The judge did not overrule the will of the people. He simply enforced the Constitution.Marriage is and always has been a contract.
Jim, the two are not mutually exclusive. He did overrule the will of the people by "enforcing the constitution". Although many would disagree, including 7 million Californians that it was proper enforcement of the constitution.
Jim, Not everybody can enter into every contract. There are conditions for qualified participants. So even on the notion that marriage is merely a contract, it doesn't simply follow that the conditions for a marriage contract are genderless. Should it also be numberless? Polygamy is a contract freely entered into. So are incestuous "marriages". Thanks, Al