I not only say that it is equal, but is one of the most equal and, until recently, one of the most fairly and equitably managed laws in the country.
It is not the heterosexual's fault or decree that somebody else is gay no matter how lovable, intelligent, capable, desirable, etc. etc. etc. that gay person is any more than it is the heterosexual's fault that another heterosexual cannot find somebody to marry or doesn't want to. Equality of the law cannot reasonably guarantee equality of outcome nor address everybody's wants and desires. Long ago, elected leaders determined that the traditional family was good for children and communities and resulted in greater prosperity, more stability, lessened crime rates, increased property values, and a solid tax base for government. Everybody, straight and gay alike, benefitted from that and it was determined to be in the interest of government to accommodate and promote the traditional family.
Okay, we now have a lot of people, both gay and straight, who are outside the traditional family and want the benefits of marriage without having to meet the requirements of the law in order to have that. Many of us are more than willing, even anxious to work out some way to develop a new, legal, and recognized institution that would accommodate those who for whaever reason cannot or do not wish to marry as marriage is defined. There is no reason the new institution cannot be just as beautiful, meaningful, practical, beneficial, and, in time, as socially acceptable as marriage has traditionally been.
It is not a matter of equality. It already is equal as everybody without exception is bound by the same laws. The 'separate but equal' mantra isn't even a factor because the new institution would not be marriage but would be something new, different, and necessary to meet the needs of those who cannot or do not wish to marry under the current definition of marriage.