Formal Debate Peanut Gallery thread - Unmarried Co-Habitation is Morally Wrong ...

[keith99]

So it's morally wrong for a brother and sister to live together to save on rent?

Does living in a co-ed dorm count as cohabitation? If not what is so different about 8 people in a wing of a dorm and 8 people chipping in to rent a house?

 

[ananda]

Does living in a co-ed dorm count as cohabitation? If not what is so different about 8 people in a wing of a dorm and 8 people chipping in to rent a house?

Nothing at all! But don't tell the fundamentalists

 

[essentialsaltes]

When cohabiting, "the woman knows she better be on her best behavior (sexually and emotionally) in order to keep her male Partner interested in her for the long run ; she must use all of her feminine wiles including sex galore, cooking his favorite meals, catering to his otherwise bad habits, and the comfort of providing a dwelling suitable to his tastes."

I'll try to briefly set aside how appalled I am, and just wonder... how would marriage be any different, if this is really what sexual politics boils down to?

I suppose given this view of the war between the sexes, we are supposed to cheer the woman for trapping the man into a marriage. Now that she can depend upon his manly wage-earning powers, she doesn't have to do anything. And he'll have to pay dearly if he wants out.

 

[Ana the Ist]

When cohabiting, "the woman knows she better be on her best behavior (sexually and emotionally) in order to keep her male Partner interested in her for the long run ; she must use all of her feminine wiles including sex galore, cooking his favorite meals, catering to his otherwise bad habits, and the comfort of providing a dwelling suitable to his tastes."

I'll try to briefly set aside how appalled I am, and just wonder... how would marriage be any different, if this is really what sexual politics boils down to?

I suppose given this view of the war between the sexes, we are supposed to cheer the woman for trapping the man into a marriage. Now that she can depend upon his manly wage-earning powers, she doesn't have to do anything. And he'll have to pay dearly if he wants out.

I'm just glad he copped to point 8. He thinks he knows better than you about your life.

That always wins the audience lol.

 

[KitKatMatt]

Apparently, all a woman boils down to is a sex object for her partner, in addition to being able to cook and do housework. So she better behave right, so he doesn't get bored and go after someone else?

Yuck, that's gross.

Marriage for a person who thinks like this must truly be a terrible thing.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Apparently, all a woman boils down to is a sex object for her partner, in addition to being able to cook and do housework. So she better behave right, so he doesn't get bored and go after someone else?

Yuck, that's gross.

Marriage for a person who thinks like this must truly be a terrible thing.

Well apparently...that's why she needs to financially rope a guy in. I wonder how marriages survived before alimony?

 

[Bluelion]

I am a Christians saved by Jesus and I lived with my wife before marriage the pastor tried to tell me to kick her out on the street and would not do it. Tell me is that right? Hey what do you know I found something in common with an Atheist.

Is it wrong yes, but Jesus said even looking at a woman with lust is adultery, now everyone has done that, So how is it the moral high ground is taken here? Its hypocritical. Sex before marriage is a sin, yes, you know many many people are having sex before marriage with out living together in fact it maybe worse. I was refused baptism because I was not married to my wife yet and we lived together. Just what gives a church a right to say that? Is the church saying I must be sin free before baptism? then no one would ever be baptized ever. How hypocritical and convenient you pick out which law you are going to obey and which sin you will renounce and which sin you will do while claim moral superiority in God's name. WHat a joke.

 

[Gabbleduck]

Well that's the second debate I've looked at, are they all this bad?

Making your opponent go first so they don't have last right of reply to your argument, holding off some of your argument until later so they have less chance to reply "I'm saving these humdingers for the next post...", using outdated statistics (or none, the rock and roll debate I viewed first didn't even have any attempt to pull in facts).
Linking whole other sites and saying "go do you research there" instead of actually condense the arguments into your own words?

I'm guessing TCMD wasn't on the debate team at school. I've never seen someone lose a debate so woefully.

 

[Gabbleduck]

I am a Christians saved by Jesus and I lived with my wife before marriage the pastor tried to tell me to kick her out on the street and would not do it. Tell me is that right? Hey what do you know I found something in common with an Atheist.

Is it wrong yes, but Jesus said even looking at a woman with lust is adultery, now everyone has done that, So how is it the moral high ground is taken here? Its hypocritical. Sex before marriage is a sin, yes, you know many many people are having sex before marriage with out living together in fact it maybe worse. I was refused baptism because I was not married to my wife yet and we lived together. Just what gives a church a right to say that? Is the church saying I must be sin free before baptism? then no one would ever be baptized ever. How hypocritical and convenient you pick out which law you are going to obey and which sin you will renounce and which sin you will do while claim moral superiority in God's name. WHat a joke.

-------------------

Congratulations Bluelion, for not just taking the moral approach to a situation despite what must have been some intense pressure, but for aso showing that your innate, internal morals are more, well, moral than those professed by your church and the bible.

 

[TerryWoodenpic]

One would have to believe that there is a universal moral standard set by only religious people to believe that. Which is clearly not rhe case. Many people have no trouble accepting cohabiting people as moral at all. In many instances religious and social morals coincide, but not often when they concern relationships and sex. When there is a dispute, the law usually comes down on the side of the civil standard

 

[TerryWoodenpic]

Nothing at all! But don't tell the fundamentalists

Next academic year my grand daughter, who is a law student, will likely share a house with some fellow law students, some of which are male. At least that is the plan, as they are setting up a study group.
There is no plan for any of them to pair off. The biggest problem will be them maintaining her very high standards of cleanliness and hygiene. And her ability to wither you with a sigle look if she disapproves.

 

[bhsmte]

Well I'm against making it illegal but I'm not in favor of promoting it as healthy

And the good news is, you don't have to do it yourself.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well that's the second debate I've looked at, are they all this bad?

Making your opponent go first so they don't have last right of reply to your argument, holding off some of your argument until later so they have less chance to reply "I'm saving these humdingers for the next post...", using outdated statistics (or none, the rock and roll debate I viewed first didn't even have any attempt to pull in facts).
Linking whole other sites and saying "go do you research there" instead of actually condense the arguments into your own words?

I'm guessing TCMD wasn't on the debate team at school. I've never seen someone lose a debate so woefully.

There's actually one I was in that was far worse...where I was required to go first, then my opponent didn't say anything substantive until the final post.

The people who were interested in "debating" topics way back when these threads were opened...weren't actually interested in debate. They wanted to make their arguments look stronger by "beating" other arguments...which they could only do by getting in the last word. They figured as long as no one could respond, they would be the victor, which in itself is an argument for why their arguments are terrible.

It was either after this "debate" or the one I mentioned where I decided that if the person who wants to debate a topic wants the other person to go first...they aren't worth debating.