Freedom Indiana, an LGBT civil rights group that rallied in the Indianapolis Statehouse the day the bill was proposed, responded to the legislation with renewed commitment to their cause.
“After reviewing the proposed bill in detail, there are real concerns,” Freedom Indiana campaign manager Chris Paulsen said in an email. “We will be actively working on solutions to many troubling parts of the legislation to ensure this bill truly provides the comprehensive protections LGBT Hoosiers need.”
The organization will have community meetings in Indiana cities in December to garner support for more inclusive LGBT civil rights legislation before the upcoming senate session, Paulsen said.
The organization argues as it currently stands, Senate Bill 100 would leave gender and sexual minorities open to discrimination, Paulsen said.
“It would prohibit cities and towns from enacting additional local civil rights protections,” Paulsen said. “It could allow a homeless shelter that receives government funding to discriminate against a single mother. It could also be used to deny someone the ability to make medical decisions for a same-sex spouse.”
Freedom Indiana aims to add LGBT citizens to Indiana’s existing civil rights bill.
“The good news is: We’ve got their attention,” Paulson wrote. “The media and big business have their eyes on Indiana. And politicians know the people of Indiana overwhelmingly agree it’s time to pass a comprehensive bill to protect LGBT Hoosiers.”
Senator Travis Holdman, R-19th District, who wrote the bill, was not available for comment and has not released a statement on Senate Bill 100.
Holdman’s Indiana Senate Republicans webpage states Senate Bill 100 would protect against discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation based on sexual orientation, gender identity, active-duty military status or veteran status.
In order to be fully protected under the bill’s gender identity provisions, a person must have, “consistently identified as a particular gender (for) one year.” Gender reassignment surgery is not a necessary part of demonstrating gender identity.
The bill also protects religious freedom and conscience, with provisions for religious institutions and small businesses in particular.
Holdman’s page states the bill would not restrict any small businesses with fewer than four employees if asked to provide marriage-related services.
“In larger businesses, an employee with a conscience objection to any marriage-related customer request should be able to accommodate all customers by asking a coworker to provide services in his/her place when his/her conscience is at stake,” according to the website.
While individuals are allowed to follow their consciences, government officials must carry out legal duties impartially, the page continues.
Senate Bill 100 would, if adopted, require local ordinances to match the state bill.
“Locally created civil rights commissions will not go away, but they won’t be able to take any action that differs from the protections and penalties in state civil rights law,” the page reads.
John Zody, the Chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party issued a statement calling the bill a “headline-grabbing attempt at legislation that brings false hope for equality.”
“Not only does SB 100 seem to uphold RFRA and pre-empt local communities’ ordinances against discrimination, but it is also loaded with twists and turns that raise questions about intimidation and the provision of social and other services,” Zody’s statement reads. “It also seems to perpetuate the notion that being LGBT is a choice and as such, these Hoosiers will be held to different standards than others.”
The Indiana Religious Freedom Alliance posted a link to an article opposing “Indiana’s Attack on Liberty.”
Written by Monica Boyer of Hoosiers for Conservative Senate, author of “Not On My Watch,” the article argues that protecting employees who identify as gender or sexual minorities is an infringement on business rights.
Boyer’s petition, on ipetitions.com, “Indiana Lawmakers, Protect Religious Freedom, “Vote NO on Special Rights,” also takes the stance that any civil rights legislation about LGBT Hoosiers goes against religious liberty.
“Senate Bill 100 OR ANY OTHER bill that gives sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI) special legal status is a threat to religious liberty, freedom of conscience, association, and speech,” the petition reads. “Making homosexual behavior the legal equivalence as skin color and race is not necessary. It is out of step with 30 other states’ laws and further divides Hoosiers.”
The ACLU of Indiana stated that while they were encouraged that small businesses were recognized in the bill, the religious exemptions and overruling of cities and towns “must be improved before the legislation can achieve its aim of addressing discrimination against gay and transgender people in Indiana.”
“Our encouragement from this first step is tempered by the serious flaws in the legislation, as written, that would undermine current civil rights protections,” the statement read.
