e.g.

“I don’t even know how to count the decimals when we talk about millennia,” he said. “This definition has been with us for millennia. And it’s very difficult for the court to say, ‘Oh, well, we know better.’ ” He added that “the social science on this” — the value and perils of same-sex marriage — is “too new.”

kennedy again; He asked, for instance, whether “there has not been really time” for “the federal system to engage in this debate.”

scalia; “Do you know of any society, prior to the Netherlands in 2001, that permitted same-sex marriage?”

roberts; “You’re not seeking to join the institution,” he said. “You’re seeking to change what the institution is.”

insert common sense comment here; breyer
Justice Breyer indicated support for same-sex marriage as part of basic liberty. “Marriage is about as basic a right as there is,” he said.
The other side’s argument, he said, was that “people have always done it” in a certain fashion.
“You know,” he said, “you could have answered that one the same way we talk about racial segregation.”

tokpr; Justice Alito asked whether groups of four people must be allowed to marry. “And let’s say they’re all consenting adults, highly educated,” he said, and then added, to laughter, “They’re all lawyers.”

case one moment; The proceedings were calm but for a brief interruption by a protester. “You can burn in hell,” he yelled from the rear of the courtroom. “It’s an abomination of God.”

stupidity; “It’s about binding children to their biological moms and dads.”

wtf moment worthy of pause; If the purpose of marriage is procreation, Justice Ginsburg asked, why are two 70-year-olds allowed to marry? Mr. Bursch said the male member of the couple was “still capable of having children, and you’d like to keep that within the marriage.”

logic leap; Mr. Bursch said the bans he was defending did not discriminate based on sexual orientation, which left Justice Kagan puzzled.