Marriage equality is a term so ridiculous on its face that when

The words of Henry Rollins, “Marriage equality is a term so ridiculous on its face that when you hear it mentioned, you would think you were in Riyadh. Years from now, perhaps we can lose the equality part, the same-sex part and call it what it is — marriage,” carry both the fire of rebellion and the wisdom of vision. They come from a man whose voice has always burned against hypocrisy — a voice that refuses to accept injustice as normal. Beneath his sharp wit lies a deep truth: that equality, when genuine, should not need to be qualified. Marriage equality, he argues, is a phrase that should never have existed, because marriage itself — as a bond of love — belongs to all, not merely to some. His words tear at the illusion that justice can coexist with exclusion.

To understand his meaning, we must see the world as it was when Rollins spoke. In much of the West, same-sex couples had only recently begun to claim the right to marry, after centuries of silence, stigma, and denial. The phrase “marriage equality” became the banner of this struggle — noble, necessary, and historic. But Rollins, ever the truth-teller, looked beyond the victory march. He saw that the phrase itself revealed the sickness it sought to cure. For if we must speak of “equality” in marriage, then we have already admitted that the world had long denied it. His wish, fierce and pure, was for a time when love needed no defense, when two human beings could join their lives without prefix or permission.

Rollins invokes Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, as a symbol of societies where such freedoms are still forbidden, where tradition cloaks injustice and love is bound by law. His comparison is not meant to mock, but to awaken. He calls out the hypocrisy of modern nations that claim enlightenment while still debating whether all love is equal. The ancients, too, knew this pattern — that every age believes itself free, even while it keeps invisible chains. The philosopher Diogenes, walking with a lamp in daylight, searched for an honest man; Rollins, in his time, searches for an honest society — one that does not merely preach equality but lives it without hesitation or apology.

Throughout history, love has always been forced to justify itself before power. In ancient Rome, slaves could not marry; in medieval Europe, religion dictated unions for politics, not affection; in modern times, interracial love was outlawed and condemned. And yet, time and again, love outlasted law. The story of Mildred and Richard Loving, who defied the racist laws of Virginia in 1958 to marry, echoes the same struggle Rollins speaks of. Their victory in the U.S. Supreme Court — Loving v. Virginia (1967) — did not merely grant the right to interracial marriage; it revealed how absurd it had been to deny it. Rollins sees same-sex marriage through the same lens: not as a new right to be invented, but as an old truth finally being acknowledged.

There is both anger and hope in his words. Anger, because love should never need a qualifier. Hope, because one day it will not. His dream is of a world where we no longer say “gay marriage” or “equal marriage,” because the idea of separating love by gender will seem as archaic as the old laws that once divided it by color or caste. In such a world, the word “marriage” will stand alone, pure and undivided — a human right, not a social debate. It will no longer need defense, only celebration.

Rollins’ statement is not only about marriage; it is about language, and how language both reveals and shapes justice. Words like “equality” and “rights” exist because humanity has failed to embody them. When the world is truly fair, such words will fall away, unnecessary as crutches once a wound has healed. This is what Rollins envisions — a future where we no longer need to assert the obvious: that love between two consenting souls, regardless of form, is sacred and valid. The goal of equality is to make equality invisible, because it has finally become natural.

Let this be the teaching for those who walk after him: fight until the word “equal” no longer needs to be said. Strive for a world where love is seen not through categories, but through its courage, kindness, and truth. Let no tradition or scripture, no law or fear, stand between two hearts that seek to build a life together. The ancients taught that love is the most divine of forces — the fire that unites heaven and earth. Do not diminish that fire with labels or limits.

Thus, Henry Rollins’ words endure as a challenge and a prophecy. They remind us that justice is not complete until it is ordinary, and that the truest victory is not to name love “equal,” but to see it as self-evident. When that day comes — when love no longer needs defending — humanity will at last have grown into its own promise. And then, as Rollins dreamed, we will call it not “marriage equality,” not “same-sex marriage,” but simply marriage — love made whole, unqualified, and free.