The law has businesses and civil rights groups up in arms and threatening -- or in some cases pledging -- to boycott the state. <\/p>\n
The reaction has gotten so hot, that on Saturday, Pence told The Indianapolis Star that he is working with legislators to amend the law and \"clarify\" that it does not promote discrimination. <\/p>\n
He told the Star that a new bill would likely be introduced in coming days but did not specify what it would say or who would introduce it. <\/p>\n
What's so controversial about religious freedom? <\/p>\n
It's not so much that religious freedom has suddenly become controversial, but rather critics of the bill assert the law could be used by individuals and businesses to discriminate on the basis of religion -- particularly against the LGBT community of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. <\/p>\n
That's a claim Pence has thoroughly rejected: \"This bill is not about discrimination. And if I thought it was about discrimination I would have vetoed it.\" <\/p>\n
But civil liberties and gay rights groups assert that the law could be used by businesses to deny service to people based on their sexual orientation and justify that discrimination based on their religious belief. <\/p>\n
The law asserts that the government can't \"substantially burden a person's exercise of religion\" and that individuals who feel like their religious beliefs have been or could be \"substantially burdened\" can lean on this law to fend off lawsuits. <\/p>\n
So what qualifies as a substantial burden? <\/p>\n
Well, that's not entirely clear and would likely have to be litigated in the courts if cases involving this law come up. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Link:<\/p>\n
Indiana's religious freedom law: What's the big deal?<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The law has businesses and civil rights groups up in arms and threatening -- or in some cases pledging -- to boycott the state. Continue reading