Then amend your state's constitution, with the help of the majority.
You don't seem to be grasping this concept, or maybe you just don't want do acknowledge it. If your conception of freedom is (as it seems) that it is always subordinate to the will of the majority, then we are never going to agree. There's more to political life than might makes right.
Thankfully. I did when I was younger and less informed. But now that I'm older and better informed I have indeed rejected such concepts, since they're in conflict with the laws of this land and the freedoms the Framers intended.
What do you mean? Just to be clear, are you rejecting individual liberty when it conflicts with the will of the majority? That's a pretty radical position, but I appreciate the honesty, if nothing else.