Read 22

Living Together Without Marriage

Let’s say that a young man and woman, age 18, want to live together, enjoying the full benefits of a live-in relationship. Both sets of parents object strenuously to their doing so. Is what the young people are seeking to do immoral? Let’s apply the five principles.

VALUE OF LIFE PRINCIPLE.

There doesn’t seem to be a violation of the Value of Life principle in that no one’s life is threatened by this contemplated action. If the woman becomes pregnant, the problem of abortion may arise, but we can presume that the couple will utilize contraception or will have something else as moral set up in the event of pregnancy.

PRINCIPLE OF GOODNESS.

It’s difficult to see any significant violation of the Principle of Goodness unless one applies some specific standard of a particular religion, for example, one specifically stating that such a relationship is immoral. If, however, the couple does not adhere to this religion, even though their parents may, then such a standard cannot be forced on them. The couple evidently feels that living together will bring about goodness for themselves, whereas their parents feel it will not. The parents also may feel that this will not bring about goodness for themselves; that is, it will make them worry, embarrass them in front of family and friends, and generally upset them.

PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE.

The Principle of Justice really seems to be the only principle that would affect the parents. That is, is the distribution of goodness fair if the parents are not made happy by this arrangement? In other words, the man and woman feel that they are being fair to each other and their parents, but the parents feel that their children are not being fair to their families. What their children are doing is offensive to them—to their taste and to their belief in the sanctity of marriage.

Two questions arise: “Is this sufficient reason for not allowing the couple to live together and to brand their actions as immoral?” and “For how long must children conform to their parents’ lifestyle or values?” Is not 18 an age at which young people should have the right to live their own lives and take responsibility for what they do?

PRINCIPLE OF HONESTY AND TRUTH TELLING.

There seems to be no violation of the Principle of Honesty and Truth Telling because the young people are quite open about their intentions.

PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.

The question really centers upon the Principle of Individual Freedom. If there is no serious violation of the other four principles, then according to this ethical system, individual freedom should be allowed. None of the principles can be clearly shown to have been seriously violated; therefore, although what the couple is doing may be offensive to some people’s (obviously their parents’) tastes, this fact in itself should not deny these young consenting adults the right to live together if they want to as long as they are moral toward each other. This, of course, is another area where the principles should be applied and constitutes a separate issue. We presume that the young people have agreed to be moral toward one another. Serious breaches of morality in their relationship toward one another would, of course, alter the conclusion concerning the morality of their living together. On the face of it, however, there would seem to be no reason not to allow them to live together.