Tim Schultz is president of the First Amendment Partnership, a group whose core mission is to advocate for religious freedom for all faiths and rights of conscience. Schultz and others say this bill gives something to both gay rights groups and to religious conservatives. It's a compromise, a tradeoff. On the left, there are some activists who say it doesn't do enough, but by and large they say they want it to pass anyway. On the right, there are a lot of prominent religious conservatives who say it doesn't give enough to their side, but they also say that they still wouldn't support the legislation even if it did give their side more. Specifically, LGBTQ groups are looking for assurances that if the Supreme Court's ruling in 2015 that legalized same-sex marriage is somehow repealed in the future, marriage licenses issued since then would still be valid. And the bill also says that states where gay marriage is not recognized, gay couples would be protected under law and their marriages recognized if their license was issued in another state. Religious conservatives are looking for protections that will allow them and their institutions to adhere to the belief that marriage is between men and women, and to live out that belief in various settings. The text of this legislation as it pertains to religious freedom requires some interpretation, so that is where the debate gets complicated. Hopefully this conversation gives some insight from an advocate who says it does provide protections for religious conservatives.