Iraqi, sweetie.
I'll be frank with you here. I have no problem with you (or anyone for that matter) calling me sweetie or honey when we're joking around and talking about light-hearted topics. As a matter of fact, I like you as a member. But I don't like it when you use the word "sweetie" in serious discussions. I feel it's very condescending and patronizing. So please cut it out. Kthnx

That doesnt mean there wont always be those idiots who deny their loved one's medicine or proper healthcare because they believe "god" will heal all or something. That doesn't mean there will be people who deny homosexuals to marry even though not only christians are against homosexuals.
It's not just "idiots". The Christian Right is a very influential political force in US politics. And their agenda is deeply rooted in Christian ideology. It's not just exceptions. The religious movements, particularly the Evangelical, in America are the most illiberal, homophobic, socially conservative, and anti-science movements in the American political scene. It's baffling that you live in America yet you don't see it.
I said Christianity as a religion.
Overall Christianity is okey, accepting, tolerant.
That's just the opposite of reality. Christianity as a religion is none of these things. It's liberal and moderate Christians I have no problem with.
Christians invented the whol e separation of church and state.
IIRC, it was the enlightenment thinkers, atheists, deists, and who called for the separation. Particularly French secularists. Among the American Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine was a an atheist, Jefferson was a deist or a best a lapsed Christian, and Washington refused to take communion and rarely went to Church.
That's why I say it's more of a personal religion (not a logical one).
Again, simply not true in the US. It largely is true in the UK where religion isn't a political force. But in the US religion has a great influence of policy-making and politics in general. [See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right]
Way to go on avoiding the issue.

At any rate, the video is a huge fail.
First of all, the guy in the video says that civil partnership are OK but same-sex marriage is not. I wish that were the case in America. Only 6 States perform same-sex marriages (CT, DC, IA, MA, NH, VT,) and only 9 perform civil partnerships/unions (CA, CO, HI, ME, NJ, NV, OR, WA, WI). That leaves
35 states where neither is performed. Meaning gay people residing in 35 fuckin states cannot get any legal recognition of their same-sex relationships or benefits that entails. For example, they can't get tax cuts and they can't get IR-1 immigrant visa for their same-sex partners like heterosexuals. IWO, they are being discriminated against and it's largely because of religious and Evangelical Christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#State_law [see map]
Now I personally think gays should be allowed to get married but I also think having the ability to enter same-sex union/partnerships is good enough
as long as they get all the benefits heterosexual couples are entitled to. In the relatively atheist UK that is the case but in the relatively religious US it isn't. This fact backs my point
Also, the US is still one of very few Western countries where gays can't serve openly in the military and one of the few Western countries where there are no ant-discrimination laws to protect LGBT people. Coincidentally (not !), it is the most religious Western country with the least percentage of atheists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_around_the_world#North_America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_the_United_States#Anti-discrimination_laws [see map]
Oh and one other lie in the video. The guys says liberals who want to introduce same-sex marriage want to "force Churches to perform these ceremonies". That is a blatant lie. Nobody wants to make Churches do anything. All they want is to be able to go to city hall, pay the fee, and get a damn marriage certificate and then be eligible to the benefits.