"Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham

[Mister Agenda]

The USA is a constitutional republic, not a mob democracy. As the saying goes, when two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner, the sheep loses. In the USA, minorities have rights that can't be easily voted away by the majority. To deprive someone of the opportunity to take part in an action freely allowed to others, it must be shown that barring them from doing so is allowed under the constitution or show a compelling interest in enforcing the restriction for such reasons as national security or because it would cause greater harm to the rights of other citizens. The Supreme Court has the ultimate responsibility to determine cases concerning these matters. I don't always agree with their decisions, and expect to disagree more in the near future, but if they make a wrong decision, it's not because it wasn't enough people deciding it. If Americans don't like the way the laws are interpreted, they have avenues to address that. New laws can be made that are more in line with the constitution. The constitution itself can be amended, if enough people agree with you that it should be. If you're so into the majority determining what's right and wrong, try that.

There is no right in the constitution to redefine words/concepts/institutions. So, really nothing for the Supreme Court to comment on. I'm not going to go round and round with this. My position is the same as Justice Roberts. At the end of the article above:

Roberts ends the opinion on a high note, urging those in favor of same-sex marriage to celebrate the decision. He warns, however, "But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it."

Dictionaries and common usage can redefine words, you don't need an act of congress or supreme court decision. You're getting silly here.