risk when you can have the same benefits?? After all marriage is only a piece of paper saying the state recognizes your union...

Red | 8:46 a.m. Dec. 5, 2011
Marriage is hard work.
"I know Americans think they are the hardest workers in the world but it's not true. The fact that so many people are not committing to marriage is a sign of our laziness."

Agreed. It is also a sign of our selfishness!

'Marriage is declining in all groups, but it's still ultimately the norm for those with a college education and good income. Not so for those who are poor. They are "as likely as others to want to marry, but they place a higher premium on economic security as a condition for marriage." Lacking that security, fewer marry.'

And we bemoan the growing gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots.' There is a reason they call conventional wisdom conventional.

I don't think it is anyones business to say whether a couple should get married or not. It is their decision. If they want to, great. If they don't, great. If they have kids, the responsibility to raise the children does not change if they are married or not. There are plenty of good kids that come from a situation like this and there are plenty of bad kids that come from married couples. The real focus of this issue, and most other social issues, is the growing income gap between the have's and have nots. The wider it gets, the worse off society is.

So let me get this straight. Research shows more and more couples are avoiding marriage and instead cohabiting, and all the prudes can come up with is lectures about how lazy, unrighteous, and evil those people are?

Are you seriously trying to SHAME or BROW BEAT them into marriage?

Why not extol the virtues and joys of marriage? Why not SELL people on how wonderful, valuable, enjoyable, and beneficial marriage is? Why not allow any and all couples who see the value of marriage to obtain it (even if they are of the same sex)?

Youth today see this as hypocrisy: the "conservative" and "religious" element of society is at the same time denying marriage to millions who want it, but then decrying how evil and lazy are those who don't want marriage.

Huh? Do you listen to yourselves? Why would any young couple listen to your convoluted nonsense about marriage?