I believe that homosexuals should have all the rights of heterozexual couples, but don't redefine marriage. For me, it's a language issue, not an equality one. Of course they should have equal benefits, but call it a "civil union".
If you think marriage is a religious institution, and that it can only be between males and females, good for you. The government has no business telling you that your opinion is wrong, nor does it have any opinion telling me and everyone else in the country that your opinion on marriage is correct to the point where it should be law. This "marriage as a religious institution" stuff should stay in churches - where it belongs.
If you are a member of a religion who thinks that marriage is only between one man and one woman, then believe that. Allowing gays to get married would not change anything, because no church would be
required to marry them. They can get a secular ceremony if they want.
The big point here is this: If, according to your religion, marriage is between just a male and a female, then your church can freely refuse to perform religious marriage ceremonies between same sex partners. The two guys, or two girls, can just go somewhere else and get a non-religious ceremony, or a ceremony from a religion that allows them to get married.
If this is TRULY an issue of religious definition, then the issue can stay in the church, and religious leaders can debate if they want to accept same sex marriage among their denomination. The government can recognize same sex marriage, but this doesn't mean your religion has to. If you don't want to recognize my marriage, then come up and tell me on the street and we'll have a good laugh about the whole thing.
Poll
