I have a different idea, after some reflection i have decided we should be able to officially get married inanimate objects in the game.... no longer will a pixel be ashamed to have special moments with other pixel items... even better i should be able to get hitched to my chokobo, probably get to ride that thing more often then you would any other pixel generated thing in the game..
way i see it SE should let us just get married to anything from bow to harp to great axe.....
Marriage feedback [inofficial Poll]
Printable View
-
12-11-2012, 08:27 AMTwiddle
-
12-11-2012, 08:28 AMZantetsukenYou make a solid case~Quote:
Originally Posted by Twiddle
I'll amend my proposal.
"Dear SE, Please create a non-discriminatory ceremony in which a player could declare their love and commitment to one more people or objects in the game (of any gender)." -
12-11-2012, 08:31 AMWynn
Yes, YES! I love slippery slope arguments. They taste like ignorance.
-
12-11-2012, 08:32 AMKalleraYou go make your tool thread for that twiddle, this is for a different discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twiddle
And I think there would be participant limits based on either lore or game contents/items obtained from the ceremony. It wouldn't do to have some endgame ls demand everyone wed the guild leader. -
12-11-2012, 08:35 AMZantetsukenWell, it IS an arbitrary line. Who are we to say where it should be drawn?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynn
If Twiddle (or anyone else) feels a deep love for their Chokobo, why they can't be joined?
Granted, it's an NPC... but your own personal Chokobo is a dear friend in-game (and will be increasingly so with the battle companion feature).
Are you suggesting we ban peoples' rights to make a commitment to their chocobo? -
12-11-2012, 08:37 AMKalleraApart from being a mob without any sense of piety, Chocobos are npcs, this is content between player characters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
You can't have a social relationship with a npc with coded lines, especially when they only say "Wark" and "Kweh". -
12-11-2012, 08:38 AMWynnThis argument has never worked so I don't know why you people continue to try it. It is the best and surest way to make everyone else roll their eyes and write you right out of serious discourse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
There is absolutely no comparison between two people who choose to marry one another and the scenario you propose of one person and an animal/object/whatever that can't even comprehend the concept of marriage, let alone agree to it.
You fail. -
12-11-2012, 08:45 AMZantetsukenHardly. Human-animal "marriage" happens more often then you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynn
http://www.thesharkguys.com/wp-conte...hinwedding.jpg
(The dolphin looks happy)
Heck, one woman even "married" a warehouse. -
12-11-2012, 08:51 AMTonkra
/edit double post
-
12-11-2012, 08:51 AMKeisunaNo, it's not an arbitrary line. Marriage, like all contracts, requires that both parties have the ability to consent and make informed decisions about what they want. That's why it's considered wrong to marry— and by extension have sexual relations with— children and animals. Neither children nor animals can be really held responsible for their actions until they've gained the ability to make informed choices for themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
You can make the case that these aren't real animals or objects (or real people) if you'd like, but I'm sure no one is going to appreciate a game that promotes something so obviously reprehensible.