While it might be used by some as an excuse for casual sex or to ironically put off deeper commitment, cohabitation is a way for unmarried (in the legal sense) romantic partners to become more familiar with each other in wholly nonsexual ways, to express daily respect and love for each other, and to see how a lifelong relationship would look for individuals with their personalities. Leaping into cohabitation without at least learning of a person's valid worldview and their psychological compatibility as a partner is certainly asinine. This is absolutely true. At the same time, living with one's romantic partner if the shared bond and one's circumstances permit it has its objective advantages that are there for rational and sincere partners.
There is more of a chance for any subjective annoyances, personality conflicts, or even worldview divergences to come up for people who need lots of regular time together to open up. Yes, all of these things can be pinpointed entirely apart from cohabitation, and some of them would have to already be brought up for cohabitation to even be rational, yet living together before legal marriage--which can be the same as living together in sincere, lifelong commitment for rational, morally valid reasons--makes it more likely that a partner will not postpone bringing up important problems in the relationship or that he or she will not remain silent about important ideological or personality details. Seeing what daily, informal life would be like together could accelerate their willingness to communicate things that they might otherwise be content to leave to the side indefinitely or for a time.
This is the greatest benefit that cohabitation in particular allows for: things that a couple might be more likely to otherwise forget about or not bring up could come to mutual attention sooner or with greater frequency. Bonding that could occur in a more staggered manner outside of cohabitation could also be quickened. Saving time on deepening a holistic connection, each member of a couple living together could realize more swiftly if a lifelong relationship based on rationality, mutuality, transparency, and affection can be sustainably enjoyed with their partner. Cohabitation could be misused like anything else, but it does not lack pragmatically beneficial aspects that are there for any willing partners living together to receive.
All of these potential benefits of cohabitation, though, are not what makes it Biblically permissible. It does not contradict God's moral nature and thus is neither condemned directly or by logical extension of other commands, making it objectively nonsinful for everyone who does not use it as an opportunity to practice something else that is immoral (Deuteronomy 4:2). There is far more to cohabitation as a philosophical issue than whether people will have sex, which is decided by them and not in any way by their living situation, and which is not necessarily sinful to begin with (Exodus 22:16-17 opposes noncommittal sex, not sex before legal marriage, which is inherently a social construct unlike whatever moral obligations exist). A rationalistic, righteous couple could have much to gain from living together, even if only the joy of celebrating the bond that they had already cultivated outside of cohabitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment