Some have labeled me “paranoid” on this issue. I’m not alone.

But the Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts — the very same judge whose legal brilliance was being celebrated yesterday by devotees of Obamacare for his majority opinion  — appears to share my worry.

This just in from a friend who watches such things:

A lot of people are pointing to this in Kennedy’s opinion as a reason not to fear:

“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.”

However, Justice Roberts points out that there is a difference between advocating and teaching and actually exercising their religious beliefs. 

Roberts writes:

“Many good and decent people oppose same-sex marriage as a tenet of faith, and their freedom to exercise religion is—unlike the right imagined by the majority—actually spelled out in the Constitution.  Respect for sincere religious conviction has led voters and legislators in every State that has adopted same-sex marriage democratically to include accommodations for dissenting religious practice.”

“The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to ‘advocate’ and ‘teach’ their views of marriage.  The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to ‘exercise’ religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses.”