It isn't immoral to have kids before marriage.

Bikerbats · 2024-05-28T19:08:26+00:00

How is this debatable? The morality of having children out of wedlock obviously depends on the source of your morals. I'm sure your sentiment is near universally shared amongst atheists and universally panned by mormons. You can't have a discussion on morality without common ground.

Medical_Sense5953 · 2024-05-28T22:49:33+00:00

Ummmmm, this justification of yours is actually pretty illegal in a lot of ways. Like, you have likely admitted to commiting benefits fraud here.

WHO is cooking the food that your partner is eating? People who live together and purchase and prepare meals together are all considered one household under SNAP. So unless your partner is having completely separate food from the rest of the household, and you are taking other measures to keep everything separate, his income is meant to count towards the household income for eligibility requirements, regardless of marital status.

ETA: The ability to commit welfare benefits fraud is not something one should be considering a benefit to not getting married. It’s a crime.

AreOut · 2024-05-28T19:17:44+00:00

when it comes to having children the only immoral thing is to have them if you and your partner don't plan to be good parents

PhaedronGDR · 2024-05-28T19:24:18+00:00

Kids from married couples are better off than kids who are born to unmarried couples by every sociological (educational attainment, drug/alcohol use, crime, mental and physical health, social adjustment) or financial (income, homeownership, debt) metric you can imagine. As an agnostic, I can understand why you're weary of any criticism you receive from your religious family members, but you don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water. You don't have to build your life in opposition to the manosphere/tradcons, my parents are still married and they're both atheists.

baiser_vole · 2024-05-28T19:10:00+00:00

Sure, you are doing what makes sense to you, but you are still taking tax money that you theoretically shouldn't be getting if you are just holding off on marrying your partner just for the welfare benefits and are getting financially supported by a guy. It is immoral to take advantage of the system when other innocent people are paying the price for your decisions.

jay10033 · 2024-05-28T23:19:08+00:00

What I find immoral is your purposeful underemployment to remove benefits from the system. While we must toil day after day to pay taxes into a system, free riders like you choose to not contribute but to use public money to support your private choices. Privatize the profit, socialize the losses is alive and well I see.

Live_Guidance7199 · 2024-05-28T19:09:34+00:00

A true RP can correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see anywhere where their motto is yay for Jesus/Buddha/Allah/whatever.

Seems kinda strawman-y...

You still have your partner so you aren't a single mom, your anecdote is pointless to any discussion on single moms.

TheYoungFaithful · 2024-05-28T19:48:47+00:00

From an atheist perspective I can understand not seeing it as immoral. However studies have shown that kids from unwed families tend to go through poverty more than kids from wed families.

Flightlessbirbz · 2024-05-28T19:58:52+00:00

I don’t believe it is “immoral.” Even if someone believes marriage is important for religious reasons, we still have to be honest that the institution of legal marriage as it exists today didn’t exist in the past, and the government doesn’t magically bless a union. It is, essentially, a business contract.

That being said, I do question the wisdom of having kids outside of marriage from a practical standpoint in many situations. Yours is a little different. The only time I’d say it is immoral to have kids is if you choose to knowing you can’t or won’t provide them a loving and stable home, or have some sort of horrible genetic condition.

KayRay1994 · 2024-05-28T22:20:33+00:00

So it’s baseless because…. your experience says otherwise?

Now, i don’t think marriage in itself is the end-all be-all factor for kids having a good life, as it has more to do with correlating factors than causation in itself - ie. married couples are more likely to actually want to have kids, they’re more likely to have shared values, they’re more likely to actually get along and like each other (across every single group of 2 people that fucks and who can/do have kids, it’s a sizable difference)

It’s less to do with the literal act of marriage in itself and more to do with what marriage represents at an individual and social level.

