Xref: utzoo sci.psychology:3813 sci.bio:4098 alt.romance:5676 soc.men:24134 soc.singles:74591 misc.legal:23030 talk.religion.newage:7936
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!helps!uudell!pmafire!reiser
From: reiser@pmafire.inel.gov (Steve Reiser)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,sci.bio,alt.romance,soc.men,soc.singles,misc.legal,talk.religion.newage
Subject: Why have Marriage Laws? (was Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?)
Message-ID: <1990Dec06.185754.29171@pmafire.inel.gov>
Date: 6 Dec 90 18:57:54 GMT
Followup-To: sci.psychology
Organization: Winco Process Development, Idaho
Lines: 12

Many of the postings on this question lead to a belief that we aren't
necessarily monogamous by nature.  If that is true, why not let people
select any combination of relationships as long as all of the people
involved are happy? (instead of enforcing current marriage laws)

Steve

P.S. - Currently "shacked-up" (<--my mother's label) with my EX-wife!
	 and it's more romantic than ever!

-- 
Steve Reiser (reiser@pmafire.UUCP or ...!uunet!pmafire!reiser)