The socialists are doing fine here in Massachusetts, one of the huge number of places reverting to the idea of state control over marriage. The only precedent I can think of for all the hot air being wafted about gay marriage is the anti-miscegenation laws that were all repealed. But now the idea that the State can have a say in who marries who has been resurrected in regards to so-called gay rights.
The way I see it is that homosexuals are human. As such they are entitled to the natural rights all humans enjoy (the origin of these rights is irrelevant to this argument) and not, I repeat not privileges or disadvantages created by the State. The same is true for women and other races (so no affirmative action). No one has any right to decide who you can or cannot love but yourself, but back to marriage: once we dispense with the government matrimony comes down to the simple issue of who will perform the ceremony. The whole idea of marriage in the context of the State exists to redistribute wealth through tax-breaks and to offset declining fertility rates caused by social security with incentives for having children, so taking marriage out of the State’s hands puts it back in the court of Holy Matrimony before God. So two religious homosexuals would either have to live with the notion that gay sex acts are sinful or find another religion.
Then again, marriage is such a huge business that companies like Bloomingdale’s and Macy’s and what-have-you will undoubtedly seek some sort of free market common law marriage, which would be a good situation not only for LGBT, but atheists.