unmarried couples facing eviction?

J-rod wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060517/ap_on_...married_couples


complete BS if you ask me. who is to say who you can and cannot live with..for any reason....

Kaitlin'smom replied: it does make me wonder why they are not married.

so I guess in that town roomates are not allowed, unless related.

I can see both sides of the story.

MyLuvBugs replied: Oh wow. Ya know, DH and I lived together before we got married (granted no kids at that time, but still), and our land-lady at that time treated us like crap until the week before our wedding. Then we came back from our honeymoon and she was nice as pie to us. Some people just have preconceptions about how life is "supposed" to be, and they look down on or force their notions on others. To me this sounds a bit illegal or almost like a challange to marriage laws or something. Who knows!

luvbug00 replied: Di I must say i take slight offence to that. Brad and I were not really planning to get married it just happended and we had mya 5 yeas ago and we lived together. I see NOTHING wrong with two people who are not ready for the commitment of marraige to raise their children together in a home out of wedlock. I see nothing wrong with having chilren out of wedlock either being married to me is a HUDGE commitment and I'd rather live together unmarried if i'm not sure then live together and miserable!

na81 replied:
Sorry, I have to agree with happymom. My SO and I have been together almost 8 years and we are not married and have a 17 1/2 month old dd together!! We don't feel the rush in getting married, besides after 7 years, we might as well BE married!! We have lived together for 6 of those years, 1 year with my sis, 2 years in an apartment and the last 3 in our house we are purchasing together! I see nothing wrong with the way we live!!

ions_momma replied:


Dh and I are married now, but when we had Ion we werent. We lived together when I conceived him, and got married after he was born. I see nothing wrong with two people who arent married and have children together, living together. As long as the landlord gets the rent and everything, I dont see why they should have a problem with it. Thankfully, we never had any problems like that with our landlord!

Kaitlin'smom replied: No, no, no I am totaly sorry for the way that came off. I just wondered if they knew about the law and why they were not married. I personally dont have a problem with it at all. I know alot of people who are together but not married. I was just wonderingif there was a reasoon behind it. I also lived with DH about 1 1/2 years before the wedding day, we were engaged but that does not always mean we would get married. I am so sorry I did not mean to offend anyone at all. I guess I am just nosy for wanting to know the reason behind it is all. I honesly dont have any problme with it at all. SO SORRY.

My2Beauties replied: Seriously! How on earth can the government tell you whom you should live with. That is completely and totally absurd. Brian and I had Hanna out of wedlock. We didn't get married until Hanna was 18 months old. We lived together for 3 years before we were married with our child and Desiree comes to stay with us atleast 2-3 nights a week and she's there a lot of the time when school is out. I would dare someone tell me who on earth I should live with. This is a law I would fight to the death, I think this is utterly and completely absurd. I had 2 roommates in college and one of their boyfriends lived with us, so there were 4 of us in a house, 3 of us females and not blood related - I don't understand how they can stop this!

Kaitlin'smom replied:
I wanted to add your right it is a BIG commitment and one that should not be taken lightly as so many do. The devorce rate it awful, and this is only my thinking I would rather people live together before marrige, then to rush into it and have the thinking well if it does not work out I can just get a divorse. You know thoes people yes mainly in hollywood who get married and in a few weeks divorce. It takes time to get to know some one why do they rush it, then figure ops not for me and thats the end of it, very sad IMO. If people choose NOT to married so be it its not for everyone, some do better with out the paper, so do better with it. Kids are so much better in a loving home with 2 parents weither married or not.

again I am sorry I did not mean for that to come out that way.

C&K*s Mommie replied: I do not understand how there can be evictions based on this. Although it is the city council that voted on this, and it is not a state wide ban. It could possibly be a chance for the ACLU to come in, and make more waves on this. Discrimination? I believe so.

C&K*s Mommie replied: Even if you did feel that way, that would be your opinion-- totally respectable for your to stand behind what you feel. But since you explained yourself differently from what was originally understood, that too is totally respectable as well.

luvbug00 replied: Di I'm sorry for jumping on you I'm having a tough day and long story short i had somone question Brad and my devotion and desision to get married today so I'm a little heated. SORRY!

ions_momma replied: I wasnt offended by your comment or your opinion on the topic, I was just stating mine, and the fact that I agreed with the other girls about it. Sorry!

na81 replied: I understood that was your opinion, and I totally respect that. I was just stating my situation! Sorry if I was rude, I wasn't trying to be so defensive. I do respect everyone's opinion!!

kimberley replied:
ITA! what kind of law is that?! i lived with my ex (never married) and with dh before we got married. there would be a lot of homeless people here if 3 non-related persons could not share a place. and isn't that contradictory? he is blood related to the kids, she is blood related to the kids, so there are not 3 people who are unrelated.. just two.

i am glad i live where i do.

