Meanwhile about that religious liberty...

Also from the opinion.  Link in the post below.

Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same-sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate. The Constitution, however, does not permit the State to bar same-sex couples from marriage on the same terms as accorded to couples of the opposite sex.

We know that the "religious liberty" issue is going to be major.  Several of the dissents touch on this.  While no church can be forced to marry anyone (if they could, many divorced Catholics would marry in the church!), things get murkier with schools and other institutions.  Catholic schools have been firing gay employees who marry.  The courts have found this to be legal, if regrettable.   I actually agree with those findings.  But a baker who is Catholic and offers a public service, cannot discriminate (in venues that include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination statutes).  That said, would you really want an angry baker making your wedding cake?

We must seek to respect those who oppose us, even as we disagree.  Let us be gracious in our victory.