For those who are reacting so negatively to the Indiana religious freedom law, do you not realize what you are saying (even if not explicitly)? You are saying that people should not have the right to live out their own religious convictions and follow their own conscience. Read that sentence again. Say it out loud. You are saying we should deny these American citizens a Constitutional right that is 200+ years old so that we can uphold these new same-sex marriage rights that are less than 10 years old and nowhere to be found in the Constitution. You would deny American citizens a basic human right (the free exercise of religion and conscience) in favor of a right we just made up a few years ago.
I find it ironic how those who just wanted tolerance are now demanding acceptance at any cost, using the threat of law to silence or penalize anyone who disagrees with them. Those preaching tolerance are not willing to tolerate anyone that does not agree with them. Think about it. Gay couples who want to get married can easily find florists, photographers, and bakers who are willing to provide their services for same-sex weddings. But that’s not good enough. If even one florist doesn’t want to participate due to their religious convictions and conscience, the tolerant ones turn to the law to force them to violate their own religious convictions or pay the price. To ensure that everyone agrees with them regarding their right to any flowers from any florist they choose, they are willing to deprive other people of their basic right to the free exercise of religion and the freedom of conscience. Even though they can get the needed wedding services from the many individuals who support same-sex marriage, in their tolerant frenzy they choose to force every person in the wedding industry with a moral objection to same-sex marriage out of a job.
The religious protection law in Indiana is true tolerance and makes it a win-win situation for everyone. Gay couples can still find business owners willing to provide their services for their same-sex wedding, and business owners who cannot provide their services in good conscience can kindly decline. But no. Those who oppose the law want to make sure that it’s a win-lose situation, in which everyone that will not violate their conscience must lose, and ultimately be forced to find another career. How tolerant of them.
Update: It appears that Indiana is caving to public pressure and will gut the bill so that it will not protect the very people it seems to have been originally designed to protect. Given these changes, I have to wonder what the bill even does now. It appears to be a shark without teeth.