INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana House could vote on a controversial proposal aimed at protecting religious beliefs this week, but opponents want lawmakers to add protections to ensure a “religious freedom” law won’t serve as a way to discriminate.
Same-sex marriage is legal in Indiana, but no statewide non-discrimination law exists for LGBT Hoosiers, though some cities, including Evansville, enacted local protections for sexual orientation.
Since lawmakers have proposed a state version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, concerns have swirled on whether the law could serve as a mechanism for a religious business owner to deny services to same-sex couples or weaken new requirements the General Assembly enacted last year on unlicensed daycares. Those concerns, advocates of the proposal say, are unfounded.
Supporters say the legislation sets up a judicial standard by extending to state courts the same protections for a Hoosier’s sincerely-held religious beliefs as the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The law asserts a person’s right to practice their religion without a substantial burden by government. It also requires government to demonstrate a compelling interest to restrict religious expression.
Senate President Pro Tem David Long, a Fort Wayne Republican, said he’s not seen a case where the law was used to discriminate against anyone, and those trying to say it’s going to happen are ignoring 22 years of case law and judicial rulings.
“I think you can tie yourself up in knots trying to say what this does or doesn’t do, you have to have some faith in putting this in place that the record and court decisions don’t support discrimination,” Long said. “You can’t write everything into a law to make sure this or that doesn’t occur. You have to look at the record.”
Yet, House Democratic Leader Scott Pelath said he feels the courts have done a good job in balancing governmental interest and constitutional protections on religion. He said the bill would cause more court cases and more confusion.
“They know not what they do with this bill,” said Pelath, of Michigan City.
“They are trying to show off for some of their core supporters on the very extreme, socially-driven right. The courts have actually done a pretty good job over the years trying to separate these competing interests. We have the governmental interest with respect to things like protecting kids. We also have religious freedoms, which are very strongly protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution as well as Indiana’s own state constitution.”
A lawyer speaking in favor of the “religious freedom” proposal said it could facilitate lawmakers considering statewide non-discrimination protections for sexual orientation.
But Gov. Mike Pence said, “I think that is a question for another time,” when asked last week if Indiana should enact those protections.
“Really and truly if you look at the practice and implementation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, it has been applied by courts in many jurisdictions around the country where there are such protections and never in conflict with those,” Pence said.
Long said he feels laws adequately protect all Hoosiers right now.
“I would hope we can stop using and putting in place protections for everyone and just say everyone has civil rights in this country and they are protected and there should be no discrimination against anyone,” Long said, “and I support that standard.”