So while yes, you can 100% have children and raise them well without marriage, statistically the reason why people who are not married are more likely to not raise children well isn’t because of the act of marriage in itself, but rather, what that marriage may represent - these stats aren’t about the likelihood of your individual future outcome as these stats are hardly that, they’re more a way to represent various correlating forces and what they may have in common

AwesomeRocky-18- · 2024-05-28T23:20:39+00:00

Definitely not immoral but it heightens the risk of a man just walking away and leaving the woman to deal with all the responsibilities of child rearing. If a man isn’t even willing to commit to you through legal means before the child is born, why do women believe he’ll have the morals to support his family if there are no legal or social consequences set in place for his actions?

bluepvtstorm · 2024-05-28T23:31:25+00:00

Yeah, I have no kids and I am pretty pissed at this blatant abuse of the welfare system. And I the kid of a social worker. I know how valuable those services are.

It’s pretty freaking disgusting that you are teaching your kids that it is ok to be underemployed to maximize the benefits you can steal from taxpayers.

What’s even grosser is that you are exactly who Reagan was talking about while I am accused of it.

I won’t ever have children because I was a responsible human who didn’t let some random man convince me that the government shouldn’t be involved in our love. But let me impregnate you instead and be able to walk away with almost impunity due to the government not being involved.

Girl you are silly with your argument and your belief that you are owed this. You aren’t owed anything.

Having kids while married is a sign of a deeper commitment to your children that you are willing to put it in writing. It’s symbolic that you are a family and it also provides protection to you as a wife.

But go ahead get your friendship ring and leech off taxpayers.

Handsome_Goose · 2024-05-29T00:29:56+00:00

I think you entirely miss the point.

Having kids before marriage is not immoral, it's retarded - because of possible legal issues, like paternity rights, child support, etc.

Also, yeah, you are just a welfare queen.

AutoModerator · 2024-05-28T19:00:07+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2024-05-28T19:00:07+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

purplish_possum · 2024-05-28T19:24:41+00:00

NO! Next question.

doggiedoc2004 · 2024-05-28T20:08:29+00:00

It’s not a moral argument. Or at least it shouldn’t be. It’s a statistical one. Children in married households do better across the board (as long as there is no abuse). It is sooo stupid that the government penalizes marriage in terms of child care benefits etc. you are making the right choice for your situation. Childcare expenses and costs of raising kids are the reason we stopped at two kids. I wish I could have had one more at least.

TheRedPillRipper · 2024-05-28T21:58:45+00:00

This is absolutely baseless

Whilst I agree morality isn’t as much of a factor, marriage as an institution plays an important role socially. That role is in establishing Identity. For example my wife is ‘Mrs Ripper.’ Our kids are ‘Rachel and Roger Ripper.’ We are known as ‘The Rippers’. Now one can legally change their name without the institution. That’s perfectly legal. Socially though? It would not make much sense.

I’m a proponent for marriage. Morality aside, the sense of identity, of family, is stronger. When there’s a shared surname.

Godspeed and good luck!

Key_Construction1332 · 2024-05-28T22:01:15+00:00

The studies dont lie bro

balhaegu · 2024-05-28T22:52:34+00:00

You can have a marriage and not be married on paper

Jaded-Worldliness597 · 2024-05-28T23:38:39+00:00

I pay a shit ton in taxes, and I greatly dislike that money going to fund single moms. However, if I read your story correctly, you are in a long term relationship and it's just that the institution of marriage would cut your social benefits. So you are NOT a single mother. Instead you are a hard working lower income family that deserves every penny of support that we can provide you. I would actually be much more inclined to take money away from single parents and give them to families like yours who are doing the right thing.

I think that marriage with children under a certain income threshold like $100 or $150k, should have the same level of benefit as a family making $30k, so that you don't get penalized for doing better, until you are doing WAY better.

As to the Religious argument. You may not believe yourself but I suspect most of the faithful would be of the opinion you are already married in the eyes of God, and therefore the government has no authority to make a moral claim on your situation.

