O'Reilly hasn't changed his opinion on gay marriage, as discerned from the introduction, but he's actually demanding real answers from someone. Call Stephen Colbert - he might be out of a job soon if O'Reilly keeps it up.
When you shed away the conservative religious argument against gay marriage, it comes down to an issue of equality. Andrew Sullivan writes:
Once you accept that gay people are gay in the way that straight people are straight, and once you remove purely religious arguments from a secular debate, the case against marriage equality simply collapses. One reason I have been so eager to have this debate on rational grounds is that, if reason is your guide, the pro-gay side wins overwhelmingly. What's left is a base-line argument for caution.I argued for this point earlier, that since marriage has been viewed as a fundamental right in both state and federal cases (Perez v. Sharp in CA and Loving v. Virgina federally), it comes down to equality. Since CA has ruled that sexual orientation falls under the equal protection clause, any law denying something based on sexual orientation is unconstitutional. Even that lawyer on O'Reilly can't argue against that.
H/T to my friend Sam at Brazen Maverick and Andrew Sullivan.