> This doesn't affect me therefore I don't care about my fellow citizens.

You do realize this exact same argument was made for decades as the Federalist Society worked to make today’s ruling happen?

That data is different enough from other poll data that I've seen that I have to call biased sampling.

Are you able to make a substantive argument here? Can you quote anything from Thomas's decision to suggest he does not want to revisit anti-sodomy laws, gay marriage, and trans rights? Otherwise your post looks like a low-effort way to refute OP's argument with absolutely no evidence.

Thomas cites himself (he absolutely loves to cite himself, he does it 19 times in 7 pages(!)), 'As I have previously explained, “substantive due process” is an oxymoron that “lacks any basis in the Constitution.”'

He then goes on to say outright that Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell should be reconsidered. I take that to mean the majority reactionary court, who also do not believe in substantive due process, will overturn those. And it also implies a call to action for reactionaries to start building cases.