Before the whole (inevitable) argument over whether two consenting adults have a right to form a legally recognized contract for tax, inheritance and health benefit purposes (what did you think legal marriage was, anyway? There's a separation of church and state in this country), I just wanted to say:
Of the two decisions, Iowa was the bombshell.
Vermont was pretty much expected, and suited the nature of the state. Iowa was almost out of left field (unless you take into account sometimes odd tendencies of the upper midwest), and the ruling is in no danger of being overturned anytime soon because (1) the legislature and governorship are in the hands of Democrats not interested in fighting the ruling and, (2) even if they wanted to, amending Iowa's constitution to add a clause (let alone a segregation clause) takes a minimum of two years --and Iowa isn't filled with the sort of passion you find in states like Alabama. Basically, the Iowa ruling is pretty much lodged right in the middle of the Midwest (granted the Upper Midwest is different than the central and south), and its going to start influencing the neighboring states.