Wouldn't that count as the state infringing on said church's freedom to practice religion? If you're right about the wording, we're setting ourselves up. Somebody should sort out the language to allow churches to follow their teachings.

I agree with both Meta and OlyCop. I don't believe that gay marriages would do anything to harm the institution of marriage that straight marriages haven't done already. I think if we HAVE to have a law it should say that the state will recognize gay marriages equally and that a church is allowed to follow it's teachings and decide if they want to do it or not.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself." - T.P.

Here's my two cents... Olycop's concern highlights for me the fact that state-endorsed marriage violates the separation of church and state, or the "entanglement" test for the First Amendment.

If a church were to refuse to marry gays, it could be argued that they were violating the civil rights of gays by denying them access to a state endorsed union.  But the state shouldn't be endorsing a ceremony that is fundamentally religious in nature.  Marriage is a SACRAMENT, like baptism or taking communion.  The state would never regulate baptism, so why should it regulate marriage?

From a legal standpoint, I absolutely believe that state sanctioned marriage should be abolished.  Civil unions should be available to any consenting adults who want to be fiscally responsible for one another.  This could include roommates, siblings, friends, intentional communities... anyone.  This union would be for economic purposes, and would not be attached to the existence of marital ties or even a romantic relationship.  Leave the sacrament of marriage out of it.

Marriage, as a religious sacrament, ought to be left to faith communities to sort out.  Some are willing to marry gays, others are not.  I certainly believe that it is in the best interest of Christianity to allow marriage to gays that desire it.  Churches, however, that wish to hold to discriminatory sexual teachings and dogmas should not be forced against their wishes.  We would never force them to offer communion against their wishes (eg, as an Episcopalian, the Roman church will not offer me communion.  Though I strongly wish for greater Church unity, I would never want to force a ban on this type of religious "discrimination").