Marriage (and/or a binding relationship) is not very popular among modern people, who believe strongly in promoted "pseudo-liberality".
As an aside:
The word religion has very similar meaning like marriage, deriving from "religiō".
The classical explanation of the word, traced to Cicero himself, derives it from re- (again) + lego in the sense of "choose", "go over again" or "consider carefully". Modern scholars such as Tom Harpur and Joseph Campbell favor the derivation from ligo "bind, connect", probably from a prefixed re-ligare, i.e. re- (again) + ligare or "to reconnect," which was made prominent by St. Augustine, following the interpretation of Lactantius.
A certain text from a possibly well-known song came to mind the last days:
Love and marriage, love and marriage
go together like a horse and carriage
this I tell you brother
you can't have one without the other.
Next to the possibly well-known wordily marriage issues, the "marriage" stance with the Jewels, for Nibbana in a guided, related way, goes "informal" like that:
“I go to the Blessed One for refuge, and the Dhamma and the Saṅgha of monks.
“May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge from this day forward, for life.
What do you think, or what would you like to share on Dhamma, in relation to bonding, duties in relation to one partner (for worldly bliss), but also in regard of the relation with the Triple Gems for an end of suffering:
Is it possible to gain, either this in this world, or that beyond, if there is no real refuge and total acceptance of the duties in this "contract"?
Can a Hallodri (lightheaded man/woman) expect to gain one or the other, e.g. without real relationship (refuge), if they're either not giving promises or if they're carelessly breaking promises?
And what about relationships where both people mutually agree not to be loyal: can any higher attainment be expected then?
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains my means of trade and exchange]