Marriage feedback [inofficial Poll]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberious

Damn, I guess I'll shoot for a parrot then.

---

There are no parrots in XIV, sorry.

Everyone, read this thread while listening to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBISfv-6hfo

or this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfT4_fsuzMo

In this game, I don't think, since most guys end up playing female characters anyway, that same sex marriage is necessary.
So personally I vote no, But really don't care either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

I'm specifically talking about a straight voyeur who is able to view women in a locker room without them realizing it - thus they are not harassed.

I'll ask again:

If a man disguises himself as a woman and hangs out in a woman's locker room - unbeknownst to them - what is he guilty of?

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/phot...?1352759482948

---

That has no bearing on same sex marriages in FFXIV/Eorzea. Please make your point clearly if you have one pertaining to the thread.

Things this thread is about:

Equal use of the marriage feature of Final Fantasy XIV regardless of character gender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

You are moving the goalposts. They are committing a crime of sexual harassment, even if they are Solid Snake.

Unless you have a point to this, stop. This has nothing to do with marriage equality or even this game, where there are no restrooms or a necessity to go to them.

---

I most certainly have a point...

But you are wrong. A voyeur is NOT committing any crime of sexual harassment. Sexual Harassment REQUIRES the victim to be aware of being harassed.
More info here and here if you need further clarification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberious

It is a crime. But the point he's making is, I believe, "Why is it a crime?" If your filming them because your sexual desires cause the urges to do so, but it doesn't affect anyone, and they don't know, and you're not distributing it, or selling it, then why is it illegal?

---

Exactly, what is he guilty of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberious

It is a crime. But the point he's making is, I believe, "Why is it a crime?" If your filming them because your sexual desires cause the urges to do so, but it doesn't affect anyone, and they don't know, and you're not distributing it, or selling it, then why is it illegal?

---

Because as soon as you're caught, the very inciting incident that would cause you to be arrested in the first place, you'd done harm to the person who now realizes their privacy has been invaded without their knowledge. It is a distraction argument. It has no place here and is not valid in any way. It is just more slippery slope nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberious

It is a crime. But the point he's making is, I believe, "Why is it a crime?" If your filming them because your sexual desires cause the urges to do so, but it doesn't affect anyone, and they don't know, and you're not distributing it, or selling it, then why is it illegal?

---

It is a crime because you are violating the privacy and restrictions of a marked public restroom.

Sexual harassment is a crime because those acts are taken without the consent of the affected party.

This has nothing to do with marriage equality!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LemmingKingXXX

I would argue that while a fundamental shift in a personal belief system isn't taken on whimsy, it's a hell of a lot easier to accomplish than actively fighting against a biological urge fueled by naturally produced mind controlling drugs. You learn (and unlearn) religion, no one is born with the base line beliefs and/or dogmatic knowledge. Taking a step back from religion, you can look at the societal norms that aren't based on biological imperatives. Anyone who's raised a 3-year-old will tell you that we aren't born with modesty in either speech or appearance, just as no one is born a patriot (or an anarchist). Granted, it's a lot easier to teach a child to put on pants and not scream at people all the time than it is to make the transition from theist to atheist, but you can't unlearn hunger, thirst or the need for oxygen (you can only be born with or without them).
Why do you think the "it's a choice" argument is so popular for opponents of homosexuality? If sexuality is a choice, then - like religion - you can be taught to act in one way or another, and you can be punished for a wrong choice if it is against the law. If sexuality isn't a choice, however; the waters become far more murky, not only can you not teach someone to be sexual one way or another and have it stick without any long term psychological ramifications should it go against their nature, but passing laws against fundamental sexuality (not overt private/public sexual behavior) are no different than the Jim Crow laws of late 1800's early 1900's USA (or Apartheid etc.).
tl;dr (if you really want one): fundamental beliefs vs biological urges = apples vs oranges
PS: I don't like boys, boys are yucky

---

Thank you, this is a well thought out post with which i agree. Your comment has mostly explained what i was getting at on the choice issue. The only reason i said that sexuality was a choice was in comparison to faith, to show someone who has heard the "gay is a choice" thing said to them over and over and show them that they were doing the same absurdity to someone else on a different subject.

