"What I've come to realize is that for loving, same-sex couples, the denial of marriage equality means that, in their eyes and the eyes of their children, they are still considered less than full citizens."
Less than full citizens. If the president truly agreed with that, he would not have hid behind states rights. He would not have said that an issue of citizenship, civil rights really, should be decided at the state level. No, it has become his stance that social policy is decided at the state level and that gay marriage is an issue of social policy. (Boy, that should make some Reaganites quite happy...)
The opinion that states should decide certainly does not match up with his friends and co-workers who see it as an issue of equality and civil rights. The 14th Amendment is to the United States Constitution, is it not? If he truly felt this was a civil rights issue, this might have been his stance. Otherwise, it felt awfully political to me. Say you're in favor personally in the hopes that your VP will shut up and your Secretary of Education will stick to education -- put it back on the states so that you don't have to actually stand for any policy that might come before you to sign or veto. Although that may be different from Mitt Romney's opinion, it is no different from how Mitt Romney would govern - and that should give him, and plenty of others, reason to pause.
Of course, North Carolina stepped up right away to expose the cop-out, exercising the President's stated opinion of state's rights and banning gay marriage. That the President shared his "disappointment" with the public surely must have rung quite hollow with the gay residents of North Carolina. I wonder if any of those personal friends and co-workers are from or have gay friends in North Carolina... and I wonder how they feel about the President's "support" today.