Gay marriage

[Esquilax]

I assumed marriage went beyond civil recognition of a union, that it was a religious interpretation that implemented rules that were exclusive and called it marriage.

Even if this were true, what we'd be left with is the same problem we have with regards to religious monuments on government land or dime. What's the easier scenario: attempting to accommodate countless sometimes contradictory religious traditions of marriage in a legal sense, or not allowing any religious observances in that arena to be enshrined in law, instead allowing them to become private observances made by the individuals getting married?

Also I was under the impression there were already equal rights?

If you consider gay people getting a facsimile of the rights straights get freely, after spending hours of time and hundreds, if not thousands of dollars applying for those benefits as equal to just getting married, then I suppose so. I don't, and I know too much about history to see the concept of "separate yet equal," as anything but troublesome on its own.