It's not specific to gay marriage, but I think we ought to remove government recognition of all marriages. It codifies assumptions about lifestyle that we don't need to accept as norm.
Previously many days did in fact go through very complicated legal proceedings to try and do this, but many places where it matters (like hospitals) don't have those contracts so its very different from just saying 'thats my husband/wife'.
I think that's the more important bit -- having society recognize the relationship as equally valid, such that all the things that normal straight married people take for granted can also be taken for granted by gays. Unless law codifies that, it's harder to do.
Civil rights has often focused on law as a kind of behavior floor and codification of rights -- society then takes many years to catch up but its a very motivating factor.
If a religious bigot wants to discriminate against gay people, well, that's not great but up to them. When the state wants to discriminate against gay people that's worse, especially since "right to a family life" is a human right.
Oh wait, that's already happening and it's got a court ruling backing it: http://www.wsj.com/articles/court-rules-baker-cant-refuse-to...
Who is the "homosexual bigot" in your example? The judge practicing the law of the country ? Per U.S. Declaration of Independence, "All men are created equal".
If you don't like gay marriage, that's great, don't get one! Go to a church that doesn't recognize them!
If you do like gay marriage, cool - go get one!
Either way, call yourself married! Or not! Fortunately the government can recognize things like shared decision making, inheritance, property ownership, etc. without having to recognize that some people held a ceremony and a party and others didn't.
There is no crisis where gay couples are unable to find wedding bakers and photographers willing to serve them. I personally have no problem with homosexuality and gay marriage. But someone with religious convictions against it, should not be compelled to be involved. It's totally wrong to force a devout Christian photographer to participate in a gay wedding if he is opposed. What entitles you to his labor?
...partly because laws were introduced to prevent discrimination by people offering commercial services.
Pragmatic me thinks: "It's kind of weird that we encode the idea of two adults sharing a home, family, and bed to the exclusion of other models, but IF we're going to do that we should let gay and straight couples do so"
Idealistic me thinks: "Why the hell does the government recognize marriage anyway? People arrange their lives in dozens of different ways. A person can coparent/cohabit/have sex with/share medical choices with/share financial choices with/(etc.) a number of different partners, but we've decided "two adults doing all of those things is the norm, and anything else is less than ideal", which is a bit stifling.
There are other models. Maybe the Mosuo "walking marriage" should become a codified norm instead?