Indiana is in the news—and not just for hosting the Final Four in the ncaa national basketball tournament. The state passed a law on March 26 reaffirming First Amendment religious freedoms, saying that the government cannot coerce or force business owners from acting contrary to their conscience or religious convictions.

The law does not specifically reference sexuality or green-light discrimination on the basis of sexuality. But it does grant protection for private companies to do business in accordance with their religious beliefs, giving them access to a court in order to prove that their religious liberty is “substantially burdened” in a dispute.

This has set the maddened mobs on fire.

The crusaders for “tolerance” are incensed. They contend that the law could mean people denying service to homosexual would-be customers. They say anyone unwilling to contribute to a homosexual wedding should be fined or jailed into submission. And this movement is organized. Immediately, #BoycottIndiana became a trending topic on Twitter and other social media. Homosexual supporters are attempting to freeze the whole state out of the national economy. And they are having some success.

Seattle and San Francisco both imposed bans on all state-funded travel to Indiana. Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy signed an executive order imposing the same ban for his entire state, and the state of Washington quickly followed suit. Some of Indiana’s biggest employers, such as SalesForce and Angie’s List, made public stands against engaging in further business in Indiana. Media and politicians have bombarded Indiana with vitriol.

Rewind to 1993. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (rfra) passed 97-3 in the Senate and President Bill Clinton signed it into law. The aclu supported it.

This Indiana law is a version of that same law. It doesn’t force anyone to do anything. It doesn’t segregate. It protects against force, against government coercion.

How times have changed. Twenty-two years later, the liberals who supported rfra now denounce it. They treat even the remote possibility of someone having legal means to defend a Bible-based business decision as hateful. They insist that the government should be able and is in fact obligated to force an individual to act contrary to his religious convictions. This coercion is necessary in order to protect the rights of homosexuals to live in a world where every last person they interact with behaves as though their actions are wonderful. Any business that won’t cater to them should be shut down.

Outspoken devotees of homosexuality want to penalize anyone who isn’t openly supportive. They would love a society where everyone wholeheartedly embraced homosexuality—but barring that, they want a Disneyland where everyone at least is forced to pretend to embrace it.

In the world they are creating, if you don’t love homosexuality, you had better pretend you do, or the government will come after you.

This is the gauntlet thrown down against anyone with a moral conviction against anything, especially homosexuality. Comply or be punished. Become a believer or suffer the consequences. Subject yourself and even your religion to the force of the government.

How is this zealotry different from those who try to convert people to a religion with the sword?

For acting to protect the right of individuals to act according to their religious beliefs, so they can be legally heard if they feel compelled to defend themselves against doing something or supporting something they believe is sinful, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence is suddenly one of the most hated people among the homosexual orthodoxy. For defending religious liberty—one of America’s most basic founding principles, and a luxury that most people throughout the sorry chronicle of human history have not had—Gov. Pence is “setting the clock back 200 years.”

When Barack Obama became president, he publicly opposed same-sex “marriage.” It was only three years ago, in the spring of 2012, that he announced his personal view had “evolved” to support it.

Suddenly, anyone uncomfortable with same-sex “marriage” is accused of living in the 1950s—or the 1700s.

All at once, President Obama’s public position from three years ago is considered as archaic and backward as the racial segregation of the Jim Crow South, or even slavery.

The reality is that we are a long, long way from the time when homosexuality was publicly condemned. In today’s world, a baker who declines to make a wedding cake for a homosexual couple had better have some courage, because he is going to face some serious backlash, and quite possibly the end of his career. We aren’t talking about government-funded businesses, but private citizens in a free market who are turning down business at financial loss to themselves in order to follow what they believe is a more important principle. In today’s social climate of toxicity over this issue, no business owner would turn down business unless his convictions against same-sex unions were deep.

Businesses have been forced to shut down simply because of activist-initiated vendor boycotts, with no specific legal action being taken. Homosexual activists are virulently aggressive about tarring anyone who crosses them, heaping on them as much public scorn as possible. And they are using every legal weapon at their disposal to punish them.

And all of this is done in the name of—irony of ironies—tolerance. “Tolerance” of homosexuals has become such a moral imperative that it justifies vicious persecution of anyone who fails the standard.

This is bullying, pure and simple. Its purpose is to make it illegal to hold a biblically based view on the subject of homosexuality.

Just the fact that Indiana—like 19 other states before it—felt compelled to pass a law reaffirming the protection of freedom of religion tells you something about the state of America. The need for this law is explicitly confirmed by the reaction against it: ugly, sanctimonious, wrathful, hateful, profane, strident and rowdy.

That reaction tells you far more about the current state of this country than even the law itself.

Homosexual activists have successfully forced “conservatives” who support actions like rfra into embarrassed backpedaling. Indiana lawmakers are in full damage-control mode and have promised to amend the new law. “Conservatives” feel they must preface any statement of support for religious freedom with vociferous approval of homosexuality. They don’t dare say anything that could be construed as discriminatory, or anything other than pro-homosexual. In today’s America, that would be political suicide.

The fact is, it’s too late for laws like this. The momentum in America is entirely in the homosexual movement’s favor. These folks are finding ways to turn even minor setbacks like Indiana’s reaffirmation of rfra into stunning victories. Woe to anyone who steps in their path.

To learn about the dangerous implications of this trend, request a free copy of our booklet Redefining Family.