Could Mr. Sulu marry Mr. Chekov in Indiana?
Supporters of the law say it will keep government entities from forcing business owners — such as bakeries and florists who don't want to provide services to gay couples — from acting in ways contrary to strongly held religious beliefs. Gay marriage became legal in Indiana last year following an appellate court ruling.
Let's take a hypothetical example. Suppose Mr. Sulu fell in love with Mr. Chekov. It's easy enough to imagine; the two sit together on the bridge.
So let's say the two fall in love and decide to marry. They buy matching wedding dresses and decide to tie the knot in Indiana. The people of Indiana voted resoundingly against gay marriage, but a federal judge decided otherwise. In that case, could Sulu compel a baker to make a wedding cake even if the baker is against gay marriage? Could they force a wedding photographer to take photos of them hugging and kissing each other if it was against the photographer's beliefs? Could they force a priest to marry them even if the priest's religion said that gay marriage was forbidden? Even more broadly, could a gay group force a restaurant to rent its space out to them if they wanted to watch a Tom Cruise movie marathon?
That's what Indiana's religious freedom law is designed to protect. If you want to be gay, be gay. But gay activists shouldn't be able to force other people and businesses to participate in their "gaiety," a word that I'm no longer quite sure of the current meaning of.
This is what happens when you have a judge imposing his own view on a state rather than respecting the views of the citizens of the state. If Indiana had voted overwhelmingly for gay marriage, this wouldn't be a problem. But because gay marriage is about as popular in Indiana as Hepatitis B, the local population is worried, with some justification, that they are going to be forced to participate in a kind of behavior they don't approve of.
This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.