This chapter does not:
(1) authorize a provider to refuse to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United States military service;
(2) establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution for refusal by a provider to offer or provide services, facilities, use of public accommodations, goods, employment, or housing to any member or members of the general public on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United States military service....The law excludes from its anti-discrimination provisions any tax-exempt church or other nonprofit religious organization, including an affiliated school, as well as any member of the clergy when engaged in a religious or affiliated educational function.
Since Indiana does not have statewide legislation barring LGBT discrimination, the practical effect of the new amendments would appear to be primarily on local anti-discrimination laws, including one enacted by Indianapolis. As reported by CNN and Huffington Post, neither side was satisfied with the fix. LGBT groups want full repeal of RFRA and the addition of sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under Indiana's civil rights law. Social conservatives want protection for Christian businesses that refuse to provide goods and services to same-sex weddings.
