|
If you must remove love from the equation (and I don't really know why you would), the primary reason for marriage is a committed, socially-accepted partnership. Not so much for you as a couple, but for all the others out there, all the institutions, all the banks, all the governments.
The marriage contract suggests stability, which commercial and government institutions like, and will allow you to do things you can't do when you're considered "unstable."
The contract establishes a partnership, meaning you tie your resources together. My wife and I would never have been able to buy our house individually... but with the exact same resources, together, we were a shoe-in.
The contract is legally binding, so you know you have legal recourse if that partnership is unilaterally dissolved... there is less of a concern of being abandoned at an inconvenient time, and a possibility of recompense if you are (a concern of those taking care of children).
All of this, in our modern age, is what keeps the institution of marriage relevant.
Love makes it equally irrelevant.
|