It is probably time for me to eject from this thread. have fun all.

oh and i agree, boys are yucky, as to why anyone likes them is beyond me. I think my wife has some sort of psychological problem that lead her to marrying me.

it doesnt matter to me, i just wanna play

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaldaka

In this game, I don't think, since most guys end up playing female characters anyway, that same sex marriage is necessary.
So personally I vote no, But really don't care either way.

---

I am confused. you say most guys end up playing female characters anyways, yet females also tend to play females, so that would mean a lot of straight males are excluded from marrying their girlfriends. And yet you think same sex marriage isn't necessary because of this?

Unless you meant that most gay guys play women characters, in which case you're dead wrong. I've met 0 gay guys who've played a female character, for the same reason so many straight guys play female characters: we like our eye candy.

And if you don't care either way, doesn't it make sense to vote yes, as same-sex marriage being allowed means that more people get to enjoy content, instead of less? Why vote no when your vote could potentially affect thousands of others?

If you really don't care, vote yes, not no. Because by voting no, you're saying you care enough to take people's right to enjoy the same content you can away, not letting it stay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wynn

Because as soon as you're caught, the very inciting incident that would cause you to be arrested in the first place, you'd done harm to the person who now realizes their privacy has been invaded without their knowledge. It is a distraction argument. It has no place here and is not valid in any way. It is just more slippery slope nonsense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wynn

Because as soon as you're caught, the very inciting incident that would cause you to be arrested in the first place, you'd done harm to the person who now realizes their privacy has been invaded without their knowledge. It is a distraction argument. It has no place here and is not valid in any way. It is just more slippery slope nonsense.

---

Not necessarily. Who says the guy isn't caught on the way out of the locker room, or days later with tons of footage on him?

I don't know how to make this more clear: THE SUBJECTS OF THE VOYEURISM NEVER, EVER FIND OUT.

(If they did, they could press civil charges which is understandable)

Why should it be a criminal matter??

I'll wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Not necessarily. Who says the guy isn't caught on the way out of the locker room, or days later with tons of footage on him?

I don't know how to make this more clear: THE SUBJECTS OF THE VOYEURISM NEVER, EVER FIND OUT.

(If they did, they could press civil charges which is understandable)

Why should it be a criminal matter??

---

This has nothing to do with same sex marriage in FFXIV/Eorzea. Please make your point if you have one pertaining to the topic of this thread.

inb4 Zantetsuken saying "I have a point" and proceeding to not say anything about that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Not necessarily. Who says the guy isn't caught on the way out of the locker room, or days later with tons of footage on him?

I don't know how to make this more clear: THE SUBJECTS OF THE VOYEURISM NEVER, EVER FIND OUT.

(If they did, they could press civil charges which is understandable)

Why should it be a criminal matter??

I'll wait.

---

As people have already said countless times, this has nothing to do with same sex marriage. However, to reply to you, if a person gets arrested for voyarism the victim is notified. The victim is the one who has to press charges.

I think the point Zantetsuken's trying to make is, just because there's 2 consenting adults, it doesn't automatically make it right. He's going about making his point in a very, very round about fashion that's confusing some people but I believe that's his point. A personal belief, mind you, but there ya go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drivendawn

I think the point Zantetsuken's trying to make is, just because there's 2 consenting adults, it doesn't automatically make it right.

---

If that's Zantetsuken's point, then lol, because the whole point of voyeur is that one party is non-consenting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zyph

If that's Zantetsuken's point, then lol, because the whole point of voyeur is that one party is non-consenting.

---

And entirely missing the point of this thread. This thread isn't about whether or not marriage is "right" or should be allowed. This thread is about providing feedback on the decision to restrict the marriage feature to heterosexual character couples. We're here to discuss that decision, that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcell

And entirely missing the point of this thread. This thread isn't about whether or not marriage is "right" or should be allowed. This thread is about providing feedback on the decision to restrict the marriage feature to heterosexual character couples. We're here to discuss that decision, that's it.

