LGBT Civil Rights and Activism

You are playing fast and loose with words and heaping on logical fallacies to make your point. Case in point: The possibility of children are a given when it comes to marriage, and using them the way you did in a debate is wildly disingenuous. Even troll-like.

Here's another one:

So going by the it would be a hassle logic NZ should not have passed legalized Gay Marriage because of the legal and financial confusion?

What confusion? All of the possible legal situations that gay couples present have already been thoroughly expanded upon by heterosexual couples in their various situations. You are creating a false equivalency between gays and polygamists-- just as right wing homophobes do.

Its great that NZ only took four months to come up with the right use of pronouns on its forms. A shift to polygamy would take decades. Also, I live in Massachusetts-- the first state to accept gay marriage and I am gay myself. Adjusting legally required next-to zero effort; That is a measure of how compatible homosexuality is with the existing tradition.

Sane people do not use cultures like Saudi Arabia or from the Old Testament as examples to follow in marital affairs. Perhaps the pro-rape caucus in the Republican party would like to borrow such arguments?

So whats the bigger folly? Being insensitive to that one person or the other two?

I'm going to frame that one!!!

Such sensibilities seem developed entirely from reading comic books or The SIMs instead of relating to real people.

If you can show me evidence that polygamy always leads to abuse or actually hurts people in a similar manner I will oppose it.

You should try to prove that bestiality "always leads to abuse or actually hurts people" though I don't think you could. That doesn't make it acceptable as the basis for marriage.

Lack of harm is not the basis for accepting gay marriage. The reasons are that the law didn't really exclude gay people and that allowing practice to expand to them would reverse the tangibly negative effects of exclusion from the institution.

But if its between consenting adults and wont hurt anyone then i dont see a reason why not.

That's a rationale for freely associating (i.e. adults having sex, etc) not for marriage. The latter is a social contract... it is not "all about you and yours".