Marriage ceremonies originated as “religious” ceremonies long before there were governments. Somewhere along the way, a “Church Wedding”, (religious marriage), became the same as a “City Hall/Justice of the Peace wedding”, (Civil/legal marriage).
That difference cannot be emphasized enough. One is a ceremony that unites a man and a woman and links that union to God, transcending the earthly realm. The other is a legal proceeding that unites two people into a legally binding contract. The tragedy was allowing both to be called by the same name.
I know that I, and probably the majority of religious folks have no issue with legal protections for same sex partners that include tax issues, visitation rights, property, insurance, etc, but all of that is legal, to be accomplished through a civil union.
Where people of faith have an issue is when the government tries to impose it's will on a long established religious ceremony.
“Marriage ceremonies originated as “religious” ceremonies long before there were governments. Somewhere along the way, a “Church Wedding”, (religious marriage), became the same as a “City Hall/Justice of the Peace wedding”, (Civil/legal marriage).”
There was no “separation of church and state” back then. People were fined for not attending church, etc. I read somewhere that the early New England Quakers refused to register their marriages, births, deaths, etc with the local colonial governing bodies as these were all congregations other then Quaker. Of course the Quakers were subjected to fines and penalties imposed by the governing congregation.