***People expect more from marriage than they did a century ago, when it was mainly a practical arrangement to provide financial stability for women and a place to raise children. ***
My marriage isnt a century old its merely 44 years. However my wife and I didnt get married as a practical arrangement to provide financial security for her and to raise kids.
If this is why socialogists believe people marry, its no wonder they want to recognise gay marriages. They dont have any idea of what a real marriage is. A marriage is a commitment for life between a man and a woman who love each other. Sometimes they go downhill, but the origianl idea was the commitment for life. Anything else is not a marriage its a business deal.
For love or money, marriage is here to stay
From the link:
"Having enough money was a common consideration, along with the view that marriage signifies that one is no longer struggling economically, in essence, that marriage comes when one has already achieved a certain economic status," Smock said. "Most commonly, this status includes home ownership, getting out of debt, financial stability and essentially not living paycheck to paycheck."
Smock and Manning also found that having enough money to afford a "real" wedding was a concern for many cohabitors. Going downtown to the courthouse is not considered a real wedding, Smock noted. Some of the couples interviewed said they were delaying marriage until they could afford a church wedding and reception, and many expected they would need to pay for their weddings themselves—without help from their parents.
If this is the case, it sounds to me like it's not about idealizing marriage, but materializing marriage. And if that's true, there's nothing idealistic about that.