---

Exactly, also ignoring the fact that marriage in this game can only be done between two consenting parties. The voyeur analogy never had feet and I'm surprised it got this far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psion

I am confused. you say most guys end up playing female characters anyways, yet females also tend to play females, so that would mean a lot of straight males are excluded from marrying their girlfriends. And yet you think same sex marriage isn't necessary because of this?

Unless you meant that most gay guys play women characters, in which case you're dead wrong. I've met 0 gay guys who've played a female character, for the same reason so many straight guys play female characters: we like our eye candy.

And if you don't care either way, doesn't it make sense to vote yes, as same-sex marriage being allowed means that more people get to enjoy content, instead of less? Why vote no when your vote could potentially affect thousands of others?

If you really don't care, vote yes, not no. Because by voting no, you're saying you care enough to take people's right to enjoy the same content you can away, not letting it stay.

---

I chose no purely because it is my choice to. I chose no because I like the idea of a story being less about gender and more about the game. So what if you can't marry your bf/gf/pet chinchilla in a game. If your relationship is effected so deeply by actions taken in a video game, then it's clearly not a relationship that's going to last.

Anyway, what's my decission got to do with you? :) I merely stated my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaldaka

If your relationship is effected so deeply by actions taken in a video game, then it's clearly not a relationship that's going to last.

---

No one said anything about their relationships being affected, but nice try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaldaka

I merely stated my opinion.

---

Okay I know what's going on. You're bitter about marriage being in this game at all, a point that I can understand (I think marriage in a video game is beyond silly), so you chose no to the question of "should same-sex marriage be allowed" simply because you don't think there should be any marriage at all.

That's a bit of a fallacy but I see your angle. People should lay off of you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Not necessarily. Who says the guy isn't caught on the way out of the locker room, or days later with tons of footage on him?

I don't know how to make this more clear: THE SUBJECTS OF THE VOYEURISM NEVER, EVER FIND OUT.

(If they did, they could press civil charges which is understandable)

Why should it be a criminal matter??

I'll wait.

---

I don't know where you're going with this, but I'll bite.

Generally speaking, laws against activities that don't cause harm are there because they are seen to drastically increase the chance that said harm would happen. Traffic laws are a good example of this. It doesn't matter if you can run a red light without causing a wreck. If they allowed you to just drive through red lights without any penalty so long as you don't cause harm, more people would run red lights, drastically increasing the chances of wrecks in intersections.

From the standpoint of the law, it doesn't necessarily matter that the subjects of the voyeurism didn't know, as the act of voyeurism itself drastically increases the chance that the subjects might find out. If the law only busted those who were caught by the subjects themselves, it would encourage more people to do it, thus drastically increasing the chances of it happening.

These restrictions on activity that increase the chance of harm are made with reason in mind, as technically just going out of your house drastically increases the chance of creating harm. They have to keep in mind that people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and all that, and the law aims to prevent infringements on life and property of everyone in the best way that it can.

Now, would you please PLEASE get to your point. I'm really sick of seeing these posts about voyeurism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zyph

Okay I know what's going on. You're bitter about marriage being in this game at all, a point that I can understand (I think marriage in a video game is beyond silly), so you chose no to the question of "should same-sex marriage be allowed" simply because you don't think there should be any marriage at all.

That's a bit of a fallacy but I see your angle. People should lay off of you.

---

Thank you.
In all honesty, it really was just an opinion. They didn't like it so they dived and started to bark.
^^ Let them marry if they want to, but if they are going to give a yes or no answer, then they need to understand there is always going to be at least one no.
I'm all for the whole gay rights thing and blah-dee-blah, but seriously, it's a video game.
Unless there is awesome armour/clothing that can't be attained any other way. Not worth the time of day.

My words will clearly upset people, and I won't apologies for them. I simply want the game to be just that, a game. Such seriousness just is a waste of time :)

To reference XI one more time, the marriage system made reference to binding of friendships and showing devotion to a friend. Could've sworn I had a screenshot around here somewhere but I can't find it. And all modern wedding really is these days (at least the ceremony and that is what takes part in the game since there is no legal ramifications) is a celebration of 2 people and the life they share. There is absolutely nothing IRL stopping people of the same gender from hosting a wedding ceremony to celebrate their union and the lives they share. Its a commercialized industry and anyone with the cash can hire a planner or host a party and buy themselves symbolic jewellery and clothes. There is no legal marriage document that tells the government "Hey we're actually 1 entity now, hand over the tax breaks".

