On principle I would not. But yeah, the laws where I live are the same. For me it comes down to terminology. Marriage is a commitment between a man and woman and God. What your talking about is a commitment between a man and a woman and the government. I don't consider this to be marriage, and think it should have a different name altogether. It's this distinction in the terminology that could help people get past the whole 'gay marriage' debate too. If it is secular, and not defined as marriage, why would any religious person have an issue (beyond issues with homosexuality anyway) with an arrangement that a man and a man and the government have? On the other side, i don't think governments should recognise a religious marriage. If a religious couple want to be recognised as a couple, then they ought to go through a secular arrangement between themselves and the government. If they want to get married in a church, then they can do that, but it shouldn't have anything to do with the government at all.
So for as long as it's called marriage, or being 'married' carries the title of... well... being married. Then no, i will not get married.