Protests and heated debates have arisen around the country after the Indiana state legislature passed the Religious Liberty Act. The act was written, as the name suggests, to defend citizens from burdens on their religious practices and beliefs. However, gay-rights activists and opponents of the bill argue that this law will allow discrimination against the LGBT community on a religious basis.

Though Indiana Governor Mike Pence, according to The Washington Post, claims nothing in the law permits discrimination and that he believes, “in [his] heart of hearts that no one should be harassed or mistreated because of who they are, who they love, or what they believe,” religious leaders and groups have been praising the Indiana law because they believe it would allow religious wedding vendors to deny services to homosexual marriages.

Supporters of the bill point to the largely bipartisan federal act passed by Bill Clinton and introduced by Democrat Chuck Schumer in 1993, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, referred to by many as RFRA.

RFRA was introduced after Native Americans were fired for smoking peyote in a religious ceremony. As a law intended to support religious minorities and stop discrimination, it was widely supported. However, critics of Indiana’s bill argue that the purpose of the state law is not to end discrimination like RFRA, but instead to permit it.

Indiana is not the first state to pass a religious liberty law – twenty others have passed similar laws, and the federal act, RFRA, has existed for over twenty years. So why is Indiana’s law so controversial?

Since laws began to emerge regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation, religious liberty laws have become less agreeable and have come into question. Indiana does not have a state law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, but only four states with religious liberty acts have such laws.

Under Indiana’s law, religious protection applies to corporations and individual businesses. This provision further complicates the law, as the religious rights of businesses remain a disputed topic, especially after the last year’s Hobby Lobby decision.

In response to national outcry over the act, Governor Pence amended the law on April 2nd, adding a provision that prohibited use of the act “to discriminate in the providing of services, facilities…, goods, employment, or housing on the basis of…sexual orientation, gender identity,” according to the National Law Review.

The Guardian reports that Brian Bosma, Indiana house speaker, said “What was intended as a message of inclusion, inclusion of all religious beliefs, was interpreted as a message of exclusion,” he continued, “It was clear the perception had to be addressed.”

Indiana LGBT rights groups have praised the amendment but acknowledge that their work to ensure the rights of gay and transgender citizens is far from complete. Just four years ago, Indiana nearly passed a bill that would have banned same-sex marriage in the state’s constitution forever.

Arkansas recently passed its own religious freedom act, only to amend it to quell protest against the law. Arkansas’ changes to the bill do not mention discrimination, however, and more closely resemble the federal RFRA, according to The New York Times. 

Still, both sides of the RFRA debate seem dissatisfied with the changes to the legislation, some believing it goes too far, and some believing it does not go far enough.