I'm just wondering if the pro-gay marriage side has really any idea of the implications legal marriage has, not just in the US but in the other 200 something countries as well.

Marriage comes with various benefits that the governments provides the couple. So in order to justify gay marriage you would need to:

a. prove that the union of two men or two women provides any tangible benefit for society (I don't believe there is any, as the judge correctly pointed out, it's just entertainment between two people. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't wanna either discourage or encourage that decision.)

b. make it merely a formal recognition solely for the purposes of maybe having an easier time to notify next-of-kin in case one of them dies... or default inheritance

Why on Earth should they have housing benefits, health benefits, tax benefits or whatever else is beyond me. Stand on your own ground. What's next? Are we gonna give 2 non-romantic friends special rights as well? Just because they're friends? That's their business, but they're not entitled to other poeple's taxes.

And no two gays parenting is not equal to natural reproduction between a man a woman. It's better than being an orphan or being raised by a single person, but it's idiotic to pretend that a natural mother and father are completely interchangeable with any set of 2 (or more) strangers. There are so many extra issues involved when one or none of the parents is actually the biological parent, they're less likely to bond well for example step fathers are far more likely to abuse children than natural fathers. They rarely have the same investment as deep down they know it's not really their child. Not having a male or female role model can also pose problems for the child's identity development. Young men with no father figures are disproportionately more criminal and badly adjusted than those with one.

The most idiotic and dangerous aspect of all of this is that now one man and one woman marrying and having children is seen as no better in any way than a surrogate impregnating herself and then deliberately giving her own son away to two men, getting some money and having no further involvement in that child's life. Normally we would call that a bad deadbeat mother. It's bad to abandon your kids... unless you're giving them away to two men.

I'm not anti-gay, I don't find anal sex between two men immoral (doubt I'd have to be lying to you if I told you that it's not a super high risk behavior that can get you a lot of infections if you're not careful) but I'm also not anti-traditional family and the LGBT movement has proven that it doesn't respect it.

Churches should not have to be forced to marry them either if it goes against their theology. Bakeries should be free to refuse service if they oppose gay marriage on moral or religious or whatever grounds.