It seems to me that judges should be ruling based on the law, not perceived ancillary social influences.
The supreme court is different. They're supposed to look at issues and decide if this is how our country was supposed to work.
Only to the extent that "how our country was supposed to work" shows up in the Constitution.
In other words, either: (1) your comment was implicitly limited to applying the overriding Constitutional laws to the laws passed by the Legislature (thus you turn out to be agreeing with the grandparent), or (2) you did intend your comment to apply more broadly, in which case (AFAICS) you're mistaken.
If you meant it broadly, what's your basis for saying they're supposed to "decide if this is how our country was supposed to work" in areas where they're not applying the Constitution (or possibly common law)?
It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes