Marriage doesn't need adjectival qualification.
Indeed the only qualification that I have any sympathy with is "underage"; and indeed that is already covered by the law. Like namely it is NOT a marriage under law.
And we wouldn't for a moment think of qualifying marriage of two people in their 70s as "Pensioner Marriage"---I have incidentally conducted such a wedding. The Bride's mother was also there (aged 95), and her daughter, and her granddaughter who was with child ...so there is an excellent photo of 5 generations even if the youngest is ion her mother's womb....
I myself was once party to a marriage of people born in two different countries....it has never-ever been referred to as "interracial", or even "international" or "cross national"..we were just married.
I likewise have married people of different races...it would be offensive to call this "interracial".
I have married quite a number of interfaith couples; and indeed couples of no faith (an expression, I suspect, which is devoid of meaning...yet full of import)
I have never enquired about people's sexual predilections; so I have no idea whether anyone of the 400+ people I have married are same-sex attracted, racially attracted, religiously biassed (I have discovered latterly...and surprisingly...that a few are some of these things).
To my mind everyone should have opportunity to marry... this is not about sex, race, nationality...