The Instigator
mall
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
jkdufu
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

The studies of cohabitation being valid as showing in negative favor for couples to sustain

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/16/2016 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 222 times Debate No: 91306
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

mall

Con

Let's talk about it. We can ask questions, get some answers , shed more like on the subject.
jkdufu

Pro

So this I an interesting article about the subject on UVA professor Brad Wilcox's research.
https://live.washingtonpost.com...
Debate Round No. 1
mall

Con

Ok now that article really had little to do with the topic statement . This is not about the kids position in the situation. The article is barely substantiating on why or how cohabitation leads to dissolution of monogamous affairs . Other than it continues to state that couples tend to do this and that . Couples tend to be this and that. No real confirmation there at all at least in general ,let alone the pairs that defy any and everything in the post when comes to stability . That's what continues to be recycled is the term stability/instability , commitment, insecurity, unfaithfulness (paraphrased). Somehow that's supposed to be a factor to explain the downsides compared the married couples . Also it was mentioned how there's lesser income, education, etc. which fails to tie into the loss of sustainability of a couple but explaining adverse affects onto the children.

1. Do you think that cohabitation before marriage is more detrimental to the man and woman's relationship versus being married first ? (Yes or no and why)

2. Is a survey an adequate attempt to figure , understand , measure and confirm the nature of cohabiting couples/married couples in general ? (Yes or no and why)

3. What is the difference between cohabitants and spouses besides the condition in which they live?
jkdufu

Pro

jkdufu forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
mall

Con

So to these studies and surveys that make the claim that cohabitation is more of a negative effect on unwed couples vs wed couples , I don't find adequate reasoning in them. The thing with this all is that no matter how much research is done, this does not conclude the condition of every single couple . Which I believe most would agree. That's the insubstantiality for any statistic . Statistics are only reading what statistians are aware of or particular regions that have been surveyed by chance . Any statistic for a specific crime , illness and or disease is only as high or low a number as to what has been reported . Secondly , when these "studies" are put forth , at least for myself have never understood what is the cause for the negative result . I believe all I get is that couples tend to do this or that but what is the reasoning behind the "tending " part? The article may have pointed to the notion of a lack of commitment , etc. However that conclusion if it is one has misidentified the root cause of the dissolution . It's not the cohabitation that supposedly has destroyed the couple , it's as it was claimed , " the lack of commitment ". Married couples are more committed than cohabitating ones . Of course they are , hence they go on the path to matrimony . But it's the other way around . Married couples don't become committed, the individuals marry the ones they are COMMITTED to . See the horse comes before the cart. The couple has to have all the qualities of a proverbial married couple prior to taking on the title married or else why marry a person that is not fit for that . Who is not what they call "wifey material " or he that would make a good husband . So when they speak of cohabitating having less of a chance for longevity in their affair , they are speaking of a poor quality affair irrelevant to living arrangements . Again with the statistics, as lopsided as they can be . They that survey can be surveying folks that are cohabitating to just happen to be a wrong fit for each other . As oppose to the ones not included that cohabitate that do make a successful item. I take it that the survey doesn't incorporate too many if at all , married couples that didn't cohabitate prior to marriage and have divorced or separated . It may be counter to the cause and instead just shed light on the successful marriage couples that answered that they did not live together prior. Can't say on how it's all conducted . But these are the factors involved which does not add up with the claim. I say re-evaluate and dig deeper to what is causing the breakdown . Claiming that it's pure cohabitation without clear sufficient reason behind it won't work . Keep researching and I'm sure it's more to it than that.

One thing interesting to note is that cohabitation is logically a constructive excercise to test compatibility . That saying " you don't know what a person is like or you don't know a person until you live with them" is a true statement. It's an extraordinary test to give preparation and certainty of content of being married to a person.
jkdufu

Pro

jkdufu forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.