So why can this not happen in the game as well? The rings are symbolic of the couples feelings, not some religious sacrament. Party clothes are well, fabulous (:P) and make nice town gear after. And all the friends can join in on a little party.

If everyone is so hung up on calling it "same sex marriage" than bypass the faux pas and call it a "Black and White Party" or something lol.

---

in a hilariously related note from Huffington Post and College Humour
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2117777.html
Allow same sex marriage or gay men will marry your girlfriends! (there is video, click the link!)

I'm not gonna ready through all the replies, but my take is simply this: They are simply avatars. A lot of males play female avatars and vice versa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RosenKreuz

There is no legal marriage document that tells the government "Hey we're actually 1 entity now, hand over the tax breaks".

---

Do you live in a country that doesn't have marriage certificates and legal marriage or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keisuna

Do you live in a country that doesn't have marriage certificates and legal marriage or something?

---

In the context of what I said, when a same sex couple hosts a wedding party in a country where they cannot legally marry, not here is not a marriage document. Under the law they are not a legally married couple. What I have said is that the lack of that document does not stop them from having a wedding, sharing their union with their friends and family, having a great big party, and then going on with their lives.

With modern marriages, the only difference is that document and that it tells the government 2 entities have become one and are now taxed differently.

A marriage, and a wedding, can be 2 completely different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keisuna

Do you live in a country that doesn't have marriage certificates and legal marriage or something?

---

I believe what they are saying is this doesn't exist in XIV so what's the big deal, just let the unions happen regardless of gender.

Edit: Rosen beat me to it :P

Also, Rosen: True on the girlfriend marrying thing. No joke. Straight ladies love us gay men. We are snappy dressers, clean, health conscious, we will make her breakfast in bed, and we won't care if she goes out to have sex with other men.

its funny listening to "Answers" while reading this thread... makes it all dramatic like o_o/

anyways can someone explain to me where this topic is at now... I've kind of gotten lost between the realm of reality and make believe...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinigamiKayla

its funny listening to "Answers" while reading this thread... makes it all dramatic like o_o/

anyways can someone explain to me where this topic is at now... I've kind of gotten lost between the realm of reality and make believe...

---

Topic of the now:

This thread was for discussion but is 57 pages off the rails. There is likely to be no resolution based on this thread, mostly due to SE not caring as much as to what non-JP players say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaldaka

My words will clearly upset people, and I won't apologies for them. I simply want the game to be just that, a game. Such seriousness just is a waste of time :)

---

Can't say I've been following this thread from my last departure from it a few days ago but I will point this out.

Video games are not just "Games" and what you find to be a waste of time may be extremly engaging to another. I respect your opinion but I couldn't disagree more with games not being a media form to not take seriously. It's as misleading as calling a book "Just a book" or a movie, "Just a movie".

Video games (MMOs in particular) generally allow people a medium they can freely express themselves (To a extent) For the most part the normal worlds laws, rules, reasoning don't follow us into the game world. While we may outselves apply our real world morals and whatnot to our characters it's something we ourselves do and can just as easilly abandon.

While I'm a avid advocate that we only speak for ourselves and how we feel the game should develope (You expressing you think a marriage system is something you would not engage in or enjoy). I am also a advocate of not speaking down to others just because I don't agree with them (Calling it a waste of time, and not worth the time of day).

To sum it up, just because you don't feel it's a good system doesn't mean it isn't something very important to others and that opinion should be respected not made fun of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RosenKreuz

In the context of what I said, when a same sex couple hosts a wedding party in a country where they cannot legally marry, not here is not a marriage document. Under the law they are not a legally married couple. What I have said is that the lack of that document does not stop them from having a wedding, sharing their union with their friends and family, having a great big party, and then going on with their lives.

With modern marriages, the only difference is that document and that it tells the government 2 entities have become one and are now taxed differently.

A marriage, and a wedding, can be 2 completely different things.

