"Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham

[SteveII]

No, marriage in the US is not ultimately a secular arrangement between couples and the government. That's ridiculous for several reasons--the main one being that most jurisdictions did not require marriage licenses until the late 19th century. Were those millions of married couple mistaken? Secondly, a marriage license is the government only intrusion into the institution of marriage. How does a marriage license do any more than keep a record and make sure you are not marrying a minor?

Steve, this is simple:

1. There's no mandatory religious aspect to marriage.
2. There is a mandatory secular/governmental aspect to marriage.

#2 only recently and not as full as you need to make a case that it is has much to do with the legal system and rights.

Why is #2 a thing?  It's more than just about not marrying a minor.  Again: taxes, next of kin, asset handling, etc.  If there's money and/or property involved, then there needs to be a way to track ownership claims.  This was especially true at a time when family assets/businesses were more prevalent.

Nope. Taxes have to do with tax law, not marriage law. Next of kin have to do with medical and privacy laws, not marriage law. There is a set of laws when dissolving a marriage because it is necessary to settle a civil dispute between divorcing people. Family law protect children from adults.  

Keep in mind, you're not even correct about your assertion that marriage licenses weren't required until the late 19th century.  Massachusetts has required them since 1639, with the idea/requirement spreading across the nation over the course of time until widespread adoption in the mid-19th century.  Moreover, marriage licenses had existed in Britain since the 14th century, so, it's not as though it was a new idea to the US.

Also, as time has gone on, any religious requirement for marriage has vanished.

I said most jurisdictions. I see you ignored the paragraph before where you got your info--didn't fit your narrative? 

I think you are confused why I am making a big deal about marriage not being a legal matter (besides it's true). It is to defeat any notion that this has anything to do with legal rights I am denying by my desire to keep the old definition.