Your predisposition would be satisfied by a "live and let live" philosophy, which is largely where we were as a country just a few years ago. Gays were and are perfectly free to associate and to participate in intimacies to their hearts content.
All we asked is that the shades be pulled down, out of common decency.
Now, marriage that is something else entirely. It is what it is.
You say "let gays get married". Gays are free to marry and have been since time immemorial. They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like the rest of us do.
I'm not being facetious here. I'm perfectly serious, becausue once you destroy the definition of marriage, who is going to craft a new one?
And if it is based on a katy-bar-the-door principle of individual freedom, what's to limit a marraige to two? Why not three? If two men can marry, why not two brothers? Why not two non-homosexual men who simply don't want to be married to women?
Most importantly, who will decide these questions? Unelected judges? Or the people?
Who is blaming gays? And for what?
These were not GAY judges that did this, they were jackass liberal elitist judges with their heads in the place gay men reserve for another part of their anatomy.
Obviously to at least the outspoken Gay's, that isn't enough....
Thus, agenda comes to one's mind.