What do you call "the community promoting" something?
There are no bumper stickers in these communities reading "be religious: make more babies" or anyting to that effect.
ROFL
I got the impression from some of the posts that certain sect (hope that is the right word) it was expected to marry young and have children right away. Am I reading this wrong?
No
If this same pressure was exerted to have a lot (10+ to pick a number) of children
No pressure at all, just a mitzvah
First of all, halacha doesnt start and end in the shulchan aruch, in order to understand the Shu"a we must look back at his sources all the way through to the torah.
Now, do you really thing the practical obligation to wake up before the neitz, is the same as the obligation to make a bris milah?
Now, Beis din are kofe to be mekayim anything that one is absolutely required to do. This is because it is their responsibility to ensure one complies with all obligations. Therefore, they don't have to wake people up at alois, since that is not an absolute requirement, but are koife people to have a bris milan.
Requirements can have 2 origins - deoriasa and derbanan. In the first, G-D directly commands a specific action, and we know so either because it is written in the torah, or by masoires (Halacha lemoshe msinayi, etc). The second origin is derbanan. Chazal had the power to make commandments similar to Gd. For example, the requirement to take תרומות ומעשרות bezman haze (according to some opinions) is a commandment similar to the din deroisa of תרומות ומעשרותin the olden days.
Anything not falling under the realm of those two origins, is not a chiyuv.
I ask you again, do you have a source that subscribes any less importance to marrying before (or starting at least at) 20 then any other halacha in Shu"a?
Any
posek? Any sefer? Any one?
Where do you get that there is any less of a chiyuv (because beis din is not כופין)?
מקור please.
The רמ"א specifically here writes that בזמה"ז נהגו שלא לכוף ע"ז (FYI the ערוה"ש disagrees in principle), to the contrary everywhere else by most other halachos it's usually not even mentioned whether כופין or not, and the נושאי כלים specifically say the reason(s) why in this instance בי"ד אין כופין (perhaps to show that the practical obligation stays the same?), yet at the same time they don't seem to (at all) minimize the practical obligation - the chiyuv..
(waking up at עלוה"ש is only a
mitzvah
מן המובחר so no kidding..)