Very cheap of you to assign a very natural human response to a societally dangerous notion to the senseless dogmas of religion.
As for it's inclusion in the game, by your argument of free will and historicity the devs would also have to concern themselves with every scandalous courtly matter, because it did exist and because it might contribute the tiniest bit to 'characterization'. Oh nooo we already have advanced diplomacy and a belivable relation system but no homosexuality? Oh goodness my immersion! Greeks did it!
Besides, even without steam workshop you can include this feature in your game through nexus with max 30 seconds of effort. To add a whole line of additional dynamic systems BEFORE we have custom troop trees, camps, in depth diplomacy - and need I go on? - is misguided time and effort and misguidance TW cannot afford at this time.
I support a number of other suggestions though as they are very basic and effortless additions.
So if I am understanding you post correctly, your main issue is with homosexuality and not the entire post as a whole? And I do include some of those "scandalous" things, if you read my post. It's even an option to vote on in the poll. Much of my post is because diplomacy and relationships are very lacking right now, and I feel many of these ideas can help. I fail to see how this is less important than custom troop trees, but I do agree that there are more pressing matters that should be addressed first (again if you read my post you might see how diplomacy might be improved with some of these ideas). It does not hurt to make suggestions, as that is what this sub-forum is for.
By that same logic, my title for the class differences is also in error because people will think and treat you differently depending on what class you marry. Nobility will absolutely despise you if you marry a gang member, and gangs will hate you if you marry a merchant, for example. My choice of wording there was because in the game currently you are forced to choose a noble of the opposite sex when instead such restrictions should not matter.Edit: And also if you're advocating for same-sex marriages actually having an impact on how you are perceived, then the suggestion should not be named "Gender doesn't matter", as it clearly does by your own statement, and if you want to make it somewhat believable given the time period, you shouldn't use rainbow letters, I'm pretty sure the elite American SJW unit didn't exist back then.
The coloration of the homosexual marriage title was solely meant to attract forum-goers who might be interested in that idea, as it is a modern symbol, not for any historical accuracy or to imply modern SJWs existed in ancient history. That should have been obvious.