If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.
And again, he said "whatever means is made possible or necessary".
That clearly extends beyond merely voting. In fact voting is effectively no longer on the list of "possible" means. Gay marriage opponents can no longer muster a 50% vote for a federal law against it, much less the percentages they would need to amend the constitution against court rulings in favor of gay marriage. Support for gay marriage is now over 55% of the public, and that percentage is steadily rising at about 2.4% per year. Gay marriage is seen as a civil rights issue by an overwhelming percentage of people under 35, and the largest percentage of gay marriage opponents are senior citizens. Gay marriage proponents are literally burying more and more gay marriage opponents every day as they drop dead of old age.
If he (or his ideological allies) attempt to oppose gay marriage by some means beyond a now utterly-futile vote against it, if he (or his ideological allies) attempt to bring about the "death" of the constitution by some means beyond a now utterly-futile vote against it, then I am prepared if necessary to take up the same means, whatever those means may be, to preserve the constitution and to preserve interracial marriage and to preserve gay marriage.
I do not take kindly to anyone threatening to use "whatever means is made possible or necessary" to kill the constitution. I do not take kindly to any bigot threatening to use "whatever means is made possible or necessary" to exterminate interracial marriage or gay marriage. The government has no business using race, religion, or gender as a basis to discriminate between acceptable and unacceptable marriage applicants.