Reply #6: Ugh. Going by his description of the NJSC decision...

[Kagemusha]

The institution of marriage is a combination of the word "marriage" with a wide array of legislated tax and other legal benefits intended to favor such unions. In other words, the institution is all about the benefits to begin with, not anything silly like love or religion. That's why making the benefits non-exclusive to heterosexual male-female pairings threatens what he regards the institution of marriage. Because the benefits are the main course, not the appetizer.

At least that's what it comes off as, because that NJ decision made damned sure not to force recognition of homosexual couples as "married" in word and law.