Kaitlin'smom replied:
good point Kimberley. which one would they say is un-related? stuipd weird laws

ashtonsmama replied: I don't look down on people who aren't married and live together--it's not something I chose to do, but I can't agree with forcing marriage on people just so they can live together--that's ridiculous.

ilovemybaby replied: Ridiculous! Paul and I lived together for nearly 4 years before we finally got married. We did get engaged 7 months after he first moved in though. It wasn't a matter of not wanting to be committed to each other. It was money. We didn't have the money to get married and I didn't want to ask my parents to pay for the wedding. I wanted to get married in the registry office but Paul didn't want to because he thought I'd regret it later on because I'd miss out on a proper wedding. I didn't really care. I just wanted certain people to shut up. Excuse my language. Our pastor, my great grandmother, my grandparents....
We are committed to each other. Otherwise we wouldn't have Abby.
I think it's good to live together for at least 1 year before getting married. I learnt a lot about Paul in the first 2 years and had to get used to a few things about him eg not washing his hands properly and leaving black marks on the handtowel (grease) and not washing dishes properly.

Well I could probably go on about this forever... I'll leave it at that.

holley79 replied: Shawn and I lived together for 5 years before we got married. I guess with the way they are stating it, my stepdad couldn't have lived with us (as a family). That would have been really sad. Him and my mom lived together for about 8 years before getting married.

You know everyone picks on Florida but I guess this takes the lime light off us for completely and utterly stupid.

Bee_Kay replied: that is just ridiculous! for no reason other than they are not married??

I know of a situation or two where I have to agree that the government has the right to intervene on an unmarried living arrangement.

gr33n3y3z replied: It can happen very easy
bc when you get married you have to pay a marrage tax I guess they are loosing money by ppl. not getting married.

when you die you pay a death tax even though you been paying taxes all your life on the monies that you made they get you again well family this time.

How can it happen well remember the post about a License to have children there ya go another way for the goverment to make more money for that

Its all about the money becareful for what you wish for bc it will bite you back one way or another

J-rod replied: glad to see im not alone in thinking this is crazy. we are in the exact same situation. unmarried, live together, baby due in august, and our wedding be shortly after. its how we wanted it....it makes us happy and no way id ever let anyone tell us how to live.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: Devils'd advocate here... but maybe it's just a way to prevent HUGE fraud. In the sense that - and I apologize if I'm not explaining this properly - that everyone that is on financial aid is entitled to a maximum amount.

That amount gets lowered with a spouse, a significat other, get raised with children, lowered for small rent. raised for higher heating bills... there is a big list of factors in the amount that you have.

However a common problem here - from my aunt who works with what used to be called the Welfare Office (it's not that anymore, but I don't remember the name...) is that 2 or more people, who are unmarried and living together (not living together as SO, but as roomates) aren't claiming that tere are 2 or more people in the house... and so two people are both getting bigger amounts instead of getting the amount they should be getting, because both are claiming higher rent, higher bills. It's like a marriage of convenience without the marriage. Does that make sense?

It would be plausible, anyways. I tyhink the government needs to better organise their staff to make sure the infor5mation given by the people on financial aid is correct, and cross referenced with other information. The government can't keep up with the fraud I guess - and so they are ounishing everybody instead of hiring more staff to do what's needed.

Sorry if I didn't explain myself right... bottom line is that I think it's stupid - anybody should be able to live with anybody.

C&K*s Mommie replied: I am not trying to back the decision by this city council, and call what they did appropiate. Because that is a decision two people should feel free to make on their own without intervention or force, to reside in that city. But everyone does understand that they are calling for unmarried couples with one or more children to be evicted... not simply an unmarried couple living alone without children.

Maddie&EthansMom replied:
That's how I took what you said. I didn't think you were against people living together by what you said in your previous post.

J-rod replied:
which imo is worse....sending them out with kids....thats stupid....so if that was me and they were doing that to us after us having kids....there would be some serious **** started.

Chiflata2003 replied: poor kids . My dh and I didnt get married until dd was almost 2.

3_call_me_mama replied: So basically they are forcing to MAKE the family or BREAK the family.
Since it could essentially break up a family if mom or dad were to have to move out of teh house. But making them marry owuld kinda force the family toether for at least somewhat of a time.

I dont' really agree or disagree wiht it. jus thtink they try to come up with more crazy laws than the next group!

IN VT (not sure if it's teh whole state or just some cities/towns) you can' t haev more than 3 female living in a house together unless they are related by blood or adoption or apply for a permit (IE sorority house). This law was set up to prevent prostitution houses. SERIOUSLY!

A&A'smommy replied: I can kinda understand but honestly I don't think its the governments business what people do in their own homes (even rented ones)

ilovemybaby replied:
Yup I think this is just going to bring the divorce rate up (because they are basically forcing marriage on unmarried couples and isn't the divorce rate something like 50 percent now?) and also the amount of people that are homeless.