Just how do animals give you consent to kill and eat them ?
You claim a "logical outcome" of the supremes ruling to be that they must abolish animal sex/rape and child sex/rape laws. But Child rights are constitutionally protected, so your child rape analogy is non-sense.
Animal husbandry (no pun intended) contributes to public welfare and would be a significant blow to the liberty if outlawed so states are not free to so so. But torturing animals (by making one your "husband") has no contribution to public welfare, and states are free to outlaw it. Homosexual sex also has no benefit to society, but it's exceptionally important to the liberty of homosexuals, so the states are not free to outlaw it.
The "logical outcome" of the issues you present support the supremes' decision.