the problem with the courts, though, is that you have to actually set out and defend a position, you can't rely on fear, emotionalism, etc.
and it turns out that the anti-gay folks couldn't defend their position.
there really isn't any rational reason to prevent gay people from legally marrying one another. we might not like it, but that's not how laws work.
outrage is hard when you realize that you've been soundly intellectually defeated. the only remaining position intellectually coherent position that isn't motivated by animus -- Olsen/Boies did a brilliant job in demonstrating that Prop 8 was motivated by animus, not to mention eviscerating the Prop 8 "expert" "witnesses" -- is the whole "do we get to vote on rights or not." and this is why we have the courts. just because the majority might want things to be one way -- for women not to be able to vote, for profound nostalgia for a Jim Crow south, or whatever -- that does not mean that their "will" makes law, or reality.
the ruling is so thorough, and so soundly reasoned, that it seems likely that Anthony Kennedy may be unable to disagree.