I’ve never understood this analogy , kids being a bigger commitment in a relationship. You can have kids with someone you’re not committed to.

You can have kids with someone and not be in a relationship with them but you are (in most cases) committing to co parent with that person until the kids are at least 18. There is still some form of relationship: you are co-parents.
If you get maried and divorce with out kids you never have to see that person again. If you have kids with them, you have committed to having that person in your life for a long time like it or not.

But it isn’t a commitment to you it’s a commitment to the kids. Like you say, like it or not. Marriage is quite different, 99.9% of the time because you love the person and want to be with them not because you have to.

When you agree to have kids with someone, you are committing to having that person in your life for a very long time. If you commit to marrying someone, as you said it is a choice. You commit to them until you choose not to and then you can get a divorce and never see that person again. Some marriages only last a few weeks/months/years. You don't get that choice if you have children. Yes you can get divorced but then you have to put up with that person in your life for the sake of the kids and the commitment you made to them when you had children in the first place. Therefore to me, having kids is more of a commitment.

The commitment in the case of a split is to do with the kids though. Which is my point. You might not even want to be around that person. And you don’t even need to talk to them if you don’t want to, you can communicate through a 3rd party. Where is the commitment to your ex there ? And in the case of my father, some choose not to co parent at all and disappear altogether doing just the absolute minimum which was pay my mother maintenance, which barely covered anything. There might be some commitment to the ex out obligation, but not love. You will find it’s all
About the kids. It isn’t the same as marriage at all.

New responder your missing the point.

Having a child with someone is committing to a life that involves that person in one way or another. You can’t go back on the choice.
Getting married is not an irrevocable commitment. You can always go back on it.

Ergo , kids are a bigger commitment.

I’m not missing the point. OP of this thread asked if marriage was a deal breaker. OP of this post said having kids with someone is a bigger commitment so no. My answer is in the context of the thread, that this post is suggesting to me that having kids is the same as a commitment of marriage. But my point is they aren’t the same. Sure, raising a kid is a bigger commitment but it can’t be compared to a marriage.

This is my response everyone is replying on. Note that I said 'in my eyes', because I know other people will have other opinions and that is fine, it's not a right or wrong situation, just personal opinions. It's hard to explain (and hard to truly know, as I'm not in the situation), but if my now husband and I had agreed that we were going to be life partners but weren't going to get married, I feel the agreement to have children maybe makes it feel like we'd be in it for the long haul. Obviously having kids is no guarantee that a relationship will last, neither is a marriage. Sorry I can't really describe it clearly haha.

Plenty of people walk away from their commitments to kids. Don’t see them. Sook about child support and actively try to get around paying it.
Commitment is a very individual thing and it’s defined by people differently.