I can sum up "living constitutionalism" in one sentence:

"Judges must dictate what society's evolving standards and morals might be, because actual society is hopelessy behind the times."

Scalia's position, when consistently applied, is the only one that is worthy of a free people. Liberal, living constitution types, simply don't trust the american people to do the right thing. This nonsense of "evolving standards of decency" is a pure smokescreen. If society's standards had really evolved, then the legislative process would be sufficient to change the law. The fact that judges must force change in the face of majority resistence proves that society's standards have not evolved.

It is the job of judges to protect the actual constitution from being eroded by "evolving standards." You've got enough work to do protecting my real, actual, enumerated rights. Let us worry about whether or not we want to add new ones for you to protect.