Pot is a substance, so it has no human rights.
The equal (human) rights question is... Who voted on whom you married?
There has never been a vote on

our right to marry women. We just assumed it as a 'human right'. Like the right to remain single. If we choose. How can you justify denying other humans anything less?
The conservatives on the court are supreme cowards for avoiding the issue, and putting it into the States hands. They know that Justice should be blind in ones pursuit of happiness. But they don't like what (marriage) justice would look like, so they looked the other way... to buy more time for their personal and religious "values" to rule the land.
Can you imagine being married in one state, but not the next... because political conservatives say so?
In California, the home of Palimony, we could outlaw marriage all together in favor of being 'Pals'.
A conservative State, like Utah, could make marriage mandatory... in accordance with the will of the majority.
And, why stop at the State level, why not govern marriage at the county level, or even at city level... where you get your marriage license?
I've never been married, (though I have, and raised, several children), because I don't think government should govern who you marry.
Be it birth control, or marriage, this conservative court is making rulings reminicent of massa governing slaves on its plantation.
But, considering Alabama did not remove the plantation era law banning inter-racial marriage from the books until the year 2000, I'm not really that surprised.
Absolutely. Even if I don't like it I'll accept a majority vote by the people. As an example: even though I don't think legalizing pot is a very good idea for recreational purposes, I have no problem that Colorado and Washington State voted for it. The people's vote is what should count, not one judge's decision, regardless of weather he is Conservative or Liberal.