Same-Sex Marriages

[Rubeus]

im surprised this got to page 3 before getting assinine. I'd personally like to see this thread closed for that very reason.

P.S.: I'm gay, I play a male Hume and my boyfriend plays a mithra. So, no, this isn't me being "insensitive." I just don't really need to read all this hate in a game forum.

[Rubeus]

@Xilk: marriage was originally created to serve the purpose of increasing personal family wealth and making countries not go to war with eachother. Then it became the bill of sale of a woman. Now it's a religious thing, which is actually VERY recent. so don't talk about things you don't know about.

Also, samurai had homosexuality and it was very okay. Greeks had it, Romans had it, American Indians had it, and Hindu's had it pre-Gandhi. sooooo stfu.

[Rubeus]

Also, one in every 10 people is gay, worldwide, which is true. we are not a minority group. we are here. we've BEEN here. we've helped in YOUR wars, YOUR economy, and YOUR struggles. we have hidden because YOU persecuted us. YOU can now sit down and take a back seat as we ask for our dues.

[Rubeus]

Being gay isn't a sexual deviance. Neither is it "shoving it in anyone's face." this is a suggestion forum, this is the suggestion. It's actually very standard a request. He's not converting people. He's not preaching on the rooftops. But many straight couples in FFXI preach about their husbands and wives etc etc. How is that different from me talking about my boyfriend?

you really need a lesson in being less of a histrionic pissant.

[Rubeus]

omg thank you Sagian, you're my new best friend.

[Rubeus]

@Ilax we only have gay parades because we DON'T have the rights of a straight person, i.e. we cannot get health insurance, make family decisions together, adopt children easily (in some states its next to impossible), get a tax break, etc. If you gave gay people that, and didn't call it marriage, we would be happy I think. If you said, "go buy property together and do your taxes together and everything else marriage entails. P.S. we're calling this Purple Hippopotamus Joint Custody Bill of Sale" we'd still be like OMG THANK YOU and probably wouldn't have parades anymore. :P

just my personal belief.

[Rosalie]

At this point, I wouldn't mind seeing this thread closed either, as it's degenerated from a request to make in-game items and ceremonies that are ALREADY AVAILABLE to ALL types of couples (unless you want to marry your npc whut) slightly more convenient (which, btw, can't be done for political bull**** reasons that are beyond SE's control) into a political argument about sexual preferences and oppression.

I'm just surprised this hasn't turned into a Galkan oppression cryfest already.

Also @Rubeus: (not to be mean, but try editing your post instead of sextuple posting next time?)

[Rubeus]

@Xilk: "marriage is a freedom" "its popular to title things as a right when it's not" "marriage is a privilege" ... hmm.. no. you can't have both. and freedom should belong to everyone, not just who you deem worthy of having it.

Also, the original hebrew bible never mentions homosexuality. soooo again, you're wrong. and Indian culture was very popular with gay relationships before Gandhi destroyed a lot of the evidence, but not all of it. Which is also a fact, btw.

Also, Japan's had christianity since the 1500s. So, how is that not a background?

... @Chrism wow. you really used the earthquake as a reason not to do this. THAT is low. INCREDIBLY low.

@ Rosalie: is this better? ^^ sorry, didn't think of it.

also, LOL @ galkas in dresses and cat on cat, furthermore, it IS just a game and it wouldn't make an OMGHUGE difference but nonetheless.

Yawn and Vivik did all the work for me on explaining how I felt. so, thank you guys.

now if you'll excuse me before this gets 40 pages of DUMB I'm going to RUN AWAY SCREAMING before someone else says something asinine and I feel the intense need to punch them for being a religious zealot, right-wing idiot, troll, or prat. *never reading again*

[Xilk]

@Xilk: "marriage is a freedom" "its popular to title things as a right when it's not" "marriage is a privilege" ... hmm.. no. you can't have both. and freedom should belong to everyone, not just who you deem worthy of having it.

Also, the original hebrew bible never mentions homosexuality. soooo again, you're wrong. and Indian culture was very popular with gay relationships before Gandhi destroyed a lot of the evidence, but not all of it. Which is also a fact, btw.

Also, Japan's had christianity since the 1500s. So, how is that not a background?

... @Chrism wow. you really used the earthquake as a reason not to do this. THAT is low. INCREDIBLY low.

@ Rosalie: is this better? ^^ sorry, didn't think of it.

also, LOL @ galkas in dresses and cat on cat, furthermore, it IS just a game and it wouldn't make an OMGHUGE difference but nonetheless.

Yawn and Vivik did all the work for me on explaining how I felt. so, thank you guys.

now if you'll excuse me before this gets 40 pages of DUMB I'm going to RUN AWAY SCREAMING before someone else says something asinine and I feel the intense need to punch them for being a religious zealot, right-wing idiot, troll, or prat. *never reading again*

translation on the end: "I've said a bunch of false, foolish things and I'm going to run away before anyone calls me on them so I can pretend to be above the argument."

