The institute of marriage has long been viewed as a very specific form of union, which, perhaps incorrectly, has also been viewed as a rigid and unchanging phenomenon, both in terms of definition and practically.

So we thought we’d share this piece by Cristina Odone, who mourns the evolution of laws relating to marriage in this morning’s article, and tells us that marriage has come under siege, co-habitation is a misguided option made alluring by the seemingly elitist and bureaucratic marriage process and that both men and women stand to lose out financially if they don’t stick to the conventional notion of marriage.

Our question to you this week, then, is do you agree with Cristina’s views?

Possible answer: No, we don’t. Marriage, like all customs, must evolve, as it once did, to allow the positive evolution of civilisation to go forwards. We don’t buy into the argument that the legal implications of either choice should be a barrier – we need to evolve our laws too, so that it reflects completely, all unions of this nature.