ubernerd83 on Legalize same-sex marriage

Derek and I have very similar thoughts on this matter, but we come to different conclusions on the matter.

The government has become far too entwined with religion in many areas, up to and including marriage. Religous institutions should not be able to dictate upon whom the government may confer certain benefits; on the flip side, the government should not be able to force religious institutions to marry two individuals that they would not ordinarily marry. A relevant example involves the Catholic Church and divorcees. Unless a couple gets an official anullment, the Church will not marry them to anyone else. The State has no such regulations on re-marriage, and yet also does not force the Church to marry divorcees. Why can't an analagous arrangement exist for same sex couples? Or better yet, let marriage be the exclusive province of relgious groups and create a legal institution of civil unions (or whatever you want to call it) for the purposes of conferring benefits from the State?

Here's where I diverge from those who oppose same sex marriage on the grounds that legal marriage shouldn't exist at all: I'm too pragmatic. Either it will take forever for the legal institution of marriage to be eliminated, or it won't happen at all. In the mean time, are we going to continue to deny the GLBT community the benefits that heterosexuals can enjoy? Politics, especially American politics, is about abandoning ideological purity in favor of compromises that still produce workable solutions.

To those of you who have similar reasoning but come to a different conclusion: in addition to opposing same-sex marriage, do you also oppose DoMA-like legislation and Constitutional ammendments that ban the practice?