Caslon7000 saidI dont think these constitutional amendments are legal. I know that the various constitutions are supposed to be the supreme law, but I dont think that any majority has the right to vote away the rights of a minority. If that were true, then slavery would be acceptable if you got a majority together to vote it in. Yet, nobody would say that slavery is morally right and that any government could sanction slavery. Likewise, no majority can say that a minority can not participate in government sanctioned function
A constitution is the ultimate declaration of what is legal or not. If a constitution states something, it is by definition legal, and there is no higher authority to overrule it.
Except in the case of state constitutions, whose provisions can be superseded by the US Constitution, if the court finds a conflict with that Federal document. With the current makeup of the US Supreme Court, however, no ruling in favor of gay rights would prevail against a state constitution at present. State prohibitions against gay rights will continue intact.
The tyranny of the majority was one of the points argued by the founders of the US government. Some felt a monarchy, or supreme executive, would guard against such a situation. The ability of a democracy to work over time was seriously doubted, with minority interests becoming compromised being a chief concern, ultimately leading to chaos.
Certainly our minority GLBT interests have not faired well under this majority rule.