So, you will be happy to give them the right to marry so long as you can withhold public approval?
"So, you will be happy to give them the right to marry so long as you can withhold public approval?"
It's not an issue of 'giving' anyone a right. It's a matter of whether they have this right ( as defined by proponents of same-sex marriage) or not.
As far as public approval, ceremonies do exactly this, put the stamp of approval on an action or behavior. Government ceremonies imply government (and public) approval. However, this in and of itself is not sufficient to deny a right. What is sufficient is the fact that this 'right' (to same-sex marriage) never existed in the first place. If we are going to invent a new right, we have a procedure in the Constitution for doing this. That procedure does not involve the judiciary unilaterally making this decision.
Homosexuals do already have the right to 'marry'. Just not by a civil ceremony. Two people (of any sex) currently can have contracts drawn up to replicate most of the obligations and responsibilities of marriage. These contracts are recognized by government as are any other contracts. The only real *financial* issues are those involving government benefits base on married status.