Interestingly, Warren argues against cohabitation because of the "conditional commitment of live-in relationships." However, many individuals prefer the conditions of cohabitation to the restrictions of a relationship that stifles individual freedom and independence. For same-sex couples, cohabitation is the only option in all but a handful of states. Social stability in Warren's point-of-view is linked to the systematic oppression of women and homosexuals.
The way Warren interprets statistics in "The Cohabitation Epidemic" is spurious. For instance, Warren fails to acknowledge the sociological changes that have led to the growing rates of cohabitation and the reduced rates of marriage. Warren does not refer to divorce statistics, and Warren does not treat cohabitation as an end in itself but only as a means to the end of marriage. Marriage and cohabitation are two different but related conditions. Marriage is a traditional social contract, whereas cohabitation is a lifestyle choice. Neither is morally superior to the other, and both offer potential benefits. Promoting marriage may not lead to more successful relationships, only more traditional ones. "In the end, the evidence suggests that the benefits of marriage promotion would be marginal," (Cherlin).
Warren also assumes that cohabitation before...
Cohabitation Epidemic Argument Analysis" "The Cohabitation Epidemic" In "The Cohabitation Epidemic," Neil Clark Warren argues that cohabitation between unmarried couples is an unhealthy situation that is decreasing the livelihood and well being of people in the contemporary context. Warren's argument is based on the idea that [state here the most important premises or assumption of the argument, or the basic strategy of his argument]. More specifically, in a part of his argument
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now