I think you will find a way to disagree with ANYTHING I reply with...so...good luck.
(sigh)
Your counter-points are moving closer and closer to how a liberal debates politics.
"Chemistry can keep a marriage sex-life together"
You read that as:
"Chemistry does everything"
see where the disconnect is? You aren't reading what i'm typing, you're reading what you want to see.
It could be that you've never had real 'chemistry' with a woman? I dunno. I've experienced it, and it was one of the most powerfull things ever...years later (now) i'm STILL talking about it.
Chemistry between a man and a woman is VITAL for a happy, healthy sex life. Sex without 'chemistry' between the couple is barely above masturbation in terms of 'usefullness'.
I'm going to speculate that you will reply to that last section with something like:
"It's impossible to romance and take time with one's mate for sex. Quickies behind the shed can be just as bonding".
So - here's my reply to what I think you may be thinking:
You may not be reading. I'm saying 'Chemistry' is a bond that brings people together...and when one has chemistry with the person one has sex with, things are amazing; I'd argue w/o chemistry, one would never GET the quickies.