[ SECRET POST #3474 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3474 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.
[Hide and Seek by Imogen Heap]



__________________________________________________



02. http://i.imgur.com/8Lfgcp8.jpg
[A Game of Thrones, Tyene Sand; link because OP warned for nudity]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Independence Day]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Queen at Arms]


__________________________________________________



05. [repeat]


__________________________________________________





















06. [WARNING for underage/shota]

[Boku no Pico]


__________________________________________________



07. [SPOILERS for Game of Thrones]



__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for incest]
[WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for gore, torture]
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #496.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2- too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

It's just... how to put it. The opposite of going "but gay marriage will lead to dog marriage! stop sign marriage! They'll be giving rights to everything!" then someone actually marrying a stop sign and giving it legal marriage rights makes a mockery of the very serious and important things like hospital visitation that people have fought so hard for.

"You seem to be strawmanning some anti-poly person here for some reason."

Regarding that, I meant you brought in poly marriage at random as something I was supposedly against, when all I was talking about was the stop sign.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, I didn't mean to come off that way. I didn't mean to imply that you were anti-poly. I was just trying to use it as an example and kind of lumped things together, which I now see fogged things up.

But I understand your point about inanimate objects. Though I do recall that a woman married the Eiffel Tower, so I don't put anything past government officials.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

Another anon brought up a good point below, and I would say I'm all for the system being reworked to recognize marriage between any and all adult parties that are able to give informed consent. So that'd exclude objects and animals but be open to poly relationships, among others. So we're not too far off in terms of stance, really.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

So we're not too far off in terms of stance, really.

No, I totally realize that! This is the kind of discussion that I wanted. And I'm glad people have been civil so far about it. This is something that genuinely is important to me, and I'm glad I could discuss it with other people.