It's important to point out about the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act -- that we make sure it's “apples to apples”-- when talking about the Federal law and 19 other state laws.
The Indiana law *is* different... more broad than all others ... except South Carolina
Law: Religious Discrimination Statute Compared to Other RFRA
BRIEF: Indiana's religious freedom law sets a standard by which cases involving religious objections will be judged. The law says the government cannot intrude on a person's religious liberty unless it can prove a compelling interest in imposing that burden and do so in the least restrictive way.
Indiana's law differs from the federal version and the 19 other state RFRAs in the following ways:
*** First, the Indiana law explicitly allows any for-profit business to assert a right to "the free exercise of religion." The federal RFRA doesn't contain such language, and neither does any of the state RFRAs except South Carolina's.
Sec. 5. As used in this chapter, "exercise of religion" includes any exercise of religion,whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.
Sec. 7. As used in this chapter, "person" includes the following: (1) An individual. (2) An organization, a religious society, a church, a body of communicants, or a group organized and operated primarily for religious purposes. (3) A partnership, a limited liability company, a corporation, a company, a firm, a society, a joint-stock company, an unincorporated association, or another entity that: (A) may sue and be sued; and (B) exercises practices that are compelled or limited by a system of religious belief held by: (i) an individual; or (ii) the individuals; who have control and substantial ownership of the entity, regardless of whether the entity is organized and operated for profit or nonprofit purposes.
*** Second, the Indiana law contains a provision about rights which have yet to be burdened. The federal RFRA doesn't contain such language
Sec. 9. A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding, regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding.
*** Third, the Indiana law provides a defense in a private suit where the government is not a party. The circuits are split as to whether RFRA can be claimed as a defense in citizen suits-suits solely between private citizens in which the government is not a party.
Sec. 9. A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding, regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding. If the relevant governmental entity is not a party to the proceeding, the governmental entity has an unconditional right to intervene in order to respond to the person's invocation of this chapter.
*** Fourth, many of the states with a RFRA law also have a law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Indiana does not have o a state-wide law.
In Indiana, about a dozen cities, including Indianapolis, have local nondiscrimination laws that specifically protect gays and lesbians in employment, housing, education and public accommodation, which include business transactions. But in much of Indiana there is no such protection.
20 States with Religious Freedom Restoration Acts: Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia.
Religious freedom states that have nondiscrimination laws protecting gays, lesbians and bisexuals: Connecticut, Illinois, New Mexico, Rhode Island.
Religious freedom states with cities or towns that have non-discrimination ordinances that include either sexual orientation and/or gender identity protections with respect to employment and public accommodation: Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas.