Reply #94: well, the solution is to not have the state endorse "marriage"

[David__77]

If this is some mystical-religious term, then let the state call it "civil unions" or "civil partnership" for both opposite and same-sex couples.

The problem is "separate but equal." That's not right, and isn't a long-term solution. Now, as for churches, I'm not especially religious, but I wouldn't belog to a church that didn't bless my partnership, on equal terms as that of an opposite-sex couple. The Unitarians do, for instance. Perhaps that's a reason why I like them...