Why should I care what a dictionary has to say about it? In practice, 'marriage' has a strong religious tone to it because of religious people and that tone isn't going away any time soon, no matter what more free-minded people might think.

See though to me it seems more like the religious are trying to have their cake and eat it too in your plan because they'll keep the term marriage while everyone else has to come up with something else for the thing most people do without religion involved.  

I don't give a damn about where I'm married, but I do care about getting married and not just a civil union because the term marriage annoys the religious when god isn't involved.  Noone said that the gay marriages should be religious, and you can't force churches to marry people, but marriages are not religious by and large so as far as the government is concerned they can't distinguish those eligible and ineligible based on religion.  The churches can certainly individually decide who they do and don't want to marry in their church, but they shouldn't have the final say on who gets married under the law.  

I'll propose a similar plan, why don't we keep marriages as they are under the law and churches can come up with some new term to call their specific marriages?  The end result is the same, but I'm sure you won't like my idea just as much as I don't like yours.  

Please, think of the arguments against it and try to figure out if they paint Gays in a...less flattering light. I would be shocked if you can find any that do not, other than the whole nobody should get married argument.

But those groups are allowed to judge what is fine for gay people? To those groups gays are less than straights, otherwise there wouldn't be any problem.

I have no issue with gay marriage if it's done in civil courts and just recognized byt the state, but the state should not force institutes like churches to accept or wed them. Also gay people can stay away from adaption, poor children have suffered enough in their lives.

I say if gay people wanna have children let them procreate naturally like heterosexuals cuz I have no issues with this, the only people in my opinion who should be allowed to adopt are those that want to have to children, could of had children naturally but where struck down by infertility not of their choosing, these unfortunate people and only these type of people should be eligible to adopt.

Note: before some intellectually challenged person decides to call me a religious bigot, please understand that I do not believe in God, and his authority has no say in my opinion, my opinion is just that, my own.

I never understood these protesters. If you are one of those, plz answer this to me. How does it have anything to do with you? You can still get married, it does'nt affect your life in any way if 2 dudes gets married. Why do you take the time and effort to take away something that does'nt affect you but could make some ppl happy? Why can't you just live your life and dont give a eff if they get married or not?

So you would rather send a child to orphanage than to loving gay parents that would love him/her and give him/her a home?

No, I'd rather these poor unfortunate children have a loving adoptive family comprising of a man and a woman so that the child grows up not only in a loving environment, but also in a balanced home where the child benefits from both male and female attributes. As I've said before, these children have suffered enough.

Please keep in mind the childs welfare and mental state,  think of what happens in schools, kids are brutally honest, especially the younger ones, they will tease other children for absolutely anything but it's more hurtful when it's real such as children getting teased for being adopted, now imagine this child not only getting teased for being adopted but also for having gay parents, this child would be so mentally distraught that they could commit suicide or at least self harm. The thing is bullying/teasing at schools happen, I wish it didn't, but it does. All I am proposing is that we prevent this from happening as much as we can, by removing some of the elements, the child will be better off, again these poor children have suffered enough in their lives, no need to add more misery to their lives.

This is not about gay people, this is about the children, I hope even gay people can understand this point, anyone who doesn't understand , that it's about the child welfare and mental state are just self absorbed, self centered, greedy people who should not be allowed to adopt children, gay or straight.

That's not a hypothetical  that is impossible.  Why is the government involved in people's personal lives.  Civil Union is the route to go, with 'marriages' being provided if you desire a 'religious union'.

Not at all, in fact that sounds like a much better idea than mine! I hadn't thought of it that way round, and it would certainly affect less people since as you correctly point out most marriages aren't based on religous reasoning.

I'm all too ready to be proven wrong and shown a different way :) Maybe it doesn't sound like it because of the way I post but that's not the case, appreciate the response and direct answer to my post.