Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

I'm sure it is emotionally, socially, etc. but you are not gaining the financial and legal benefits you get with marriage. That's why gays have fought to get the right to marry.

And for some those benefits are not worth it to them.

We lived together for 19yrs until we decided we wanted a kid. Been married for 8 yrs now. Kid is 7. Call us old fashion but we wanted to be married if we have a child.

Anonymous wrote:My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

Lovely for you, but the OP asked what's bad about it. And she has gotten some very reasonable answers.

Anonymous wrote:My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

I'm sure it is emotionally, socially, etc. but you are not gaining the financial and legal benefits you get with marriage. That's why gays have fought to get the right to marry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

Well, not *any* marriage. My marriage is better than your relationship, for example.

To you, it is. My relationship is better than your marriage, to me.

Anonymous wrote:My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

Well, not *any* marriage. My marriage is better than your relationship, for example.

My longterm relationship is just as committed, fulfilling and important as any marriage.

Anonymous wrote:I'm wondering what reality some of you people are living in to believe it's harder to break up than be granted a divorce?? That's insane. Not to mention, divorce costs money.

If you buy a house together and you're putting money towards it, then your name will be on it. If you're renting some place, it's not like you have equity in it, so it doesn't matter.

What other legal protections are you all talking about that are different if you're unmarried?? Custody/visitation is the same.

I interpreted the comments to be that some people too easily move in together and get stuck in a relationship that they decide they don't want long term. It's easier to break up with someone if you don't have to split a household.

Once you're committed long term, then houses and kids can be managed just fine, as you note.

Anonymous wrote:I'm wondering what reality some of you people are living in to believe it's harder to break up than be granted a divorce?? That's insane. Not to mention, divorce costs money.

If you buy a house together and you're putting money towards it, then your name will be on it. If you're renting some place, it's not like you have equity in it, so it doesn't matter.

What other legal protections are you all talking about that are different if you're unmarried?? Custody/visitation is the same.

Marriage allows you to title a house joint tenants in the entirety. Unmarried people can only title it tenants in common. Tenants in the entirety provides more legal protection if one spouse is sued for anything, like a car accident.

Social security survivors benefits for spouse or parent of minor child. But not for live-in partner. Same with Medicare and Veterans benefits.

No estate tax for married couples.

Entitlement to FMLA for spouse, not partner.

Continuation coverage for health insurance for spouse, but not partner, under COBRA.

Inheritance rights outlined in law for surviving spouse, without need for a will.

It's harder to break up relative to a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship where you are not living together.

Legal protections are largely about splitting up assets. Some states are community property, others are not. That can affect how much money each parent gets, and that can affect the children's well-being. Also, getting Social Security benefits based on the ex's work record only happens if you're married. There can also be an order giving a share of the pension. Basically, the economically weaker partner gets a much better deal if they marry.

I probably wouldn't have gotten married had I not been living with my spouse for a few years. Hindsight is 20/20.

I'm wondering what reality some of you people are living in to believe it's harder to break up than be granted a divorce?? That's insane. Not to mention, divorce costs money.

If you buy a house together and you're putting money towards it, then your name will be on it. If you're renting some place, it's not like you have equity in it, so it doesn't matter.

What other legal protections are you all talking about that are different if you're unmarried?? Custody/visitation is the same.

Anonymous wrote:The biggest issue I see is that if/when it goes south, you basically go through a divorce but without legal protections and the emotional recognition. If you are very young I feel like you are putting too much on the line by living together. (The older/wiser you get, the more savvy you become about everything.)

Yes, the issue isn't sin. I couldn't care less about two people shacking up without the benefit of marriage. The issue is whether it's a wise choice given the difficulty of breaking up as well as the possibility that a so-so relationship is going to become a permanent one just because it's too big of a hassle to move out.

"Two people joined together can best care for children...."

Explain how a ring/certificate makes you a better parent?

why buy the cow