This Is Not a Question About the Rights of Gay Marriages, But a Question?

About the legality of a judge taking it upon himself to interpret the law as he sees it in this day and age and ignoring the vote of the majority. In California, as most know this was put up to a vote and the majority voted against gay marriage, The judge overturned the vote of the people. Being that we live in a democracy, didn't the judge take on the role of a dictator and took the rights away from the majority vote? Why bother to vote, if the vote is not upheld?