A bill speeding through the Indiana General Assembly threatens to do irreparable harm to our state's business reputation, as well as setting civil rights of Hoosiers back a generation.
Senate Bill 101, better known as the Religious Freedom Bill, would enable business owners and others to cite religious objections to homosexuality in refusing to provide services for same-sex marriages and other activities involving gay people.
A baker could refuse to make a wedding cake. A seamstress could refuse to sew a bride's gown. A travel agent could refuse to book an anniversary cruise. A florist could decline to supply petals for the flower girl.
The bill breezed through the Senate 40-10 in February, with every Republican senator saying aye. It was approved 9-4 along party lines Monday by the GOP-dominated House Judiciary Committee. The legislation will now be considered by the full House, which is also controlled by the GOP. If the bill passes, Republican Gov. Mike Pence has vowed to sign it into law.
Monday's four-hour hearing drew hundreds of demonstrators on each side of the bill to Indianapolis. As you might expect, gay rights activists shouted opposition to the legislation, and conservative Christians chanted support.
Aside from the usual pro-con suspects, the Religious Freedom Bill has created unusual adversaries. The Indiana Chamber of Commerce and other business interests, usually in lockstep with Republicans, oppose the bill for its potential to frighten would-be employers away from Indiana.
What business owner wants to invest in a state where a significant portion of potential employees and customers can expect to be targeted by state-ratified discrimination?
At the root of the controversy is the issue of whether people should be able to treat other people differently based on sexual preference.
If you put this into the context of the 1960s, it's akin to the Jim Crow laws and customs that pervaded the South. Segments of society then defended the idea that people could be denied services based on their skin color and that others should enjoy privileges based on their skin color. And, of course, biracial couples were regarded with disdain.
Turning a historical lens on that era, virtually no one today would defend Jim Crow laws. The passing of the years reveals the policy as criminally idiotic and divisive.
Clearly, if people are in a relationship that is not illegal and are not behaving in any illegal manner, no one should be allowed to deny them goods and services that are available to others.
History will regard laws of the Religious Freedom Bill's ilk in the same way it regards Jim Crow laws today. Looking back, historians will ask, "What could Hoosiers possibly have been thinking?"
The Indiana House of Representatives must vote Senate Bill 101 down. Otherwise, Indiana will become a current day and historical pariah.