Patches presently anyone can go and have a service and call themselves whatever they want, they could have legally binding contracts drafted too, the idea is that marriage will be recognised legally, and by extension by all, as something it at present is not and it IS a staging ground for many to then wage a campaign on anyone who is not going to provide the religiously sanctioned services they want, otherwise it will be considered discriminatory and they will be able to sue them for as much as they can.
I would love to believe you that it is simply a matter of live and let live but its far past that, why werent civil partnerships sufficient? Why would the minority's minority of politicised queers need parity of esteem with the majority and, dare I say it, dominant sexuality? Other than to serve as one more victory on the road to bringing down the imaginary heterosexual dictatorship they think is ruining their lives, I've read the books on queer theory which many of the people who think its just a matter of challenging nasty, religious bullies and bigots havent. There's a lot of nasty psychology there.
I'm a believer and I dont feel dictated to by my faith, I suspect that a lot of people who've had enough and are prepared finally to say to the gay agitators, that's enough, you're done, alright, dont feel they're being dictated to by their religions either, they could feel dictated to by the legislators who're going to change the very definition of marriage. Which isnt just a matter of semantics.
I really do believe that mindset of the vast majority of people opposed to "gay marriage" is simply "I didnt used to care but I've just about had enough of this", constantly being told that you're a bigot, a hater, discriminating, simply because you're living how generations before you saw fit to without it hurting anyone eventually wears, even if you're praticed in ignoring the chattering classes.