David committed both adultery and murder; yet God, in His wisdom, brought the promised Savior / Messiah through that adulterous union. Mat Chapter 1 and Luk 3:23-38.
It seems to me that this alone behooves us to be less rigid in our pronouncements and rules.
The Sermon on the mount is full of didactic hyperbole, a teaching technique wherein a case is intentionally overstated to show the importance of the principle.
Matt 5:29-30
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
KJV
Do you suppose that the verses above were intended to be literally applied?
Matt 5:31-32
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
KJV
These are the verses under discussion.
Matt 5:40
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
KJV
Any thorough historical study of first century Israel will prove that most people (except the priests) wore only those two garments; and parting with both would result in total nudity. If your daughter is told to remove her dress should she offer her underwear. I think not!