Yes.

Marriage does help for legal reasons, but does nothing to keep people together...or very little.

We’re not living in the dark ages. People co-habiting is the norm. Marriage should be avoided. Ruins everything.

All the questions you posed are easily dealt with. Legal papers can be drawn to cover all those things. Marriage is wholly unnecessary. In the event of a break-up, there would already plans in place.

Before marrying someone, I would prefer we live together for at least 1 year (more would be better). Need to be around each other when one or the other is sick, tired, grumpy, angry, sad; find out or exposed more to each other's "bad" habits and living styles. I would rather go into marriage knowing as much about other person as I could. If we both accept each other after living together for a few years, then hopefully the marriage will last and we won't get divorced over something stupid like "irreconcilable differences" that a bunch of celebrities get divorced over because they marry each other too quickly. But even if neither of us wants to get married, that's fine too.

Whether you are married or not doesn't determine how well the relationship will be or how you will treat your kids. Married and unmarried people cheat on each other or leave one another; some people whether married or not make terrible parents. So it really depends on the people who are in the relationship if they want to get married or not; doesn't matter to me.

I don't see marriage as a requirement. Was with someone for seven years, lived with them for six. If anything, it becomes an obstacle. Of course, that doesn't mean you cannot get married eventually. George R. R. Martin and his partner, for example, waited 30 years. Never let the expectations of society guide your life. Do what is right for you when it is right.

"Is living together an acceptable alternative to marriage?"

Don't married people live together, usually?

So.. child support is filed for whether there is a marriage or not. The biggest issue is the ability to make decisions for your SO in the event on an accident. This is where power of attorney’s work. My brother and his SO have been together 10 years. They bought a house together and have a very strong relationship.

Acceptable to whom ? Who cares ?

All the same issues you stated, can occur whether or not people are married.

My wife (we were married by a drunk judge in the back room of our favorite wine bistro) lived together for over a decade. We NEVER thought it was temporary. Marriage was decided on an evaluation of income tax return scenarios. My opinion: you're a couple or you're not. A marriage certificate is just a piece of paper.

As a child of divorced parents (technically they divorced and then divorced other partners as well)... Marriage is not something I'd be interested in.

Custody is decided as it is in a divorce.
Child support is owed by the noncustodial parent without consideration of marital status.
Why should someone, mom or dad, entitled to someone else's retirement?
If there is joint property, it should be divided equitably between the parties.
College education of children is not a parental obligation. It would be completely voluntary.

I think you missed the more important issues. A cohabitating partner has no legal rights in medical decisions, for death benefits, or in litigation regarding wrongful death claims and such cases.
There are a lot of other areas where were you a cohabitating partner, you'd have no rights that marriage grants.

Worst case scenario, a man in a same sex relationship for years is in the hospital in a coma. His partner, who's been through everything with him throughout that time, can be denied visitation rights by the family. If a decision must be made regarding the termination of life support, the partner has no legal rights there either.

There are a large number of rights that married people have simply by virtue of that certificate.

If you are planning on having kids then do the paper work, it's for them not for the parents.

Marriage is essentially a contract with (insert deity here) involved. So just write up a legal contact. It requires some forethought but if it's all laid out before there are set expectations.

Living together is completely acceptable. As for if you split, child support is done EXACTLY the same way through the system.

Done both. Enjoyed both. Not afraid of either one.

Absolutely, as long as legal steps are taken in financial and property matters.

Marriage may not be necessary for the relationship itself. (A piece of paper falls apart in hot water, but it's the strong commitment and devotion that make the marriage.) HOWEVER, for finances, raising children, taxes, social security, decisions in the operating room, etc., that piece of paper holds a lot of power and security.

As a stay at home mom, married 29 years, I invested 20 years raising my kids, working from home, making far less than my husband. Though we divorced many years ago, I am glad I will have the option of using 50% of his social security benefits when I retire, as they are higher than taking 100% of my own.

Or you could be over analysing this?

marriage provides distinct legal benefits. until society catches up to the idea that those obligations exist because of the nature of the relationship, not because you stood in front of a priest or judge and said "i do", it will always have those advantage.

acceptable to whom?

to the government? well, it's not illegal but in terms of what you describe -- child support and all that -- you have a different legal standing in some instances from the standing you'd have if you were married.

if there are children, then the above is a consideration.

if there are no children, then just make sure you have directives in place regarding being able to talk to doctors is the other one is in the hospital, for example, and make sure there is a clear will.

g

Although it is not universal, many areas recognize common law marriage when two people of the opposite sex live together for longer than a year. So if one of you gets litigious during a separation, this former spouse can do some serious damage regardless of a formal ceremony.

Certainly not necessary in terms of commitment. Perhaps if there are legal advantages. I think for a lot of older folks it is not financially feasible.

Circumstances. Two of my kids lived with their partners prior to marriage. I wasn't opposed.
I really wanted my son to get married more than my daughter. My now DIL is the sweetest person and wanted marriage. It was important to her. To him it didn't matter either way, but he risked loosing her eventually.
My daughter, well she's a different person entirely. I think she's still navigating this relationship. They're engaged. It's not that I don't like my future son in law. I just see some hesitation. In the end I do pick marriage over living together. I just think you try harder to hold it together and make it work. I see way too many people changing partners every other day. Although it's not my business, multiple partners can be very confusing to kid's.

Marriage has social, legal, and financial benefits, but it also has drawbacks in all of those areas, as well. You have to do what works for you. Without marriage contracts, divvying up property and deciding custody can actually be easier, since you can avoid dealing with legal hurdles.
To each their own, I say. Marriage appeals to me for social and economic reasons, but I completely get why it does not appeal to others.

There are roughly equal pros and cons to being married or just living together. IMO with just under half of first marriages and well over half of second or third marriages failing why bother?

[cdc.gov]