Glenn Garvin does readers a disservice in his March 31 Other Views piece, Indiana’s new law is not anti-gay. He writes that “19 other states have passed their own version" of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act and that it’s “not the savage instrument of gay-bashing that it’s being made out to be” by liberals, and that liberals such as Barack Obama have supported RFRA in their own states.
What he leaves out is the fact that the other 19 states have statewide non-discrimination laws that prevent RFRA from being used to allow discrimination against gay people, whereas Indiana does not. Indiana legislators refused to consider any statewide protection for gay people, and there are no existing local laws that forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
What Garvin leaves out of his argument explains why so many people and organizations are upset about Indiana’s RFRA, which could allow vague religious claims to trump basic human rights. He should provide his readers with all the relevant facts to help us understand the wide spectrum of protest raised against Indiana.
Ralph Remis, Miami