[Conscience of a Conservative]

Oh, I agree that the claimed religious backing for bans on interracial marriage were nonsensical. But, I disagree with this:

To claim anything is objectionable on religious grounds requires a clear reference to scripture for the objection to be credible. There are no such objections.

It's not the role of government look at scripture to determine whether someone's religious objection is legitimate.

[Hostage]

I said nothing about the role of government.

Homosexuals can claim that those opposing interracial marriage used religious grounds to object.

My statement is directed at homosexuals and their useful idiots. Nothing at all to do with government. Clear now?

[Paisan]

I seem to recall a case involving Peyote usage as part of a religious rite, before the Court.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/494/872

Scalia’s opinion on this issue are most informative.