Marriage. There are so many views on what marriage is or should be. There are arranged marriages where alliances of families are formed (often to preserve their power in society or just survival); this of course is less common in the present day. Then, there are the various religious definitions. But marriage has developed to become more about romance over time. With increased gender, racial, and religion equality, the progression of marriage was forced to change. Now more than ever, marriage is about having a commitment to pursue dreams and happiness.
While I respect every individual's perspective on marriage, the discussion in the public should be solely on the institution of marriage from a objective standpoint. There are plenty of quantifiable benefits to being marriage including:
Filing one tax return. This had to be the first since it is tax season!
Higher IRA Income Limits. And a spouse that doesn't work can contribute into their own account.
Spousal Health Insurance
Cheaper Home/Car Insurance
Government benefits (e.g. Social Security)
Tax Exempt from estate and gift taxes when given to a spouse
Ability to give consent when the other person is unable
As you can see, these benefits can often be substantial. The fight against gay marriage shouldn't be viewed as a shot at a particular person's religion or beliefs. The battle for gay marriage is for social equality just like women's rights movement and the american civil rights movement. There could be an argument for gay couples to get civil unions but they are not legally recognized in every state. Also, some states have banned same-sex marriages and any other form of same-sex unions.
But why should the government recognize "marriages" and "civil unions" if they are the same thing? I propose that there be a unified term for it (whether it be marriage/civil union marital status/civil status) and have additional optional field for the type (e.g. Straight/Gay/Other). If a religious group finds it offensive to call it a marriage, the government should not legally recognize any unions of people as marriages at all (including theirs). But I'm sure those religious groups would be against that too; stating that the government would be degrading their meaning of marriage.
Then, there is the argument that those martial benefits exists in order to help or encourage couples to raise a family. With adoptions and surrogates, gay couples should have the same right to those benefits. Whether the living environment for these children are optimal should not be accounted for in providing benefits.
On a side note, married couples are happier than other couples. But that can't be because people that tend to get married are usually happier...