A state legalizes gay marriage and it doesn't even make the front page of the paper? That's what I call progress. Can't wait till the Times starts squeezing them into National Briefing. Or Metropolitan Diary. (Wait, that's already the gay section of the paper).
I've always thought that this is an issue best pursued through the legislature. Not because courts don't have a role to play in protecting minorities from discrimination -- they certainly do -- but because expressions of majority will are more politically viable and more likely to settle matters for the long term. (C.f., by contrast, abortion rights).
That said, I believe that the early court rulings on gay marriage paved the way for the current trend in legislative action. Massachusetts could not have passed a marriage equality law in 2004, but it could now if it needed to. Once the courts ruled marriage inequality unconstitutional, people were forced to deal with it. And they found, essentially, that it was no big deal. That's what made it feasible for neighboring states to proceed on other fronts. New York is next and already looking, let's say, fashionably late to the party.
I understand that the rest of the country is still freaking the fuck out. According to this CSM article, "Forty-four states have enacted laws that define marriage as between a man and a woman, known often as Defense of Marriage Acts (DOMAs). Thirty others have amended their constitutions to define marriage in a similar way." Which makes 74 states that have already banned same-sex marriage. Forgive me if I suspect that things aren't as dire as that makes them sound. Not when we already have Marie Osmond.
More and more Prop 8 is looking like an anomaly rather than a major setback. The anti-marriage movement is dying out, figuratively and literally. You don't need a weatherman to know that a storm is coming.