The paragraph that says “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion" is a brazen, flagrant, intentional lie.

The reasoning is intended as, and will be used as, the can opener to break open countless protections against the most egregious exercises of state power, and limitation on the ability of private groups and entities to harass and oppress other citizens.

Among the most obvious rulings that the reasoning in this reversal renders fair game for would be malefactors and self-appointed adjudicators of other people's habits:

Griswold vs Connecticut Lawrence vs Texas Eisenstadt vs Baird Obergefell vs Hodges

But it extends far beyond that. The right of privacy is inextricably bound up in your right as an individual or group to have some control over, or at least recourse against, invasion by acquisition, deployment, and promulgation of personal information.

Someone here wrote "the deed is done" as if this was really about abortion and it's over. It hasn't even started. Abortion isn't the agenda. Its prohibition is just one waypoint on the journey to fulfill the agenda. The real agenda is to free up the government and private groups to combine and put the twentieth century, and the prospect of liberation from traditional "moral" tyrannies, back in the box they escaped from after WWII. To rephrase Rousseau: the Court finds humanity everywhere too free, and they need to put it back in chains.

America is descending into a future that may (and probably will) make societies like East Germany look like a libertarian paradise.