Freedom is finite. Asking for all personal freedom is asking for anarchy. People have more freedom because power and freedom grow when we are united. We promise some freedoms to all in our country. This is not a guarentee of all freedoms.

Christianity in Japan at its peek is a small sliver. It does not form the core values, beliefs or customs of the civilization like it does in many nations in the west. the difference is ubiquitous and obvious. Go there sometime or somewhere else. Make a comparative study and 1st hand observation of what things are common amongst humans and what things are common only among cultures.

The Hebrew bible does specifically list homosexuality in many places the mosiac law in exodus for one example... Sodomy is mentioned in Genesis in the practice of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah for which the practice was named... I don't understand your point here though. My only reference to the bible was as an example that marriage clearly predates Western Civilization. I find it mildly surprising and irritating that someone can persist in ignorance of this.

Freedom comes as a result of choice and how power is exercised. More people united results in more freedom for all. When you break people into groups to separate and distinct them, then they compete for freedom and power. This is simply how it works. Its not even a matter of beliefs or moral judgment.

Marriage entails a great deal of responsibility. with that comes freedom, yes, but also agreement to restriction in freedom. One door opens, another door closes. It is a privilege in that you need to convince someone to marry you. I feel quite privileged when someone gives a gift especially such a gift as the commitment of marriage.

I agreed from the start that this thread would not be a great place. I saw only contention possible to come from it. I don't think it is needed for the game. However, I feel very strongly about this topic and I will not stay silent if the debate is here. I feel a responsibility to give fair response to the issue. If it goes completely uncontested, then readers will have no options by which to judge their beliefs and feelings.

All my arguments in this thread have been against same-sex marriage. I have made no accusations against homosexuality directly. I have also made it quite clear that I do not agree with it. I do not believe it is a good thing. I would not take personal offense at anyone stating they are gay. I do not believe homosexuality is as simple as "born that way". I cannot say it is as simple as a choice either, although this is what I believe is more prevalent. However, our choices form who we are and who we become much more than our natures. Of this, I do not doubt. I do not want to presume to judge why anyone is individually homosexual. I do not have the benefit of omniscience which is prerequisite for a good judgment in such a matter. I am convinced that their are many who are NOT born that way. I am quite confident that there are many who are driven to homosexuality through social pressures. Homosexuality itself however has not been a point of my argument in this forum at all however. It has been about law and same-sex marriage.

Your accusations are exactly what I do not like. "Religious Zealot" , "right-wing idiot"

This tells me you do not look at the ideas. You are applying derogatory labels to "the other side" of the argument. You are reducing it to "my group vs any other group, and forget the details!" Perhaps you have encountered zealots and idiots opposing and offending you. its not exactly rare... You should recognize there are plenty of zealots and idiots on both sides of the argument. They do not help the issue at all. You sound rather zealotous yourself.

Demonizing and name calling are not at all conducive to a meaningful discussion. They only purpose as an attempt to embarrass, shame and ultimately SILENCE your opposition without respecting their right freedom of speech or belief. it is a weasel tactic of one who would deny them such freedom if they could.

A few other posts use the term "Homophobic" for exactly this purpose as well. It is applied to anyone who does not believe homosexuality is right and just as good (read better) than heterosexuality. The term itself tries to be ambiguous by having several levels of meaning and application, none of which quite fit.
One level of meaning is it implies one has an irrational and unexplainable fear of homosexuality.

I do not fear homosexuality. It is not scary.. I find the thought of engaging in homosexual acts rather repulsive, but this is not fear. I believe I could recover from the emotional trauma I believe I would encounter if i participated (willfully or unwillfully) in such an act.

On another level it is used to depict someone as a hater. Someone so full of hate for homosexuals that it overrides all other judgments. Again I cannot feel this applies to me. I have known homosexuals. I do not believe it is the definition of a person. I believe it may be one part of someone's life, and I do not agree with it.

Homophobe is a very derogatory term. It is too broadly applied and it only serves to marginalize and ignore those who do not share a view about homosexuality.

I have consistently argued against same-sex marriage in this thread because I believe it is a real threat to Marriage, freedom and family. I believe it is a destructive thing for our society.

[NrvnqsrKhaos]

translation on the end: "I've said a bunch of false, foolish things and I'm going to run away before anyone calls me on them so I can pretend to be above the argument."

Freedom is finite. Asking for all personal freedom is asking for anarchy. People have more freedom because power and freedom grow when we are united. We promise some freedoms to all in our country. This is not a guarentee of all freedoms.

Christianity in Japan at its peek is a small sliver. It does not form the core values, beliefs or customs of the civilization like it does in many nations in the west. the difference is ubiquitous and obvious. Go there sometime or somewhere else. Make a comparative study and 1st hand observation of what things are common amongst humans and what things are common only among cultures.

