Every time the actual public has voted on granting the same legal status of marriage to same sex couples, they have rejected the idea, usually with a decent majority.
Except in the eight states where they didn't...
Vote? Yes. That was sorta my point. Amazing what you can accomplish when you don't let people vote on things.
... the capital of the country...
The people voted in that case? You're still proving my point.
...and your home state where they didn't before they did.
In my state the people voted against granting that legal status to gay couples. Then a judge overruled them. Then the people voted a second time to amend the state constitution. In both votes the majority of the population (of California, not exactly a bastion of intolerance) voted against granting the legal status of marriage and the attendant benefits to same sex couples. At some point, you really do have to abandon the assumption that this issue is just about people who like gays fighting against those who don't. That's just a stupid/silly way of looking at this.
But yes, other than the exceptions your statement is true.
What exceptions? Can you name a single state in the US where the actual people voted to extend the legal status of marriage to same sex couples? Not the legislature, not the courts. A vote of the people. Last time I checked, every single time this has come to a vote of the people, the people have opposed it.
Why does this matter? Because someone up the thread made it sound like the majority wants these legal changes, and it's just some bigoted minority using money and influence to prevent what everyone wants. But that's simply not true. While there are a small number of bigoted people who just don't like gays, they are *not* the reason why things like Prop 8 in California exist. They are *not* the reason why DOMA exists. And if you only focus on that group, you are missing like 90% of the actual issue.
Again, does anyone actually think that over 50% of the voters in California just hate gay people? Really? That's pretty darn absurd. So then why do some people keep arguing this as though it's true?