Final answer:
Genesis 2:24 is traditionally cited as support for heterosexual marriage and is often considered to imply a permanent bond, but the verse does not directly address the notion that premarital sex is wrong, which is the implication not related to Genesis 2:24.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks which of these implications is not related to Genesis 2:24. The passage is often referred to in discussions of marriage and sexuality. While interpretations can vary, traditionally, Genesis 2:24 has been seen as supporting the concepts of marital union and heterosexuality, suggesting that marriage is between a male and female and that it forms a permanent bond. The implication that premarital sex is wrong is not directly addressed by the verse; such an interpretation would be derived from broader scriptural contexts or doctrinal teachings that are not contained within the verse itself.
Furthermore, debates concerning what constitutes a marriage and a family reflect divergent views among conservatives and progressives, with some citing religious and biological arguments for a traditional view, while others advocate for recognition of same-sex marriages based on principles of consent and non-discrimination. Additionally, legal recognitions such as Obergefell v. Hodges have affirmed the legality of same-sex marriage, illustrating changing societal norms.