I've always been of the opinion that the gay marriage issue was best decided by the states, not the Supreme Court. I'm support gay marriage, I just think the Supreme Court has more important (imo) things to rule on. So today, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 that gay marriage was a fundamental right to all couples. Hooray for that, but really, what does that really change for the states that don't already allow gay marriage? John Roberts gave a "fully throated" (ahem) explanation of his dissent: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ssent-constitution-had-nothing-to-do-with-it/ I'm not that up on Supreme Court decision making, but is he saying the same thing I'm thinking? That maybe he supports the right of gay marriage, but doesn't think it is a matter of the Constitution to decide? And why is that TRAITOR John Roberts dissenting, shouldn't he be in the liberals back pocket?