Clarity, I hope so.

And another thing.
Sorry, I shouldn't make Douglas Adams references I probably can't tie into my actual post.
Having said that, another thing about me that some may find interesting, is how many seemingly conflicting viewpoints I have.
For instance, I am (in terms of what I personally believe) a rather conservative Christian. I  believe the Bible is the written word of God and it is completely valid for the modern age. Including the prohibition against the lifestyle of homosexuality. I completely reject the concept of two men or women being in a marriage. However, so long as the federal and state governments continue to tax and regulate people based on their legal union status, I happen to think it is absolutely fair to allow any two people to enter into a legal status that protects their interests in the same way a traditional marriage currently does for heterosexual couples.
My preference would be to take the word marriage out of the legal code involving this union. The word "marriage" means something very important to a lot of cultures (including mine) and it is unfair to ask us to accept a meaning that offends us. Since we will never agree to surrender our meaning, I think we should take the word 'marriage' out of the law and leave it up to the respective couples and their society to label the relationship. You want call two men in a committed sexually active relationship 'married'? Fine, go right ahead. It's a free country and you can think and say what you believe. Please, just don't try to force me to compromise my deeply held beliefs while you do so. And don't condemn me for my stance on this issue, none of you have the right to do so.
Both sides in this argument have valid points, but as long emotion clouds reason, I don't believe we will come to an acceptable solution.
In summary:
If you think homosexuality is wrong and that marriage is only between a man and a woman, good for you. We agree, on that. We just don't have the right to force people to accept a law that penalizes their consensual behavior. The constitution doesn't recognize that right, because God didn't give it to us.
If you think you have you have the right to the same legal status with your same-sex partner that I'm entitled to as a result of my marriage to my wife, good for you. We agree, on that. We just don't have the right to force people to accept a law defines marriage's meaning as something that deeply offends their beliefs.

This is a pretty good outline of beliefs on this issue. Some people on my side of the meaning of marriage will never accept the concept of letting homosexuals have their legal status, no matter what is called. Some people on the other side of the meaning of marriage will never be satisfied with merely agreeing to disagree. They both want to use the law to force the other side into submission. I utterly distance myself from both of those elements.