“The churches did the government a favor when they chose to act as agents of the state. A religious marriage does not make a legal marriage.”
Yes, it does make a legal marriage. The authority of the priest/minister to marry those within their congregation dates before the establishment of the United States. For american authorities to claim that they no longer have this authority is contrary to the legal history.
“The state has a vested interest in knowing the marriage status of people, for everything from inheritance to tax rates.”
Indeed, but the authority of the minister to legally marry those within his congregation is not a power granted to him by the State.
“If the state now has to do ALL of its own marrying, then the cost to the state increases”
This would imply a subordination of the authority of the priest and minister to the state, a subordination that does not presently exist in law.
“The churches agreed to marry people legally because the state wanted them to - not the other way around.”
Nonsense, church weddings have always been seen as legal since long before the state of America existed.
I would suggest you reread what I wrote.
If the CHURCH unilaterally declines to perform a civil ceremony, the CHURCH takes control over holy matrimony again.
The problem is that the churches carried the government’s water on the civil contract side of modern marriage, and now the government is threatening to take complete control.
If the minister or priest does not sign the marriage certificate, it is not a “legal marriage” - it is not a marriage contract in the eyes of the state. But it would still be a bond of holy matrimony - just not for tax purposes.