Are you really going to force me to explain this to you? Seriously?

Okay, here goes: the Supreme Court decision was troubling for *everyone* because six justices essentially said that if a right was not expressly articulated in the constitution, then it is not protected. This means that many things we take for granted that we freely get to do are in jeopardy if we elect governments that choose to legislate things based on their own religious views.

Let's say a local government decides eating pork should be outlawed. According to the rationale of the Supreme Court, that can be done now, because the freedom to eat what you want is not an expressed right in the constitution.

I used the example of men and driving to point this out. The fact that you think THAT I AM ACTUALLY SERIOUS is ...deeply strange.