I thought these two high ranked comments from politics were informative. Not shocked they're going after gay rights, people are sick of their behavior.

Alito's opinion:

This is evident in the analogy that the dissent draws between the abortion right and the rights recognized in Griswold (contraception), Eisenstadt (same), Lawrence (sexual conduct with member of the same sex), and Obergefell (same-sex marriage). Perhaps this is designed to stoke unfounded fear that our decision will imperil those other rights (...)

Thomas's concurrence:

For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

Alito acts all offended that anyone would have the audacity to suggest that they're also looking at contraception and gay marriage, only for Thomas to jump in and helpfully point out that they're definitely looking at those too.

The dissent is spicy

Either the majority does not really believe in its own reasoning. Or if it does, all rights that have no history stretching back to the mid19th century are insecure. Either the mass of the majority’s opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other.

...

The Court reverses course today for one reason and one reason only: because the composition of this Court has changed. [...] Today, the proclivities of individuals rule. The Court departs from its obligation to faithfully and impartially apply the law.

...

The majority scoffs at that idea, castigating us for “repeatedly prais[ing] the ‘balance’” the two cases arrived at (with the word “balance” in scare quotes). Ante, at 38. To the majority “balance” is a dirty word, as moderation is a foreign concept.

Feels good to read something so clear and articulate call out this court's majority.

(Not my comments btw, -AM)