There exist people with serious religious objections to interracial marriage. I don’t agree with them, but that doesn’t make their objections any less religious and protected by the first amendment.
The thing I don’t recall, from anytime in the past decades, is anybody trying to make people with these objections participate in the celebration of the marriage.
The closest I can recall is a justice of the peace somewhere in the South a year or two ago who objected to performing an interracial marriage and suggested they find somebody else. He, of course, was in a different position. He had chosen a profession where he had agreed to act as an agent of the state, and thereby lost his right to opt out.
He was, of course, if I remember rightly, removed from that position, as he should have been. In fact, if he disagreed with state policy for religious reasons, he should have resigned.
All this is very different from imposing your values on a private citizen.
If he is a Justice of the Peace, he’s a public servant. He can try to palm it off on a co-worker, but he can’t, he’s obligated.
If a church has an issue, though, they should be in the clear.
And if the baker tells you get lost, that his (lost) business.
The older I get, the more I am for leaving people alone and the more I support a right to “bigotry” and “racism.”