The Hebrew bible does specifically list homosexuality in many places the mosiac law in exodus for one example... Sodomy is mentioned in Genesis in the practice of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah for which the practice was named... I don't understand your point here though. My only reference to the bible was as an example that marriage clearly predates Western Civilization. I find it mildly surprising and irritating that someone can persist in ignorance of this.

Freedom comes as a result of choice and how power is exercised. More people united results in more freedom for all. When you break people into groups to separate and distinct them, then they compete for freedom and power. This is simply how it works. Its not even a matter of beliefs or moral judgment.

Marriage entails a great deal of responsibility. with that comes freedom, yes, but also agreement to restriction in freedom. One door opens, another door closes. It is a privilege in that you need to convince someone to marry you. I feel quite privileged when someone gives a gift especially such a gift as the commitment of marriage.

I agreed from the start that this thread would not be a great place. I saw only contention possible to come from it. I don't think it is needed for the game. However, I feel very strongly about this topic and I will not stay silent if the debate is here. I feel a responsibility to give fair response to the issue. If it goes completely uncontested, then readers will have no options by which to judge their beliefs and feelings.

All my arguments in this thread have been against same-sex marriage. I have made no accusations against homosexuality directly. I have also made it quite clear that I do not agree with it. I do not believe it is a good thing. I would not take personal offense at anyone stating they are gay. I do not believe homosexuality is as simple as "born that way". I cannot say it is as simple as a choice either, although this is what I believe is more prevalent. However, our choices form who we are and who we become much more than our natures. Of this, I do not doubt. I do not want to presume to judge why anyone is individually homosexual. I do not have the benefit of omniscience which is prerequisite for a good judgment in such a matter. I am convinced that their are many who are NOT born that way. I am quite confident that there are many who are driven to homosexuality through social pressures. Homosexuality itself however has not been a point of my argument in this forum at all however. It has been about law and same-sex marriage.

Your accusations are exactly what I do not like. "Religious Zealot" , "right-wing idiot"

This tells me you do not look at the ideas. You are applying derogatory labels to "the other side" of the argument. You are reducing it to "my group vs any other group, and forget the details!" Perhaps you have encountered zealots and idiots opposing and offending you. its not exactly rare... You should recognize there are plenty of zealots and idiots on both sides of the argument. They do not help the issue at all. You sound rather zealotous yourself.

Demonizing and name calling are not at all conducive to a meaningful discussion. They only purpose as an attempt to embarrass, shame and ultimately SILENCE your opposition without respecting their right freedom of speech or belief. it is a weasel tactic of one who would deny them such freedom if they could.

A few other posts use the term "Homophobic" for exactly this purpose as well. It is applied to anyone who does not believe homosexuality is right and just as good (read better) than heterosexuality. The term itself tries to be ambiguous by having several levels of meaning and application, none of which quite fit.
One level of meaning is it implies one has an irrational and unexplainable fear of homosexuality.

I do not fear homosexuality. It is not scary.. I find the thought of engaging in homosexual acts rather repulsive, but this is not fear. I believe I could recover from the emotional trauma I believe I would encounter if i participated (willfully or unwillfully) in such an act.

On another level it is used to depict someone as a hater. Someone so full of hate for homosexuals that it overrides all other judgments. Again I cannot feel this applies to me. I have known homosexuals. I do not believe it is the definition of a person. I believe it may be one part of someone's life, and I do not agree with it.

Homophobe is a very derogatory term. It is too broadly applied and it only serves to marginalize and ignore those who do not share a view about homosexuality.

I have consistently argued against same-sex marriage in this thread because I believe it is a real threat to Marriage, freedom and family. I believe it is a destructive thing for our society.

You know, I can't say I disagree with your premise here. People are bloody hypocrites very often; Name calling isn't reserved to those who are in the majority.

I respectfully disagree with your stated purpose of marriage, and it's significance in our society. I also believe that the current economic benefits for marriage are not based on it's usefulness to society, but rather a simple economic tool to be utilized for businesses and governments. I say this because there are many reasons that a couple could not fit the standards you specified for the marriage to be helpful to society: Sterility is a prime example. And yet, sterile straight couples, who cannot produce a family, have those benefits.

But that's really it. I'm honestly getting sick of the name calling of this thread, especially from the "yay to gay" side, because that's really just putting you down on the same level as those "Nay to gay"s you're criticizing. Way to go!

We already answered the actual question of the topic: Same Sex Marriages aren't in the game, but if you reeeeaallly want to marry a person who's the same in-game sex as you, there's a method. End of discussion.

The rest of this junk is just rants. Hell, I've done my own share of ranting. I'm ranting right now!

Peace out, people. I'm done here.