Marriage and Common-Law Couples
The practice of common-law couples, who live as if they were married (more uxorio, as it used to be called) without having formally contracted marriage, has now become widespread. The justification given is that a piece of paper is unnecessary, and what truly matters is love. However, people usually realize that this "piece of paper" is important for many practical matters, such as family allowances, survivor’s pensions, inheritance, and many other things—at which point, they end up formalizing their marriage.
The real reason, however, is the reluctance to commit for a lifetime. A common-law relationship is much simpler because either partner is free to leave at any moment without consequences.
But does this mean that if one day I realize I like another woman better—perhaps a younger one—the common-law marriage should simply end?
This leads us to examine what marriage truly is. Having sex with someone does not make a marriage or even a couple. Marriage means that two people are consorts—they share their lives, their home, good times and bad, health and sickness, wealth and poverty. And this is meant to be for life. While divorce and separation exist, they signify that the marriage has failed—that it did not go as the spouses believed and promised each other.
But most importantly, what is the purpose of a couple? The continuation of life—the most fundamental purpose of every living being.
Among animals, parents care for their offspring only for a short period, until they can survive on their own. After that, the bond disappears, and they are ready for another generation. For humans, however, things are very different. We do not wait for one child to become independent before having another; we have children of different ages. The time it takes for them to reach autonomy is very, very long, and even after they become adults, the relationship continues—and later extends to grandchildren (only humans become grandparents).
This means that, in practice, the role of a couple in renewing life lasts their entire lives.
If we fail to understand this fundamental law of humanity, then we fail to understand marriage itself. Why shouldn’t we just have sex with whoever we happen to meet? Why do we experience jealousy, a sense of unity, solidarity, and mutual care until the end of life?
Ultimately, common-law relationships discourage having children—a real tragedy, as low birth rates threaten the very roots of our society. However, let’s not frame this issue as a duty to society but rather as a matter of self-fulfillment.
Having sex with just anyone may bring some pleasure, but true joy and happiness come only from a woman who truly loves you, who is wholly and solely yours, and who dedicates her life to you (and, of course, this applies to men as well). Above all, it is about sharing the joy of parenthood—the first baby tooth, the first word, birthday cakes, the first day of school, and so on.
What is the meaning of life without these natural joys? What could be worse than growing old alone and sad?
Children are always and inevitably a great and endless responsibility. But if we desire children, it is because, ultimately, they fulfill us and give our lives meaning.
This is not about ethics or religious precepts—it is about joy, happiness, and self-fulfillment. Yes, life is only one, but for that very reason, is it worth living without love and without the laughter of children? I don’t think so.
It is true that sexual attraction—although the foundation of romantic love—is not enough; much more is needed. What we call true love is something deeper.
But how do we know if what we feel is true love, a fleeting infatuation, or something in between? In reality, we only find out afterward: if we have spent a happy life together and love each other as much as, or even more than, on the first day, then it was true love.
I have seen marriages that began with the greatest love end after just a few years, while I have seen marriages that lasted a lifetime, with unwavering love, that were arranged marriages.
So, we should not think that a marriage should last only as long as the feelings do—in other words, that either spouse should be able to dissolve it whenever they please. Otherwise, the true purpose of marriage—the upbringing of children—becomes secondary.
It is often said (though not always true) that men tend to be more reluctant to formal marriage. Some believe that women are favored in separations. While gender equality is constantly proclaimed, in reality, this is not always the case: in separations and divorces, women are often favored, as the priority is to safeguard the children, who have been denied the right to have a family according to nature.
As a result, children are usually entrusted to the mother, who is considered the most suitable to care for them. Consequently, she is granted the marital home and financial support, while the poor husband sometimes ends up sleeping in his car.
I understand that this may not be fair to him, but the best interests of the children take precedence—and often, the woman takes advantage of this situation.