[Jim in CT]

I am in favor of gay marriage. I don't believe being gay is any more a choice than being black, so I feel they have the same rights.

But I hate the way this was decided. The constitution is a list of enumerated powers, any anything not in the list, is to be decided by the states, by elected officials who are answerable to us. I don't like judicial activism, where judges who aren't elected, and therefore not answerable to us, think the constitution is whatever they interpret it to be.

When SCOTUS does this, sometimes it results in more freedom. Sometimes it results in savage tyranny, as in the Dred Scott decision. For a more recent example, read Kelo v New London, where homeowners in CT had their homes seized by eminent domain. And NOT so the town could build a school or road, but so the town could sell the land to a private developer who would get rich by building mcmansions. Stupifying.

The only way to prevent this, is to collectively state that the Constitution has absolute meaning and standards. If it gets outdated, there are mechanisms to amend it. But if the document only means what 9 non-elected folks interpret it to mean, then it means exactly nothing.