---

Ah, I see what you mean, but being legally married isn't just about taxes. It's also about being able to be seen by the law as the legal parent of your children, or being able to visit your spouse in the hospital, or make medical decisions for them when they're unable.

But most importantly it's about the union being recognized by the governing authority. You can have the biggest wedding in the world, and yet feel like your relationship is attacked by society as illegitimate because it isn't recognized by the law like 'normal' marriages are. That's kind of why I hated FFXI's restricting marriage to opposite gender couples, because the GMs, part of the governing authority in the game, officiated over it, and you had physical evidence in the form of a ring.

That's why many people feel it's important to have gay and straight marriage be equal. It doesn't matter if the water tastes the same and comes from the same place, the fact that you're forced to drink from one fountain and forbidden from another for no good reason is still a strong social message that you are inferior, and don't deserve to be treated as truly equal.

Humanity just sucks... it's ashamed that people as a whole can't just keep their nose out of other people's business.

I am all for equal rights in the real world. However "gay" couples can and do adopt and are viewed as legal parents. Hospitals can be informed of same sex couples legal or otherwise to allow entrance. And medical decisions do not require a marriage, they require a power of attorney which can be sought out from any lawyer for about $100 and it does not matter the relation of the person you are giving power of attorney to.

Since 2009 the marriage system in FFXI has been open and is no longer GM officiated. You can buy rings from a box in the starting cities, as well as the wedding gear. And even then the ability to sign rings means you could pick any ring to craft (permitting you had gold smithing) to sign your name to and give to your spouse to be so you were no longer limited to a wedding band.

But this isn't real life anyway. This is a game. And as I have said if the legalities and sentiments attached to "marriage" are a problem for the general masses, then do away with the idea of it being a marriage. There will be no children, there is no legal ramifications or need for power of attorney in the game (unless you really need a raise and the whm is demanding to know your relationship status to the KO'd).

Which brings us back to same-sex couples still have weddings. A wedding is not a marriage. It is just a ceremony and party celebrating the lives of 2 people and the part of it they share. So why not let all the happy little pixels wear tuxedos and dresses, let those who care to show that they care about another human being have their fun, and call it a day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaldaka

In this game, I don't think, since most guys end up playing female characters anyway, that same sex marriage is necessary.
So personally I vote no, But really don't care either way.

---

So if a guy is playing a female character and his girlfriend is playing a female character they can't get married in the game.

Logical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keisuna

It's also about being able to be seen by the law as the legal parent of your children

---

All of a sudden it's so clear. The reason why SE's only allowing opposite sex marriage.

New mini game: Child Raising.

It'll be like a cross between Chocobo raising from XI and Chao raising from Sonic Adventure.

Shit you can even race 'em.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keisuna

I don't know where you're going with this, but I'll bite.

Generally speaking, laws against activities that don't cause harm are there because they are seen to drastically increase the chance that said harm would happen. Traffic laws are a good example of this. It doesn't matter if you can run a red light without causing a wreck. If they allowed you to just drive through red lights without any penalty so long as you don't cause harm, more people would run red lights, drastically increasing the chances of wrecks in intersections.

From the standpoint of the law, it doesn't necessarily matter that the subjects of the voyeurism didn't know, as the act of voyeurism itself drastically increases the chance that the subjects might find out. If the law only busted those who were caught by the subjects themselves, it would encourage more people to do it, thus drastically increasing the chances of it happening.

These restrictions on activity that increase the chance of harm are made with reason in mind, as technically just going out of your house drastically increases the chance of creating harm. They have to keep in mind that people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and all that, and the law aims to prevent infringements on life and property of everyone in the best way that it can.

Now, would you please PLEASE get to your point. I'm really sick of seeing these posts about voyeurism.

---

A fine answer...

