I'm loathe to raise an issue of fervid preoccupation of some, but I saw a pair of letters in a recent Weekend Australian that dealt with the issue nicely.
The first letter aligns with my view: without trying to be crude; marriage is about sex; sex, at least in princple, leads to procreation. If procreation is not possible, then it is not 'sex' but something else. 'Para-sex', maybe. But, with Long's letter, cut off from procreation, from bringing new life, we merely have a centripetal spiral of self indulgence: a narcisistic implosion: it is not about 'love' as concieved by the author of love, but about self, because it cannot produce life.
The second author, Burdon, misses the point entirely and has reduced 'love' to its hijacking by Hollywood fluff. We get nowhere, and certainly cannot 'hijack' God's revelation to bolster the implosive selfishness.