I agree that Obergefell was wrongly decided but not in the way most conservative think. Marriage is the purview of the states, not the federal government. The only exception is states cannot limit marriage due to race because of the 14th Amendment.
IMHO the correct legal decision in Obergefell would have been that states decide who can or cannot get married so those states that had legalized same sex marriage are allowed to do that and states that had not legalized it were also allowed to do that.
But under the full faith and credit clause of the constitution a state must recognize a marriage that is legal in one state in it’s state.
Therefore any same sex marriage in the five or six states that had legalized it to this point were valid and had to be recognized by the other states.
This is the reason I always believed we needed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a women.
I’m not sure the “full faith and credit” clause can be extended to unlimited lengths. If one state reduced age of marriage to 6, should those marriages be recognized everywhere?
I think we need a constitutional amendment defining judicial activism as treason and prescribing penalties therefor.
Well before Obergefell I would argue here on FR for getting States out of the “marriage” business all together and was attacked often.