Originally Posted by StaticX27

For purposes of this argument, I consider marriage to be the name in which this binding contract exists, not as a religious ceremony symbolizing the unit of two people, which is the way it's viewed now.

Now, if you're suggesting getting rid of the term marriage in reference to the religious meaning, then sure, go for it, it would have no effect on the contractual binding that is marriage now.

Just FYI, yes, when you file your marriage certificate, it is tied to your social security number, which would effectively null your marriage to whomever it is you're marrying in the eyes of the government. Can you imagine the look of surprise on a guy's face when he gets a letter in the male saying his marriage certificate has been declined because his spouse was a transsexual? I would probably hang myself....

In essence, I do agree with you in many aspects, marriage as a whole has been too closely identified to be synonymous with religion in general that the Religious Reich feels it belongs to them and their laws should dictate what's acceptable. Having been to 3 weddings in this past year alone that were not held at a church, I consider it complete and utter zombie-bullshit that the churches are all up in arms over same sex marriage, moreover, that their opinions are affecting policy because of their own opinions on how people should live. You don't see me trying to pass laws that put the bible in the fiction section of a book store, why should they get to affect policy that has absolutely no affect on themselves?