COHABITATION

The trend that began to circulate in a limited circle is only one house without a valid marriage bond and behave like a married couple or commonly referred to as Samen Leven. Indonesian society had a special designation that is not less popular, that is cohabiting. From the name alone is pinned, the community has been able to judge that such behavior is an aberration to be analogous to the animal buffalo. Deviations that allows full access to negativity view of society.

We know that Indonesia is a country that is still thick with the traditional oriental (still there now?). Uphold traditional moral values ​​as his starting point. Although, sometimes it is starting actualization 'silenced' by invasions western culture with modernization and acculturation dressed and outspoken culture without a moral filter. At least, cognitively, Indonesia is a country east. Hereditary, recognized or not, our society still assumes that cohabiting relationships is a term of free-sex and free-sex is a taboo. They give the impression that cohabiting is that although adultery behavior by the perpetrator actually trying to claim as a legal relationship. Social sanctions still remain upheld. Society firmly still dripping idea to isolate the perpetrator cohabiting.

If the line can be drawn a little justification, that in fact is not always the desire merely cohabiting was always dominated by the orientation towards sex. However, tend it is impossible to say there is no sex in it. During this appears byword in the community that the will is the will of cohabiting mere sex. Precisely selected communities with a 'hit rate' behavior merely cohabiting with free sex (free-sex) without official status that often lead to paradoxical views about cohabiting. Moreover, in it not infrequently appears the desire to live happy and harmonious family life with a partner like without the need to bound the laws of marriage are sometimes felt to be irrational and unfair.

However, when viewed from the socio-religious point of view, it is clear that cohabiting is a serious blow to a country like Indonesia religious. Cohabiting is something that is false and strictly forbidden by religion. Both it and its dominance over whether or not sexual orientation. Because there are a Muhrim terminology and non-Muhrim which became the dividing line and the controller of the opposite sex relationships.

The presence of cohabiting not just stand alone. There are several factors that are often used as a straightforward reason why someone does cohabiting, namely:

First, for those who are less moderate, sometimes appears the assumption that cohabiting is the first step to the ship sailed home. Trauma and phobias for the failure of marriage is the main reason. Cohabiting is often seen as a means of pre-wedding to her partner about each other and understand the outside-in. The statement that it believed is, failure is the failure of love marriage. Then, in-cluster where the view that 'Love does not have to have' it habitable.

Second, for example, the scheme of the day in the Javanese market fundamentals that are sometimes considered to be irrational. A person who was born on Thursday Wage will not live happily if it relates in love with someone who was born on Wednesday Pahing. Even with the tragic outcome was sentenced to starch, which means death. However, in reality not rare marriage between two people born on those days actually reap happiness. As a result, trust and respect of norms and customs will be reduced. The notion that the inability to walk more relevant with the times making less respect for social norms and customs are. If social norms and customs are no longer regarded as something that needs to be respected, then everything can happen.

Third, and experience has also become evident that not always love the legal relationship will reap happiness. Portrait of celebrity life we ​​once again have to be a real sample slides that must be underlined. Once satisfied with her partner, then divorced, then look for a new companion, then divorced again, and so on as if it is a dogmatic cycle which is mandatory for their love relationships. In fact, not satisfied with just one wife, polygamy they pinned. Whereas for the case of polygamy that upholds justice and equality is a delusion that a new handful of people who can make it happen.

That portrait ins and outs celebrities love us. Although the actual artist's life can not be equated simply with the lives of ordinary people. However, at least it is an example that the view of marriage has begun to shift. Marriage no longer be something that are sacred. However, more as a routine that transformed into a culture. And culture will easily fade so snare modernization came rushing without insulation and resistors.

However, apart from the factors above, it seems we need to agree on two of the most essential things: First, that existence is a manifestation cohabiting (real form) a lack of appreciation of religious teachings. Religious values ​​of religious teachings that only limited aspects of cognitive and utterly unable to reach the affective domain. Actually, if the noble values ​​of religious teachings that lived well, cohabiting did not have to happen.

And second, cohabiting into a new product from a shift in moral and ethical individuals who tend to confuse the right to freedom which if not handled properly will soon be extended to national issues. Cohabiting is a long products segment of the western cultural liberalization that blindly rummaging through the eastern cultural stagnation. Yet in this case, moral and ethical beliefs are reliable barometer of the most vital and filters to block the injection of western culture it. Morals and ethics often bear the social criticism of anything that deviates as part of the interaction. Without them, western culture would mock each other in and colonize its own culture.

Talk on Human Rights (HAM), we will always hit on the problem of subjectivity and objectivity. Using human rights as a weapon of freedom of relationship (cohabiting) was not a wise move. Presumably, we also need to quote the words of Dewi Lestari in his novel 'Supernova: Roots' that sometimes people do have to scold each other to understand. Context, sometimes the truth does need coercion in its application. Like it or not.

Shifting views on the institution of marriage. For them, cohabiting and marriage only have paper-thin difference that led to the problem of identity and status are yet again faced with the notion that love can not be standardized, objected and arranged in such a way. Unlike thin it is just a listing before the formal institutions of the ruling. Institutions that are considered competent to be formally consecrated love affair. Marriage was a way of tying a couple to each other, so bound by "law." But in the end, many couples divorce is because, it turns out the law was not considered fair or impartial. In addition, the status of legally married and recorded in the statistical records that led to the conviction will be useful to all parties not guarantee the end result is a happy-ending. The erosion of respect for social norms and customs prevailing in society. In this case, social norms more closely related to the customs even though they are clearly something different. Indeed, in social norms, of course there are things that potentially lead to conflict. The presumption smell reality proves that the case of the clash of love and indigenous causes a lot of complicated contradictions and problems that are hard to find a mutual meeting point. On the one hand, people want to remain enforce customary with all its originality. But on the other hand, love is a natural instinct that can not be standardized, objected or regulated by polishing the love for traditional parallel. Purity of love is considered beyond the sanctity of indigenous peoples. Then came the opinion that love is something that grows as the growth of the heart rate. While the custom is only limited to the results of human reason., Behavior that is too idolize and deify love without being able to translate the essence of true love. People are too excessive in view of love. For them, love is everything. Love here never will be far from limited to the corridor understanding the relationship of love beings of the opposite sex. It would substantially narrow the meaning of love. The love that makes the visitor must fight for all his wishes fulfilled regardless of surrounding conditions. So, the motto ‘dunia hanya milik berdua, yang lain ngontrak’ a verse which purified. All the things that will destroy the chance of love, will they lunge. If this happens, the opportunity to put religion and the law increasingly revealed as the biggest barrier width.