Courts are a governmental process married or no.
Sure, but no one has said "Don't let the Courts divide property for gay people."
The issue is that when you give government recognition to two people "marrying" -- there is a legit argument that if you recognize two heterosexual people doing it, it's not fair if you deny when two homosexual people do it. Ok, fair enough. But just like the civil rights movement before it, we will now see what was a fair point about equal treatment transfuse into overburdening federal legislation against the rights of private citizens and property owners who wish to live their own lives their own way. We are already seeing it with the "Should small business owners have to bake a gay wedding cake" nonsense.
Well, this type of interference and needless (and harmful) "wrong-righting" by liberals is an inevitable outcome.
If you want to cut it off at the pass, simply do away with government recognition for everyone. Then, everyone is treated equal, there is no "marriage" that the government has an interest in protecting.
Two people want to live together and have children? Fine. People do that all the time without getting married these days anyway.
If they split up, who gets the kids? They either agree on it themselves, or the court has a trial to decide. This is how the court operates whether people are married or not right now anyway.
Do these people want to own property together? Fine. Buy a house as tenants with right of survivorship. Later, if they want to split up? Well, in "divorce" there are attorneys who get involved to dissolve the property and have one party buy out the other. So... we can do this even if there is no "marriage."
Tax consequences? Simple. Make a flat, low tax. No loopholes. Now there is no reason to have marriage deductions, child deductions, or homeowner deductions.
Problems solved. You can't name one that can't be handled fairly simply.