[GSWarrior]

Actually, the court is pretty balanced right now. Scalia and Thomas are far right, Ginsberg and Breyer are pretty left. The others sort of fall into the middle. Unless you want a court that is tilted to the right. I prefer a balance to keep the lunatic fringes from either side from asserting its will.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Rehnquist is also a conservative, and Stevens and Souter are diehard liberals. The power in the court really lies in Kennedy and O'Connor, both Republican Reagan appointees.

Kennedy oftimes will vote with the conservatives (today is one notable exception) and O'Connor is a true wild card...though she has tended more towards the liberal bent.

I believe a conservative court is better than a liberal one.

[El Gato]

Scalia and Thomas are far right

Did you actually read Thomas' dissent? It's short and follows:

I join Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion. I write separately to note that the law before the Court today "is ... uncommonly silly." Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 527 (1965) (Stewart, J., dissenting). If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal it. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources.

Notwithstanding this, I recognize that as a member of this Court I am not empowered to help petitioners and others similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to "decide cases 'agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the United States.' " Id., at 530. And, just like Justice Stewart, I "can find [neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a] general right of privacy," ibid., or as the Court terms it today, the "liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions," ante, at 1.

Doesn't seem so "far right", to me.