I was thinking how funny it would be if she fell in the "marry me" lava.

I bought a "Arcana Heart" game for the PS2 a while back, I forget if it was numbered or not but what I remember is that it was a hard son of a mother. I couldn't beat it, I got to this impossible end boss in a furious frustration and gave up. I had never played a fighter that unbelievably difficult. Memory doesn't…

Which is exactly why they should be rabbits. In a creative world, I don't like the notion of "Why not just be the same as everything else?" Because this is so much a human thing done to death with humans, the question is not "why not just be humans" The question is, "Why not be anything else?"

Now the test is how they animate. If I see one more RPG where what passes as human animation is the occasional right hand half raise, I'm gonna lose it.

@jccalhoun: The definition of marriage is not just some words, it holds ground in how the functional, providing family of this country is seen in the eyes of the law. If this had no connection with the law, then there would be no one to say you do or do not qualify, it would essentially just be ceremonies with…

@Robotronic: If it was a case of simply reading the constitution, there would be no debate. This has everything to do with the states involvement and who qualifies for the benefits.

@The5thElephant: If it wasn't for the biological possibility of birthing children (adopting is different) then what purpose would the government have in even rewarding marriages? It would then just become a ceremony and have no social impact at all. You see, its the possibility that a man and a woman can conceive…

@wezelboy: Yes, its called children. Homosexual marriages are not as beneficial as heterosexual ones, thats just how it is.

@snap_understeer_ftw: Right, well this isn't a race issue. I'm not here trying to gain immunity by using friendships as a shield, I'm stating I have no bias towards the person but I have a different discretion to the changing of an institution.

@Thidrekr: It doesn't piss me off, if your state wants it then your state gets it. Your hostility doesn't impress me and isn't shaping my hold on the definition of marriage.

@jepzilla: How does that apply to homosexual marriages? Equal protection under the law? Do now everyone is entitled to the same state benefits and social programs as every other person?

@ballistic90: The government doesn't provide marriage and institutions of the state do not need to cater to every single persons desire to have what the other person has. Marriage isn't a "belief" and in no way is it required to be all inclusive of specific lifestyles. It exists for reasons outside of a ceremony and…

@The5thElephant: If I have gay friends I should support gay marriage? I'm not against anyones "love", I'm against changing the definition of marriage in these cases, and it is not due to some underlying hatred feelings for people, but due to the nature of protecting the institution for what it is. For both the…

@Robotronic: Oh, so people have the "right" to marry now? I'd love for you to show me that in the constitution.

@tcc3: Yeah the old, I have these friends because I value humans for humans but I don't agree that every human is owed the same thing as another besides the basic human rights.

@BSartist: The state has the right to provide marriage benefits to Marriages that are or are not equally productive under the circumstances. Heterosexual marriage valuable to the state. Considering we do not have a human right to marriage but the institutionalized privilege to be wedded, there is no human-based-right…

@Robotronic: You sure sound like you're ready for a hefty helping of open minded debate there.

@Malyonsus: Why don't you explain to me how I'm acting in a bigoted way? Oh right, right...Must be because I don't agree with every change you want to make. Stand back, opposition is a bigot, you never hear that used in every single case of yes/no politics.

Funny troll, despicable labeling of this article. Don't be the elitist side of "every other view point is from bigots and hicks." It's the opposition of gay marriage, it is not the opposition of a human being. Damn near every one of my friends is gay (thanks Furry art) and I disagree with gay marriage so get the hell…

If I am to learn anything from all these articles on furniture from the future, its that we have no taste or interest in practicality. As long as its some weirdly shaped piece of industrial material that's plausible you can sit on it, I guess its a chair from the future.