BothWaysItGoes · 2024-05-29T00:01:40+00:00

Define marriage. Oh, you are in a committed relationship with a partner, but it’s not a marriage because you didn’t have a giant party and didn’t file papers to the government? Well, that’s how marriage worked in many places for many years. Except the fraud part, that’s something recent, congrats for that.

Realistic-Ad-1023 · 2024-05-29T00:25:19+00:00

It’s not amoral, but there is no protection without marriage. Marriage affords thousands of protections for a married couple and their children (in the US) that are not afforded to non married couples, and common law is a joke meant to sort shared mortgages. Marry before children. And only marry someone who is a good partner and with whom you’re compatible.

Realistic-Ad-1023 · 2024-05-29T01:07:06+00:00

joint tax returns
“family partnership” that allows you to divide business income amongst family members at a special tax rate.
inheritance
exemptions on gift and estate taxes
life estate trusts (ie trusts with no taxes)
assumed conservatorship
social security when you’re retirement age, even if you don’t work, and he dies, you’ll be given his ssi
insurance benefits through a family plan
FMLA if he gets sick (legally the job holds your job and you’re still paid a portion of your income if you have to take time off work to care for him.) you don’t get it if you’re not married.
medical decisions if he’s incapacitated (you can be kept from seeing him in the hospital if you’re just a girlfriend, let alone make decisions for him)
death benefits
filing as a step parent or adopting together
receiving a share of marital property if you divorce
spousal/child support when you break up
family benefits reduced rates for health insurance, auto and homeowners insurance
suing a third party for the wrongful death of your partner (you can’t if you’re not married)
marital communications privilege (you can be forced to testify against one another if you’re not married)
crime victims recovery benefits if they’re a victim of a crime
immigration and nonresidency benefits for a noncitizen spouse
visiting rights in jail
socially: men recognize a greater level of commitment when married (it’s why so many will convince you that “You don’t need the government involved in your love life.” And they leave within 5 years of their child’s birth
socially you’re recognized as a unit, until then you’re “just a baby momma.” And that’s not going to change any time soon.
bigger and better loans for married couples
better interest rates for married couples
assumed paternity (if you have a child out of wedlock, he has to sign the birth certificate and if you break up, you have to sue him for a paternity test to get child support. Better hope none of what he said was an empty promise.)
divorce allows for a more fair division of marital assets. Was he only able to work those long hours with a child at home because he knew you were there to care for him? Did you support him through a particularly difficult time? Pay for schooling or help fund his business venture?you’re only entitled to equitable division of assets if you’re married. Otherwise it’s a sunk cost.
more likely to survive health issues with a spouse looking out for you.
married people are less stressed
shared retirement funds and higher contribution limits
socially: he would make more money and be considered more reliable if he got married before he had a child with you.
better sleep
social capital/prestige
joint accounts
combined credit score

Can some of these things be provided just by cohabitating? Sure. But you’d better hope he means all the things he says and doesn’t just up and leave one day. Which is really easy to do without any incentive not to, if you aren’t married. He can use you as an incubator and house maid for a few years and just disappear one day, zero repercussions. Nothing for your lost time, lost income, lost experience, lost youth; all for him to easily start over elsewhere. But hey - you trust him. So maybe you’ll get some of these benefits while you’re young and starting out. But once you’re old and staring down the twilight of your shared lives and you can’t visit him in hospice or decide to donate his organs like he wanted and you’re left without his retirement or ssi because he didn’t see the point in allowing the government to intervene with your lives (but you sure would allow the government to fund it) that’s when the true benefits of marriage hit. I guess just pray you go before him?

Title	It isn't immoral to have kids before marriage.
Author	juicycouturewh0re
Upvotes	0
Comments	47
Date	May 28, 2024 7:00 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1d2rcw7/it_isnt_immoral_to_have_kids_before_marriage/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/it-isnt-immoral-to-have-kids-before-marriage.1519844 https://theredarchive.com/post/1519844

Comments