Supposedly, young adults don’t have much of an attention span ”” except when it comes to love.
That’s when it seems this generation of young people is giving new meaning to the words “long-term relationship.” Many are “a couple” for years, and some approach a decade of dating. They’re just shy of the altar for so long that parents and grandparents are a bit bewildered.
“It’s good to get to know your partner before marrying, but one wonders how long you need?” says sociologist Andrew Cherlin, 61, of Johns Hopkins University.
Why should 2 or more people living together in long term committed relationships (or simply living together for that matter) be denied the privileges and benefits of marriage or civil partnerships?
Br. Michael – privileges/benefits of marriage are, historically, granted by society in recognition of the benefits marriage accrues to society. Traditionally, that was children. Children are quite often born out of wedlock (such an interesting term!) and raised that way now. So one might, indeed, argue that society doesn’t accrue unique benefit from marriage now; therefore, in that argument, the benefits/privileges ought to accrue to all or to none.
However, data remains clear that children whose parents are married are more likely to ‘succeed’, to not live in poverty, etc. I would therefore argue the benefits/privileges should continue to accrue to married couples and not to those who live in long-term relationships who decline to formalize them with a contract and public ceremony.
This, of course, leaves off the miserable failure of many in our culture to remain married – which, data shows, also exposes the children to much higher likelihood of poverty.
“Supposedly, young adults don’t have much of an attention span — except when it comes to love.”
True, self-giving love brooks no shadow of possible separation, true love longs for complete unity instead of staving it off for as long as possible.
“True, self-giving love brooks no shadow of possible separation, true love longs for complete unity instead of staving it off for as long as possible.”
Thanks St Jimbob. Both you and the pharisee. Paragons of true love. It is this type of one-sided self-adulation that keeps most people from church. You see their sins. They see your hypocrisy and want no part of it. I really don’t blame them.
#4, not sure where you’re coming from in your attack on St. Jimbob’s comment. Nothing there to indicate hypocracy or self-adulation.
I’m sure that Br. Michael’s question is more rhetorical or heuristic than hostile. But that question indeed is a common one in our time, given the enormous growth of cohabitation, and not just among young people.
Did you see how Harrison Ford finally got married to Calista Flockhart recently? After living together for SEVEN years!! And he’s 67 and she’s something like 45. So this dangerous (even alarming) social phenomenon is not limited to the youngest generation.
But let’s face it. It’s not the length of time spent in dating that’s problematic here, but the practice of sexual intimacy outside of marriage. And the most troubling aspect of that is that today an astounding and deplorable 40% of American babies are born outside of wedlock. And among blacks/African Americans, it’s around 2/3. That is simply catastrophic.
The median age at which women marry for the first time has reached a record high in the US, at age 26. My own daughter is one of those women driving that number higher; she’s 28 and single, but determined to find a Christian mate who is spiritually compatible. And she proudly wears the virginity ring her mother and I gave her when she was a teenager and that she will someday hand to her husband in exchange for her wedding ring.
I’ve just come back from a weekend trip to watch a beloved goddaugher get married. She’s 31. He’s 33. Both are earnest, committed Christians. And both stayed sexually pure til their wedding day. It does happen, even in these sexually obsessed and permissive times. But alas, they are very much a minority. Even in the Church.
David Handy+
Good for your daughter, Rev Handy. Studies show that people who get married later stay married and are happier married. One-size-fits all solutions are incredibly unwise, and because someone is cautious in coosing their mate in no way indicates that that person will love less or be less committed.
The answerto #1’s question is more questions: If those simply shacked up can be married, what will this do to the definition of marriage? Is this what we want? If they are permitted civil benefits, then to whom can the same civil benefits be denied – or can they be denied to no one?
Larry
My apologies, Mr. Martyr, if I offended you with my terse and ham-fisted scoffing at the article’s use of the term “love”. Allow me to expound:
Today’s social approach to mating and marriage is precisely backwards from a proper christian courtship and marriage. The modern practice is to share a bed first, and then if that’s satisfactory, share a flat. Should that go well enough, eventually the participants may find the motivation to make a spiritual and civil covenant to stay together, prenuptial agreements not withstanding.
The christian approach to marriage, after a chaste courtship,is a mirror image of society’s: a spiritual and civil commitment is made FIRST, the couple set up housekeeping, and then they enjoy the physical and spiritual fruits of sexual relations.
Where does love come in? Love is the giving of the entire self, without reservations, and without boundaries. Calling cohabitation “love” is really a misnomer. It’s more like “guarded affection” and is influenced by gratification, both spiritually and emotionally. Most cohabitations that I’ve witnessed have not ended in marriage, but usually dissolved as the participants grew apart. They grew apart because they never gave each other wholly to each other.
There is a big difference between “Here is my life, and everything that comes with it; ring, keys, and bed” and “Here’s the bed, okay that was cool, here’s a key, okay, I can tolerate this, and here, if you insist, is a ring.”
Are you against sexual relations outside of marriage or long dating relationships where couples look realistically at the consequences of spending a life together?
The two seem to me to be very different issues. Also, both sexually active and sexually abstinent people fall in love and make life-long commitments. Both groups also divorce and cheat on their spouses.