This is Scalia’s written defense as to why the majority is wrong, and Gay Marriage should not be legal.  Can any of our readers possibly tell us what Scalia is saying, because we can’t understand a word:

(Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms?  And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie. Expression, sure enough, is a freedom, but anyone in a long-lasting marriage will attest that that happy state constricts, rather than expands, what one can prudently say.)  Rights, we are told, can “rise . . . from a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives define a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.” (Huh? How can a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives [whatever that means] define [whatever that means] an urgent liberty [never mind], give birth to a right?)  And we are told that, “[i]n any particular case,” either the Equal Protection or Due Process Clause “may be thought to capture the essence of [a] right in a more accurate and comprehensive way,” than the other, “even as the two Clauses may converge in the identification and definition of the right.” (What say?  What possible “essence” does substantive due process “capture” in an “accurate and comprehensive way”?

To read the entire Supreme Court opinion, Click Gay Marriage Opinion.