Supreme Court and poitics

I'm against gay rights and I disagree with the recent Supreme Court decisions.
I'm in favor of Affirmative Action and I agree with the recent Supreme Court decision.
I'm in favor of abortion rights and I agree with Roe v Wade, and disagree with Casey and the current trend of the court.

What I'm getting at is that the Supreme Court is a political institution on the most important cases that define the issues of the day.  No matter how much we desire a court system that follows rules rather seeking a desired outcome, any system filled by human beings will become political first and foremost.

Take the decisions that support homosexual marriage.  No judge who is known to support gay rights voted against that side of the case.  For instance, none of them happen to think that there wasn't any legal standing and dismiss the case.  That is a Constitutional issue that shouldn't break down on liberal/conservative lines.  There's no liberal justice who believes that it is reasonable to believe being gay is a lifestyle choice that can be regulated, and therefore a state can have laws that are "rationale" even if they disagree.  Can you believe that in 2013 that a majority of Justices believes that there is no rationale basis for the federal government to prefer traditional marriage?

Remember I'm not addressing their views, they are addressing everyone else's views and concluding that you can't enact policy based on preferring and supporting traditional marriage above all over relationships unless you are being hateful.  So thousands of years of laws and custom had no rationale basis.  We found that out in the past 17 years.

What really happened was that the gay rights lobby has changed American culture through the media, politics, and on a personal level so much so that advocates feel proud to advance their gay rights agenda, with those who support normalcy and traditional marriage have been shouted out of the public square.

This in theory was not supposed to impact the Supreme Court.  They are supposed to determine the  how  the Constitution applies to the world today.  They are supposed to decide actual disputes of law.

Realistically, the judges are normal people, with like-minded friends who would be ostracized if they ruled against "their side".