That's not a ruling on the merits, that's a cowardly dodge and you know it. If you were correct, that would be the final say on the issue - and you know damn well it isn't, or we wouldn't be here and the 9th wouldn't be taking cases.<quoted text>
the part where they held a gay marriage ban "presents no substantial federal question".
you already admitted that was the current law, why are being purposefully thick?
Your argument that it's "current law" is stupid. Of course it is, and it needs to be changed. Recall that it was once "current law" that a black man was a slave, women could not vote and separate schools for minorities were legal. Do you think Plessy v. Ferguson is good law now, because it once was?
You like sterilization cases like Skinner, eh? Do you think Buck v. Bell was good law? Eh?
You have no argument, all you can do is restate the issue and try to call it one.