Here is an argument I came across in my discussion:

Actually the for life part is wrong, as that gives rise to these false beliefs that divorce is wrong, which we know isn’t true. Marriage is the union between two consenting adults that has no time stamp on it, whereas mutah is. The problem you seem to have is, you dislike it- which is fine, but that is totally irrelevant on whether or not it can be done or not. Let’s not pretend to turn a blind eye to real world issues, this is a hyper sexualized time and not everyone is monolithic in their views on life. Marriage (without time stamp) is an option for people who wish to go down this path, as marriage is not fard (required). For those who don’t wish to go down this path, Mutah is an option. This entire talk about “ruins the traditional family marriage” is really nonsensical. If someone wishes to have a family, their mind isn’t just gonna change if Mutah is allowed, no one is telling them to partake in Mutah lol. If someone does want to partake in Mutah, that is their choice and literally has no effect on other muslims traditional family marriages. I think what you might inadvertently be saying is, Mutah is better than marriage- I disagree but the reason why I say you might be saying this without knowing is because you seem to be operating under the fear assumption that socially the fabric of traditional family marriages are gonna collapse. I have full trust in the traditional marriage structure, and I’m not insecure about it collapsing or something if Mutah is allowed. I think this issue goes back to the persons understanding of God, religion etc. Yes Islam has aspects within it that are meant to be communal, but that doesn’t negate the fact that Islam is for all people, who go on their own individual life journeys. It’s one thing to make a case that Mutah is not the best, but to state is haram is an entire issue. I will say, a case that it is haram or not is an actual case that can be made, not whether it’s moral or not.

I say it’s not good to argue whether its moral or not because I’m not going to argue that the Prophet of God allowed immoral actions. The institution of slavery for example during the Prophets time was immoral but he had clearly incentivized it’s end through various means, basically trajectory hermeneutics. So I bring this up because even if we say slavery is immoral, which it is, the Prophet wasn’t just allowing it, it was already a deeply rooted system during his time as it was in many other places such as the US later on etc. However now on an immoral action as you claim zina, or prostitution, I refuse to debate if the Prophet allowed immorality, as that is in turn what you would be saying. This would be the case because we are talking about sex here, not something deeply rooted in a system that is hard to just end, it is sex. So the Prophet of God allowed temporary zina or prostitution makes no sense, as no man is going to die from not having sex, meaning it wasn’t something he had to just “accept” like slavery which even then he didn’t but he couldn’t out right stop it. But if we are to say the Prophet of God let people feast on their desires immorally, an immoral act that unlike slavery which something that was deeply rooted, then this tarnishes the image of the Prophet pbuh and I don’t debate these things. Same goes btw with the Prophet marrying a 6 year old, I don’t debate this because of what it implies the Prophet was, which he isn’t because Aisha ra wasn’t 6, but that’s besides the point.

The point made about divorce is interesting. If marriage is supposed to be done with the intent of life and it is for the child then why is a divorce allowed at all?