And it underlines why many people strongly against calling gay-unions 'Marriages'

Marriage (traditionally understood) has long been an institution in which two people agree to sexual excusivity. This can be for romantic reasons, or for the purpose of providing the ideal structure for the propitiation of the species, or both. It creates offspring via the sexual activity of its partners, who are biologically inclined to care for the children more than any others. It also harnesses the complementary attributes of both sexes to create the best and most balanced environment for their offspring to grow and thrive in. The couple's lives are largely dedicated the raising to their offspring. [*all other factors being equal]


Same-Sex Marriage is an agreement of sexual and romantic exclusivity between two people of the same gender. Barring any extra-marital sources of pregnancy, as long as the sexual activity (of any sort) is exclusive between the two partners, there is no chance for offspring. The couple lives are largely focused on each-other. [*all other factors being equal]

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law, which means that schools will teach it as such, and religious organizations, businesses are often penalized, fined, or sued if they do not comply with legislation that requires them to act in a certain way in regards to married people.

Even though most people wouldn't be able to describe it this way to you if you asked, intuitively they know it and it calls for gay 'marriage' is a severe affront to them.

Of course, many straight people fail to live up to the ideal, and we all know of cases of abuse, divorce, infidelity, etc.. but gay relationships experience those things just as much - so it's a wash there.

The wider social implications of calling gay unions 'marriages' is the key to the opposition.

You may not agree, but the issue is a very serious one with many people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law.

---

Again, it's a video game. Unless SE decides so implement my TOTALLY AWESOME idea above, the biological bonds you speak of and the idea of procreation are meaningless. Context plays a role in this too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zyph

Again, it's a video game. Unless SE decides so implement my TOTALLY AWESOME idea above, the biological bonds you speak of and the idea of procreation are meaningless. Context plays a role in this too.

---

Its not JUST a video game having gay marriages...

Its a game company that is making a volatile political/cultural statement.


but yeah, I agree with the fact that gay marriage is equal(ly stupid) to straight marriage in FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

A fine answer...

And it underlines why many people strongly against calling gay-unions 'Marriages'

Marriage (traditionally understood) has long been an institution in which two people agree to sexual excusivity. This can be for romantic reasons, or for the purpose of providing the ideal structure for the propitiation of the species, or both. It creates offspring via the sexual activity of its partners, who are biologically inclined to care for the children more than any others. It also harnesses the complementary attributes of both sexes to create the best and most balanced environment for their offspring to grow and thrive in. The couple's lives are largely dedicated the raising to their offspring. [*all other factors being equal]


Same-Sex Marriage is an agreement of sexual and romantic exclusivity between two people of the same gender. Barring any extra-marital sources of pregnancy, as long as the sexual activity (of any sort) is exclusive between the two partners, there is no chance for offspring. The couple lives are largely focused on each-other. [*all other factors being equal]

Now when an authoritative body declares that same-sex unions believe that a man-man or woman-woman union are "marriages", and therefore EQUAL in all manner to that of a traditional marriage, they have simultaneously also declared that the biological bond between parent and child, the value of procreation, and the complementary nature of the sexes effectively meaningless in the eyes of the law, which means that schools will teach it as such, and religious organizations, businesses are often penalized, fined, or sued if they do not comply with legislation that requires them to act in a certain way in regards to married people.

Even though most people wouldn't be able to describe it this way to you if you asked, intuitively they know it and it calls for gay 'marriage' is a severe affront to them.

Of course, many straight people fail to live up to the ideal, and we all know of cases of abuse, divorce, infidelity, etc.. but gay relationships experience those things just as much - so it's a wash there.

The wider social implications of calling gay unions 'marriages' is the key to the opposition.

You may not agree, but the issue is a very serious one with many people.

---

This is not valid. You want to know why? A man and woman can get married legally even if one or both of them is infertile or otherwise incapable of having children. The law does not see marriage as a contract, or even an obligation, to breed.

If this is truly the argument against same-sex marriage then all marriages in which no children are produced, or in which the children are no longer living at home or being raised, should be recinded immediately until such time that children are once again being brought forth from the couple. One child a year, no exceptions.

And what about gay people that adopt or have children that came from a former straight marriage or otherwise? They are rearing children but still being denied the right to marry the partner who is also rearing those children. Flawed argument is flawed.

But just to put this back into XIV territory, no children are possible here no matter what genders we are talking about so whatever other ridiculous arguments people are going to come up with here against marriage equality should have a firm basis in the game.