I agree, it was odd to get attacked for promoting "the federal Government" be involved in marriage when it was beyond clear I was against it, but then that same person who attacked me advocates states control marriage. What's the ******* difference? So 2 dude married in Oregon are now just buds in California? How does that effect taxes? What gives the states the rights to say who can and can't be married. Pretty much the same arguments I made against the federal government doing the same stupid chit.
Well look at it this way. The state provides subsidies and tax advantages to marriage, and performs marriages. This is an artificial construct of the state, which puts married couples in a financially advantageous position as opposed to single people.
So, naturally if you create a state sanctioned 'marriage', then same sex couples, are going to want the same advantage.
But rather than push for keeping the state out of the marriage business, by removing the artificial construct of marriage, they insist that states pass laws against same-sex marriage - making a civil rights issue.
With the state out of marriage, it would be purely a religious and social issue, not one that is discrimination vs equality. In framing it as a state issue, it was only a matter of time till someone pointed out an inconsistency in the law, and challenged it.