Both sides seem to want to strike a pose of wounded innocence in the dispute about laws passed by Indiana and Arkansas to exempt religious believers from legal requirements that conflict with their beliefs. Supporters of the laws insist that they have nothing to do with same-sex marriage or the rights of gay people. The laws, we’re supposed to believe, are simply about religious freedom, which everyone likes, or big government, which no one does.

But the opponents of those laws, while not as disingenuous, are faking it, too. They are scrambling to find differences between what Indiana and Arkansas have passed and the similar federal and state laws that have been on the books for years. That way the opponents can avoid saying what they actually believe: When it comes to same-sex marriage, the law should sometimes forbid people from acting even on their sincere religious beliefs.

That’s what this controversy is really about. It’s not a misunderstanding that can be “clarified” by some technical amendment, as Indiana attempted to do. It is a big and illuminating moment in history — a conflict between the demands of religion and the demands of society. Such conflicts can sometimes be a terrible thing, but they can also be a source of great moral progress.

Read more at The Washington Post