In America, the popular public society-wide meme opinion is "sex is bad outside of procreation." You're not allowed to encourage it, you're not allowed to make it safer, and many doctors aren't even comfortable talking about it.
Running a "birth-free sex" program is an affront to the victorian sensibilities of genital shame and a general war on happiness. The one true path is dedication to god and hard work, not personal enjoyment of anything. And we're going to have our 80 year old half-senile business moguls fund all politicians to ensure sex is always dangerous, unsafe, and bad for you.
That's reasonably common in the US if the parents are religious. If the kid and their significant other are visiting parents and aren't married then they aren't allowed to sleep in the same room (because they might do shenanigans!).
Actually, I apply to rule to all house guests. You're not married, you sleep in separate rooms.
My house, my rules. You're welcome to stay at the hotel down the street if you can't handle sleeping apart from each other and we'll cheerfully roll out the red carpet and provide chauffeur service for you.
Do the criteria require one of a civic marriage, a religious marriage or both? If the latter in isolation is acceptable, as it has no legal power, would domestic partnerships then also be an acceptable alternative?
In America, the popular public society-wide meme opinion is "sex is bad outside of procreation." You're not allowed to encourage it, you're not allowed to make it safer, and many doctors aren't even comfortable talking about it.
Running a "birth-free sex" program is an affront to the victorian sensibilities of genital shame and a general war on happiness. The one true path is dedication to god and hard work, not personal enjoyment of anything. And we're going to have our 80 year old half-senile business moguls fund all politicians to ensure sex is always dangerous, unsafe, and bad for you.