The Instigator
tmar19652
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Cohabilitation offers more benefits to men than Marraige

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,243 times Debate No: 28284
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (5)

 

tmar19652

Pro

I feel that cohabilitation offers more benefits to men than marriage.
Just to define terms, cohabilitation refers to a dating couple living together and marriage is the legal bond between a male and a female. (Please do not interpret this as me putting down gay couples)

Good luck
Ore_Ele

Con

I thank my opponent for challenging me on this topic and I gladly accept. I will allow my opponent to start and present their argument for cohabitation over marriage. I am taking this debate in good faith that this is not a semantic gotchya and that we can debate on the basic understandings of the words of the resolution.

Thank you and good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
tmar19652

Pro

Thank you for accepting the debate
1.First, in the United States the median income of full time year-round workers was $42,800 for men, compared to $34,700 for women in 2010. Why would an average man want to get married to an average woman if he made more money? He could simply live together with that woman and maintain his financial status were things to fail in their relationship. If he were married, he would have to split his assets with the woman and likely, because he made more money, he would pay alimony to her for a period of time. So not only could he lose years of wealth, but essentially have his income garnished by alimony for years to come
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women in the Labor Force: A Databook, December 2011 Report 1034 (accessed 4 July 2012)

2.Secondly, federal tax laws favor unmarried taxpayers in several cases. Why would a man not only risk paying alimony and losing assets If he can stay unmarried and still pay lower tax rates.
Source: http://www.thedailybeast.com...

3.Also there is no evidence that marriage provides a better environment to raise a child. What"s more is that a stable co-habitation situation is far better for a child than an unhappy marriage. The heartache, pain, stress and psychological disturbance of a child when their parents break up is not due to the breakdown of marriage but the breakdown of a relationship. Whereas the married couple may become abusive during the process of a divorce, a co-habitation is legally a much easier institution to break down, reducing the duration of stress placed on a child in that situation.

4.Also A new study, published in the Journal of Marriage and Family, finds that marriage provides few additional benefits compared to couples living together. The researchers were quoted as saying: "We found that differences between marriage and cohabitation tend to be small and dissipate after a honeymoon period. In addition, while married couples experienced health gains " likely linked to the formal benefits of marriage such as shared health care plans " cohabiting couples experienced greater gains in happiness and self-esteem.

5.Also, the divorce rate in the united states is around 50%. With estimates for the cost of a divorce ranging from $5000-$15000, why would a man want to get married if he risks losing this much money upon the events of a divorce.

Age at marriage for those who divorce in America (2011)
Age Women Men
Under 20 years old27.6%11.7%
20 to 24 years old36.6%38.8%
25 to 29 years old16.4%22.3%
30 to 34 years old8.5% 11.6%
35 to 39 years old5.1% 6.5%

The divorce rate in America for first marriage, Vs second or third marriage
50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:
"The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
"The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
"The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%
Source: http://www.divorcerate.org...

6.So if a man can enjoy all of the benefits of marriage with a cohabitation, why would he not take advantage of that? He lessens his risk of financial loss, lowers his tax rate in some cases, and provides a stable environment to raise a child. Moreover, he has much more societal mobility if the relationship dies, and is not tied down by alimony payments.

With that, I pass the figurative ball to con, and good luck.
Ore_Ele

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for their argument. I will first refute my opponent's case before presenting my own.

== PRO'S CASE ==

1) My opponent brings up the need, if both people are average income earners for their gender. First of all, this is a bad assumption to make, as while there is an average, most couples will not fall into that average. For example, the average male height in the US is 5'10" [1], but only a small percentage are actually at that height. Of course, even if we accept this completely average couple, being married would save $720 annually on federal income taxes [2] alone (state taxes will, of course, vary from state to state). And the further their incomes are apart, the greater the savings. This will be addressed in more depth in my arguments.

2) My opponent says "federal tax laws favor unmarried taxpayers in several cases." However, his source does not back this up. While his source does "say" this same thing, it does not offer a single tax advantage, nor source its claim. I will go on to show in my case that taxes actually benefit the married.

