A little over a month ago, we wrote about a North Carolina dispatcher who was told to either marry her live-in boyfriend or find another job. Apparently, this lunacy tracked back to a standing North Carolina law making it illegal to "live in sin" in this manner. Such laws appear to be on the books in seven states, and in North Carolina alone, about 25 people have been convicted over the past eight years. For more details, check out our earlier Rant.

As we noted then, the dispatcher in question was bringing legal action against this unconstitutional law. We've seen a fair amount of coverage of this over the past few days, including the following defenses of the law in question.

From a recent article found on the NBC San Diego site:

Supporters of the ban say the state has a legitimate interest. One of them said there are studies showing that couples who live together before they get married have higher rates of marital problems and divorce.

And from the Associated Press:

"We think that it's good to have a law against cohabitation because the studies show that couples that cohabitate before they're married, that their marriages are more prone to break up, there's less stability in the marriage," said Bill Brooks, executive director of the conservative North Carolina Family Policy Council.

Is that the best argument for upholding this law that these people can come up with? We haven't seen much else, other than the usual bible thumping and grunting about "family values," but this is pretty weak indeed. We checked into the North Carolina Family Policy Council. Although, commendably, they seem to avoid mentioning God or the Bible on their web site (we didn't see it, anyway), their agenda makes it clear that they might as well have done so. Check out their policy papers, which include such golden oldies as the myth of the Wall of Separation, the evils of homosexuals, and the harm of full-scope sex education.

But we digress. Back to the defense, such as it is, of the cohabitation laws presented above.

First, we don't believe their references to studies at all. Before we ever agreed to nod at this dubious data, we'd want to take a long hard look at the studies in question. We're willing to bet that we wouldn't like what we saw. Why?

While data on this subject may be able to show a correlation (if one exists) between premarital cohabitation and divorce, we have serious doubts as to the ability to show any kind of causal relationship between the two. Let's say that the data shows that the divorce rate among those who "live in sin" before their wedding date is 30%, and the divorce rate among those who do not is 15% (we made these up for illustrative purposes, so please don't think they are real). That looks like a pretty good correlation. But how would causality be established? Perhaps this just means that people who are more likely to wait until they are married to live together are also more likely to avoid getting a divorce. In fact, Christians, who make up a fairly large portion of the United States, are instructed to follow both of these tenets. Further, how can anyone know the actual empirical impact — positive or negative — that premarital cohabitation had on a given divorce? As a result, any data claiming to show a causal relationship here is, to us, pretty meaningless, no matter which side that data is on.

Setting aside the suspect data, anecdotally, we would say that the exact opposite is true and that couples who live together before they get married probably have a lower chance of getting a divorce than those who do not. By living together before the wedding, a couple is basically getting one of the most difficult parts of marriage out of the way up front. They are test driving their relationship, and allowing any potential problems to bubble up before they tie the knot. If anything, this should lead to increased marital compatibility, not increased divorce rates. We're not saying it solves all marital problems, but we certainly believe it solves some.

Second, why would anyone assume that cohabitation is just a precursor to marriage? There are plenty of people who live together for their entire lives and never get married. We know more than a few who are doing so, and there's nothing wrong with making this choice, either with or without having children. And to address the above "concern," there's no need to worry about these couples getting divorced, is there?

All that said, we can't help but think of the obvious argument that the government shouldn't be creating or upholding criminal laws based on trying to make happier marriages. We're talking about a law that makes cohabitation a criminal misdemeanor punishable by up to 60 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. Even if the ridiculous assumption about increased divorce rates was true, should this criminal law be upheld simply because it leads to happier marriages?

If so, we've got some more ideas for other laws along the same line of reasoning:

• Children must be well-behaved and considerate of their parents since couples with considerate children are more likely to remain happily married. Failure to comply will result in a fine of ten weeks' allowance; a second offense results in the loss of one limb (child's choice). If the child doesn't get the hint after two offenses, he/she will be limited to a diet of broccoli, spinach and cauliflower for life, under state supervision.
• Couples shall not lie to one another since couples who are honest in their relationship are more likely to remain happily married. Each offense results in mandatory rhinoplasty to lengthen the offender's nose by four inches (cumulative per offense).
• Couples shall not commit adultery as this often leads to divorce. Violators will be forced to write a book report, of no less than 5000 words, on the Ayn Rand novel of their choice (excluding Atlas Shrugged); a second offense condemns the offender to a marathon screening of every adaptation of We the Living; the third offense results in castration (males) or clitoral circumcision (females).
• Couples shall not covet their neighbors belongings since that often leads to arguments about money which is one of the leading causes of divorce in the United States today. Any offense shall incur forfeiture of all gardening tools, to be remanded to the custody of the neighbors.
• Couples shall spend time together on Saturdays or Sundays (assigned by the state) instead of working, going out with their friends, or playing golf. This strengthens the marriage. Violation of this law is a capital crime.

Wait a minute...these laws sound awfully familiar. Shit, the fundies will probably love these new laws. Maybe we should tack on a few that some of us like, and which make equal sense (but are far more interesting, in our opinion):

• Marital sex must take place at least five times a week because couples who have sex frequently are more likely to remain married. Those who abstain will be anally raped by state-certified homosexuals.
• Sexual toys and/or props must be used as a couple at least once per week as this has been known to "spice up" married sex, leading to increased marital satisfaction. Those who refuse will be anally raped by The Penetrator™.
• Married women must perform fellatio on their husbands upon reasonable request because men who receive blow jobs from their wives are, on average, happier in their marriages. Violators must deep throat oversized popsicles until brain-freeze sets in. And will never receive cunnilingus, because, you know...come on.

In point of fact, these are all ridiculous proposals, including the law against cohabitation. The sad part is that one of them is real. For now.

'why would anyone assume that cohabitation is just a precursor to marriage? '

Thats just it, it isn't. But to be honest I don't think they are assuming that at all. I think they know it's not a precursor. In fact statistics -I viewed the add in Mens Health so consider the source- said 60-70% never marry. Which of course is why they consider it sinful, it's so much premarital sex, egads.:-)

'Christians, who make up a fairly large portion of the United States, are instructed to follow both of these tenets'

I know one pastor who stated the following--I don't think I've ever married a couple who wasn't cohabitating first, kinda funny.

In truth Christians cohabitat for the same reasons everyone else does, saves funds, want to be together, etc. If a lifetime committment comes of it Great but to everything a season.

'why would anyone assume that cohabitation is just a precursor to marriage? '

Thats just it, it isn't. But to be honest I don't think they are assuming that at all. I think they know it's not a precursor. In fact statistics -I viewed the add in Mens Health so consider the source- said 60-70% never marry. Which of course is why they consider it sinful, it's so much premarital sex, egads.:-)

'Christians, who make up a fairly large portion of the United States, are instructed to follow both of these tenets'

I know one pastor who stated the following--I don't think I've ever married a couple who wasn't cohabitating first, kinda funny.

In truth Christians cohabitat for the same reasons everyone else does, saves funds, want to be together, etc. If a lifetime committment comes of it Great but to everything a season.

We agree — we don't think they really believe the bullshit excuse they give about cohabitation leading to higher divorce rates, but if they state their real reason (that God is against it), then their 100% religious motivation will be out in the open. So, instead, they lie about it to make it seem as if they have a real reason to oppose cohabitation (which they don't).

How very Christian of them.