What is it exactly you want out this 'discussion' StG?

Did you want an actual answer to something or an opportunity to tell us your opinion?

The answer to your final question in the OP, was that marriage and monogamy are not against evolution, neither is polygamy, polyandry, polygyny nor any of a multitude of mating schemes.

What else you you want?

Stg,

Several statements were taken as fact in your post and built on to reach your ridiculous conclusion.

The following statement is wrong:

"Man was designed to breed and hang around till around when the kid was 3 years old then sod off and sow his seed again. "

Anyone with more than a year 3 knowledge of evolution would know that for higher order animals that take longer to mature, evolution favours those who support their children until they are capable of taking care of themselves.

As Humans take longer than a decade, the evolutionary perogative is for longer term relationships.

So marriage is a product of evolution and not in spite of it.

StG,
I'm more an agnostic. I got married twice in a church merely to be compliant.
I refer you to an essay by Gore vidal that I posted here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3094

It talks rather nicely to your topic.

Well Stg,

I never got married. My kids would more than likely be considered 'bastards' had they been born in another era.

But, I chose to enter into my de facto arrangement, and have children, as I love my partner. See, it's not very hard to explain.

Incidentaly, the government changed the laws recently, and people who wish to live together and not be financially tied for life by the government must explicitly opt-in for this priveledge...

http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Families_NewDeFactoPropertyRegime#d5

ie, even if you don't want to be married, the government has decided you planned and are responsible for any live-in partner for the rest of their life, and if you don't like that, you better see a lawyer.

The law equates the rights of de facto partners (including same sex partners) with married couples as to property settlement, superannuation splitting and spouse maintenance. Whether they intended this or not. There is no such option of not getting married, you have to explicitly pay the legal fees to opt out. You are married by default, whether you believe in the concept or not.

It's something to do with wanting gay people to have the same rights, but not wanting to allow them to marry. Or maybe it's a feminist conspiracy, but you'd have to ask antiseptic.

I read an article where it stated that if 2 18yos lived together for a couple of years and broke up, the inheritance of one is available for the other to claim. Doesn't make much sense to me. Or if two 50 year olds want to keep their financial independence, they must know about the law and get a common law contract if they wish to live together.

I reckon the government should just butt out and accept that people who don't get married chose not to. Those who wanted to be protected by the marriage laws and have the state recognise their marriage should get married. Pretty simple. But then I suppose they would have to let gay people get married Shock horror.

Dear Stg,

When you consider that we're all born into
relationships - starting with the maternal one,
often held up as an ideal form of love - it seems
only natural that people generally want to share their
life with a partner. Love and affection are beneficial
throughout life, and people know this innately.
Marriage isn't compulsory, of course, and it may be
likely to occur less frequently in the future, but it's
a fair bet people will continue to fall in love and
try to find harmony together just as they've always done.

Dear Stg - you ask -
Why marry in a ritual ceremony instead of a registry
office if you're an atheist? Well, at a guess - I'd say
it's about people wanting the event to be something
special. They've found what they need to nurture their
souls, to give life meaning - that special someone -
and they want their ceremony of commitment to have the
wondrous, mysterious element in it as well. There are no
hard and fast rules for why people chose to do what they
do - I just think that the sense of contentment, of
sharing, of oneness with another human being is perhaps
the most elegant of human feelings. Your souls are merged,
and all the world's your paradise. Why wouldn't you want
the ceremony to be as special as your relationship is?

Stg, I wasn't really an athiest when I got married in a Catholic church some years ago, I was more of a skeptic really.

This church was built across the road from our home when I was a child and we used to play on the building site!
So it had great sentimental value when I came to want to get married there years later.

Yes, I was christened a Catholic, but had long since left the fold.
I did still want to get married there though.

The priest, even though he knew I was a lapsed Catholic was still quite happy to marry us and take our money for the service.

So I guess you could have called both us and the priest hypocrits!

It is no one else's business where anyone wants to get married or not as far as I am concerned.