Within 5 sentences Prager is wrong, and even for them that is pretty quick. Those who support the right and ability of gays to marry do not only if marriage equality is good for gays, they also ask is it good for society. On both accounts, a resounding yes. Marriage will extend benefits and rights to the children of gay couples, who now can't get married. Such as extending health insurance or inherentence to those same children. Prager doesn't even grasp this, which I find amazing. Does he even read any of the pro-marriage equality writings and pieces? How can he be so ignorant on something so basic?