Sex after marriage not before

I feel pretty guilty about accepting a 1-round debate, because any argument I make--no matter how silly--will mean an automatic win for me, being the only argument in the entire debate. However, from reading Pro's first round, I don't think that this fact matters much to him/her. Instead, it appears clear that Pro wants to learn some possible arguments from the Con position, and not necessarily to win. I will therefore oblige Pro and give several good arguments for the Con position, even though I only need one bad argument to win. =Same sex and/or polyamorous relationships= Currently, there is no institutional marriage for same sex or polyamorous partners in many places. Thus, no matter their commitment, all sex that they have would be "pre-marital. " Obviously, same sex and polyamorous partners have as much a right to sex as monogamous different sex partners. Thus, in the interest of equality and living relationships, premarital sex is vital for many same sex and polyamorous partnerships. =Freedom to break up= Institutional marriage is about a financial commitment, and not a personal commitment (although of course these aren't mutually-exclusive). In order to break up with a sweetheart after marriage, one needs a divorce. Many people want strong personal relationships without having to divulge their bank account. Many people also want the freedom to break up, without having to request the court's permission (divorse). Thus, marriage is bad for these people. =Non-commitment= Some people may want to have relationships without a strong commitment. These relationships are perfectly fine too! Sex does not always imply a need for long-term commitment. For these people, marriage is a really bad idea. =trial run= It may be a good idea for some engaged couples to have sex and live together, to practice what it would be like to be married. This will help prevent nasty marriages. =Anti-marriage= Marriage comes from the idea that women could be bought and sold like property to other people. This commitment to the husband might strike some as uncomfortable. They may want to oppose this historically sexist institution and instead prefer relationships where partners has absolute freedom to do what they want, without the interference of the state =solidarity/activism= People may want to avoid marriage or postpone marriage to show their solidarity with those for whom marriage isn't allowed. They may choose to avoid marriage as a form of activism or protest. =Cost= Marriages are often expensive, as are weddings. One may choose to wait for the wedding but not sex until they can afford a very nice one with a traditional honeymoon. That's their choice. It may also save some embarrassment if they don't want it known that they are poor. =Lazy= Marriages take a lot of planning and work. Why not avoid it altogether? =private or secret relationships= Some people may not want their relationship publicly known. For example, maybe they are in an interracial marriage and have racist parents. This is their decision. Maybe they want to elope together. Again, their decision. I think that's probably a fair number of decent arguments. I hope this was helpful!