That’s a good point, yet is it always true for all cases? Because; adulterers for example, sometimes do not have to proclaim publicly they have the right to do what they do, they just do it and it’s accepted and encouraged by their friends, it’s called divorce. One week a couple could be together, and the next they could both be with somebody else, and they go get papers signed and have wedding parties to and make their new vows. If that isn't but nothing more than an institution, and often accompanied by celebration I don’t know what is?
I am not trying to defend promiscuity outside of marriage between one man and one woman bonded in union to monogamous relationship, and the commandment to raise children, just curious of the issue of promiscuity, and why it is OK for some not for others , or why it is OK for some married couples not to have children and not others, and why these issues are not tearing apart churches, and no big public debate. The whole institution of marriage seems to be cracking, such that more people are single now than ever before, and nobody cares?
It’s not only the sin of promiscuity outside of marriage between one man and one woman, but also selective humbleness and forgiveness in the church, to accept institutionalized sin in our secular society, which perhaps it all means we are approaching the end times, maybe this is the real issue?
That's to avoid precisely the situation you describe.
Obviously this makes some people upset and resentful . . . but on the other hand the alternative is a devaluing of marriage.