How can you say marriage is religious when a judge can perform the ceremony, when the state, which is supposed to be separate from the church, awards benefits according to one's marital status, and when completely non-religious people, like atheists, still get married?Gay marriage - Completely against it. Marriage is religious and should be defined by religious groups as they see fit.
Even if that's true (which I doubt) there are still very good reasons to get married. Tax benefits, for one, and probate laws differ once your married. The same benefits do not apply to civil unions or domestic partnerships, which is one of the main reasons gay people want marriages. The benefits and protections levied by the state are disparate.Most homosexuals are not religious and therefore have no way or reason to be married.
See above.If there's serious call, I'm sure some religious group will step up and do it for them... The government should have freeform family unit designation. Civil unions. This extends to all life forms, so if Ms. Smith wants her little fluffy to be part of the family with all rights and privileges, there's nothing wrong with that.
What if they're racist? Same deal?Gay adoption - Adoption requirements should be established by those caring for children. The parent(s) probably selected the group that they gave the child up to, and that group should be able to choose who they will or will not allow to adopt children from them.
Do you mean to say that a couple should be treated as one person?They should have no more privileges than single people, IMHO.