I just came across this thread. The discussion is almost entirely centred around issues in the USA, which is fair enough. The situation is obviously very different in many other countries. What is upsetting is a) how far behind western European countries the USA is on this topics b) how successful religous groups have been in confusing the issues of civil marriage and religion and c) how some gay people (eg Marius567) don't realise how much this issue may matter to them one day.
Consider the case of and elderly same-sex couple. They have worked hard all their lives and managed to purchase their own home where they have lived for the past 40 years. Perhaps both now in their 80s. One dies and the other is left alone, perhaps also infirm. If the deceased failed to make a will, 50% of the property may be inherited by a neice or nephew who might decide to sell the house, leaving the surviving partner homeless. Even if there was a will leaving everything to the surviving partner, there might be a large amount of inheritence tax to pay. The surviving partner might need to sell the house to pay the tax. This would not happen to a married couple because they could inherit from each other tax-free.
This is just one of many examples where being denied access to marriage can be a real hardship to same-sex couples. Also, the elderly person in the example above might have lived out rest of their days independently in their own home (on which inheritence tax would be paid when they eventually died). However, if they are made homeless they may become a burden on society.
In the USA there is a clear distinction between civil and religious marriage. Allowing civil marriage has nothing to do with compelling churches to marry same sex couples. As fra as I am aware, no mainstream US politician is proposing any compulsion on churches to marry same sex couples. In any case, I doubt any self-respecting same sex couple would want to be married in a church which did not welcome them.
Many of the posts on this thread also seem very muddled on the question of sexuality. The reality is that in the workplace people talk about their personal life. I'm not talking about sexual stuff, just "what did you do at the weekend" stuff. Simply by use of the word "he" or "she" in a particular sentence, work colleagues will quickly deduct a workmate's sexuality, unless that individual tells lies about what they were doing. Alternatively, they may be seen shopping in the supermarket together etc.... If this can lead to discrimination at work, or losing a job, shame on the USA. In these days of job shortages and economic hardship, losing a job certainly is a civil rights issue. What is more, if the person who loses their job also loses their partner (breakdown of relationships, or even death of a partner are common in such stressful situations) the lack of the protections of marriage can make things even worse.
Oh, and all the comparisons with the plight of black people and the civil rights movement....... The plight of black people in the USA has been (in many cases still is)dreadful. Yes, there are a few parallels with gay rights but this is different. Gays are not being used as slaves. If they try hard enough they can hide their sexuality. Agreed. So what? How does this make discrimination based on the gender of a person's partner anything but shameful?
By the way, here in the UK we have never had employment quotas. We have laws which make it illegal to disriminate (positively or negatively) based on race, gender etc. Of course, this system has it's problems but for the most part it works pretty well. Having "quotas" for any group seems odd to me but quotas for gays obviously would not work. Some people's sexuality changes over time and anyone might claim to be gay to get a job (what a turn-around that woudl be).