They already can, so this change is neutral on that issue.If, as you say, atheists, pagans and homosexuals can be "married" how does this change achieve that?
If someone is very religous, they should be quite happy with the freedom to both legally join (whatever the word), and to be MARRIED in say, the catholic church. They can tell people, "We were married in the catholic tradition", or whatever, and it would be true, and would have whatever meaning it has in that subculture or the wider nation. The idea that this would be insufficient, seems absurd.
Fishstyx just proposed this as an alternative. If it's pros aren't want is desired by the parties, then as megaprogram points out, fine, just allow anyone to be married. If it's government, it can't be religious, end of discussion right?
I'm glad to see that the strategy I've always advocated - hooking the fight for gay rights into a states' rights argument - is taking off.
I dip my forefinger in the watery blood of your impotent mad-redeemer (your Divine Democrat your Hebrew Madman) and write over his thorn-torn brow, The true prince of Evil the king of the Slaves!
- Ragnar Redbeard, Might Is Right, 1890
I'm getting tired of all the gay BS.
Just live and let die. quote ?