Good post, Rubicon.

One thing that always strikes me with "gay marriage" is that "marriage" is a religious covenant/promise/sacrament, as well as being a civil union in our nation and in Europe and other places.

Who do gay "marriage" proponents think they are, re-defining a 6,000+ year-old religious rite, when it is Judeo-Christian religion and laws that they cannot stand??

A big part of the problem is calling it gay "marriage", when the religious rite of marriage is and always has been between a male and a female. Who are gay rights proponents to change the definition of millennia-old religious rites???

A lot of this fighting would stop if gay proponents would focus on a "civil union" or "domestic partnership", and leave the religious rites alone as they have stood for thousands of years.

I can't think of anybody I know who is not okay with a "civil union" or "domestic partnership" sanctioned by civil authorities, while leaving the religious union/rite up to the churches/synagogues.