3) Here, my opponent dives into the raising of a child. This entire argument is not supported by facts, nor honest logic. The first issue that we see is a straw man fallacy. In this debate, we are comparing marriage vs cohabitation. To honestly do that, we need to remove alternative factors and variables. As such, to compare for a child, we must assume that the couple raising the child is the same. In the same situation, same degree of love and care, same everything, other than the marriage certificate. This is not what my opponent does, but rather say that a loving cohab is better than a hateful marriage and that is evidence for the cohab.

What is important to raising children is not a piece of paper that says "married," but rather the relationship that the two adults have, and that relationship being strong and staying together. The problem with cohab on this front is that they are three times more likely to break up before a child turns 5 than a marriage (1 in 3 cohab will break up before the child is 5, compared to 1 in 10 marriages [3]). This will be readdressed in my arguments.

4) This section simply says that there is no difference and does not suggest that one is better than the other. Since it is not supporting my opponent, I will save space.

5) The divorce section has some issues of concern that must be addressed. First of all, divorce can cost next to nothing. It entirely depends on how well each party can agree to divide their assets before going to the courts. Uncontested divorces make up about 95% of divorces in the US [4] and is the cheapest form, because there is no legal fighting. My opponent also fails to realize there can be legal expenses with cohab break ups. If living in apartments, both will have to be on the lease (a legally binding contract). If they are living in a home, they are likely both on the loan (since that will show more income to provide a better, cheaper rate), or if one is making enough money for all of that, then you can refer back to the tax advantages which only get better for marriage the greater the income gap.

Contracts that need to be gone over in the case of a break up can go all the way down to family plan cell phone plans.

== CON'S CASE ==

1) Taxes

This is simply and straight forward. Marriage provides tax breaks that can add up the massive amounts over the years, especially if the two are making a significantly different amount of income. In the example that my opponent provided of average incomes, a $8,100 difference resulted in $720 difference for federal income tax (9% of the difference). If the guy is making an extra $7,500 and the girl is making $7,500 less (so they still have the same combined pay), then you are looking at a $1470 difference in the federal taxes alone [2].

2) Prenuptials

Since the US currently recognizes most prenupts (within reason) [5], any concern regarding alimony, child support, losing half of your stuff (though it never was "your" stuff, they paid for part of it if they were working, as our averages are) can easily be prevented.

3) Access

My opponent uses an example of two working adults making average money. While they may have the option of cohab vs marriage, cohab is not as logically for many others. In cases with a single working person, with someone living with them (or someone working just part time), one person may not be able to be independent at the drop of a hat (we can also turn back to how massive the tax benefits are when incomes vary widely), and since cohabitations break up far more often, they present greater risk and uncertainty for someone, which leaves them more susceptible to leveraged bargaining.

In summary, it is simply that with the advantages of federal tax breaks for all not making the exact same dollar amount (99.997% of couples) added with the fact that a simple prenuptial can prevent most of the legal issues and cost with a less likely break up, marriage is the better option for the vast majority of Americans, both average and not so average.

Thank you

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://www.paycheckcity.com...
[3] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
tmar19652

Pro

I feel that I am fighting a losing battle now that I see that I see both sides. Both marriage and cohabitation have their merits, but I concede to con.
Ore_Ele

Con

I thank my opponent for their opening argument, and their personal honesty in changing their opinion on a topic. I do hope to see them stick around in debates and in the forums for a long time to come so that they can continue to grow and help others grow.

Thank you,
Debate Round No. 3
tmar19652

Pro

Thanks ore_ele and hopefully the voters read the whole debate not just the top.
Ore_Ele

Con

I will allow this to go to voting.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by DoctorDeku 3 years ago
DoctorDeku
Con, I would be willing to try my hand at debating this resolution with you. If you're interested send me a PM.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
Well, kudos to PRO for forfeiting in person, but it's still a forfeit.

Probably would have been better to post something like this up in the forums first.
Posted by tmar19652 3 years ago
tmar19652
OK I will
Posted by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
Extend voting to 2 weeks or more and I'll accept (I'd also prefer to have the character count at 8,000 but that is less important).
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
tmar19652Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a nice debate. Pro appropriately conceded & thus pro gets conduct & con gets MCA.
Vote Placed by DoctorDeku 3 years ago
DoctorDeku
tmar19652Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit. At least Pro admitted defeat instead of just letting himself time-out.
Vote Placed by rross 3 years ago
rross
tmar19652Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded
Vote Placed by Maikuru 3 years ago
Maikuru
tmar19652Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
tmar19652Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: see comment