In my religion, marriage is a sort of a sacrament, but it is also a contract. There's a standard form for a marriage contract, in which the parties are identified by their full names and patronyms. The contract is read before witnesses, who then sign it.

The contents of the contract are the interesting part. In essence, it says that the husband will put aside a certain amount of money (the minimum amount, for someone who can't afford a lot, is not that much) for his wife's benefit, in case he predeceases her or they divorce. However, it also describes the conditions of this contract. Foremost among these are the things a man must provide for his wife: food, clothing and sex. So, yes, this is a two-thousand-year-old tradition that lack of sexual satisfaction is a valid reason for divorce, and furthermore - not meaning to brag or anything, ha ha - that a man who stays married can satisfy his wife.

There was a mildly awkward bit in which my father goofed as he read the contract. As he hadn't rehearsed it, he accidentally read a part he wasn't supposed to. My full name and patronym are simple enough: it's my given name, then "son of [my father's name]". My wife's patronym, however, does not refer to her father Richard, but to one of the Biblical patriarchs. Had she simply been named in the contract "daughter of Abraham" that would have been okay, innocuous. However, the contract says "daughter of Abraham the patriarch", which identifies her as a convert. While it needs to be written, because she is in fact a convert, it is inappropriate to read it aloud; one does not mark out a convert as a convert to a public gathering, lest they become embarrassed.