Tony Perkins, the leader of the socially conservative Family Research Council, said on Tuesday that he supports Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s (R) move to clarify that Indiana’s religious freedom bill does not allow businesses to deny service to anyone.
“RFRAs are not intended to nor have they ever been used to deny anyone non-religious goods or services,” Perkins said in a statement sent out to press. “We support such a clarification making clear RFRA does not impact non-religious goods or services.”
Perkins’ statement came after a press conference in which Pence said he wanted to clarify the law so that it did not allow for businesses to refuse service to anyone, including gay people, based on religious objections. The conference was held in response to wide criticism, both locally, and nationally, over the law.
Perkins said the law was only about protecting people from government discrimination.
“We must ensure that religious business owners are not forced by the government to participate in a same-sex ceremony,” Perkins said. “What RFRA is intended to do is to protect people from government discrimination.”
Perkins has been an outspoken opponent of gay marriage. In 2014, when Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) vetoed anti-gay legislation similar to the Indiana law, Perkins said he was “disappointed” with the move in a statement.
“This bill, like the federal RFRA, bars government discrimination against religious exercise, so by vetoing this bill Gov. Brewer is saying she supports government discrimination against people’s religious freedoms,” Perkins said in a statement at the time.
Below is Perkins’ full statement:
The governor addressed the complete falsehood that RFRA is about denying people a seat in a restaurant or a room at a hotel. Christians would never deny people these services but being forced to participate in a ceremony that violates religious beliefs is completely un-American and uncivil. We must ensure that religious business owners are not forced by the government to participate in a same-sex ceremony. What RFRA is intended to do is to protect people from government discrimination. However, until we see the wording of his proposal, the impact on religious businesses and churches is unknown.
RFRAs are not intended to nor have they ever been used to deny anyone non-religious goods or services. We support such a clarification making clear RFRA does not impact non-religious goods or services.
The government shouldn’t force religious businesses and churches to participate in wedding ceremonies contrary to their owners’ beliefs. If the government punishes people for living their faith, there are no limits to what government can control. We want to be sure that the measure proposed by the governor isn’t used as a weapon to impose punishing fines on people like florist Barronelle Stutzman, bakers Aaron and Melissa Klein, and wedding photographer Elaine Huguenin.
Indiana has been the target of misinformation, and bullying in both the media and online, simply for joining 19 other states in aligning themselves with federal religious freedom law. What is unfolding in Indiana reveals the source of true intolerance: those who want the government to punish people for freely living according to their beliefs.
