So then you think ONLY the courts should be deciding marriage rights based ONLY on the original federal constitution? Same for the state courts? Keep in mind that any changes to the original constitution were also made by your dreaded "tryanny of the majority".<quoted text>
If it would mean keeping this country from becoming tyranny of the majority, yes I would rather wait. Your celebration of being allowed marriage equality by a majority vote by the people takes more than it gives. Even if the LGBTQ community receives marriage equality in this manner what will stop the religious right from creating more popular votes in other areas of our lives? Not a thing. There is never a true benefit to tyranny of the majority that's why we have a constitutional law system.
There is no difference between a legislature approving a marriage equality bill and a citizen initiated referendum approving marriage equality. BOTH are constitutionally approved methods of legislating in states which allow citizen referendums/initiatives, and BOTH are subject to the "tyranny of the majority".
If the results of such votes are unconstitutional, then the courts will overturn them. If the results are NOT unconstitutional, then the people of the various states have the right to decide what the laws of their state should be, whether by direct vote or through their elected representatives.