Bolded: Why might I ask?

Because I believe marriage was a religious institution conducted by the church. It was used to define partnership at the start of our country out of convience. Because you're only able to gain certain government granted benefits through marriage, I believe it has led to a lot of people getting married who has no business doing so really degraded what it is supposed to stand for (the counterbalance to this seems to be that most churches are requiring convenant marriages to try and manage some sanctity).

That said, I have no issue if two gay people want to be together, adopt, divide up stuff, do their taxes together, see another in hospitals, and any other government granted freedom or privelege. Just would keep the state and church as separate as possible.

I can live with that, a church(of any religious order) should be allowed to define marraige how they want to and not be forced to uphold anything that contradicts their beliefs. But what we are speaking of is different than Religious Marraige, we are talking of Goverment institutionalized marraige, like you said there IS a difference. The only thing we care about is the Legal standing of the issue. Legally there is no excuse for hindering same-sex marraige.

At basic value, a same-sex couple should be able to file for marraige liscence at the court house then have their ceremony wherever they want/can. SSC should be able to benefit from all the same things any straight couple can, thats all anyone is really asking.

Not really on topic but I laughed

I'm not making any argument either way, it's an issue I couldn't care less about. If somebody doesn't value their relationship without the state's blessing, that's not my problem.

It's just the term "marriage equality" that irritates me.