The difference with this proposition is that it will be an amendment to the state constitution. It will not, after the fact, be able to be called unconstitutional as it will be the constitution.

True. Which means if such an amendment were to pass and became part of the state constitution, you can bet there will be a future ballot proposition to pass an amendment nullifying it (nationally, that happened with Prohibition and its repeal). And then maybe on and on.

In CA, though, we have had at least a few examples of the voting public passing a law only to be overturned by a court or courts. It happened with Prop. 187. It happened now with Prop. 22. Ironically, both of these were passed by large majorities. It will take much, much more to repeal an amendment than a 4-3 decision.

Now that gay couples have actually started getting married, I have not noticed the Universe coming to an end. I have not noticed the Earth stopping its daily trek around the Sun. I have not noticed the collapse of 'traditional marriage'. The meltown that was predicted by the anti-gay elements has not come to pass.

I'd heard that gay marriage ceremonies, flowers, catering, site rental et al could potentially bring in the better part of a billion dollars to California's economy. Since many couples will hold off or scale back their ceremonies, pending the outcome of the fall ballot measure nullifying gay marriages, the atmosphere of uncertainty posed by the ballot measure has economic ramifications for the state.

I blame the LHC.