What do bathrooms, marriage counseling, and religious freedom have in common?

They represent some of the many ways that states are finding to limit the rights of gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people—or, depending on your point of view, protect the rights of (mostly Christian) religious people who object to them.

The trend is being driven by conservative frustration with last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing gay marriage nationwide, says Frances Henderson, associate politics professor at Maryville College. States such as Tennessee that had essentially outlawed gay marriage were left with a limited ability to control its cultural acceptance—not to mention the growing flexibility toward transgender people.

However, new laws addressing these issues in Indiana, Georgia, Mississippi, and North Carolina have been labeled discriminatory and caused an unprecedented backlash from businesses.

The Tennessee House had seemed to be edging away from this cliff the same week that North Carolina basically catapulted over it yodeling. But the General Assembly this week finalized a law allowing counselors to refer away patients whose therapy goals conflict with the therapist’s “sincerely held principles.” (Gov. Haslam’s office indicated in an email that he “is deferred to the will of the legislature on this bill as amended” but will review its final form before deciding whether to sign it.)

And last week a Tennessee House committee revived a bill dictating which bathrooms public school and college students can use—although that effort could flushed over its potential impact on federal education funding .

After so recently celebrating the Supreme Court victory, the LGBT community has found itself reeling from states legislators’ attempts to figure out some way—any way—to legally limit their rights, says Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project.

“Legislatures have really struggled with what they can do,” says Sanders, whose group advocates for LGBT rights. “And they’re throwing up a lot of options. Things that sounded good at beginning of session are maybe not sounding as good toward the end.”

Two types of laws are being pursued most actively. One is about where transgender people use the bathroom. The other relates to protecting the “religious freedom” of individuals or groups—such as counselors, pastors, businesses, or entire service sectors—who want to refuse to serve someone based on their personal beliefs.

The Tennessee Legislature has approved, rejected, and is still considering bills that fall into both categories.

“Where very conservative Republicans control state legislatures, they see it as an opportunity to counteract what they perceive as legislating from the bench,” Henderson says.

In the Pulpit and the Bathroom

One bill that failed to lift off in Tennessee this year would have stipulated that clergy, religious organizations, and their employees couldn’t be forced to perform services or provide facilities for events that conflict with their religious beliefs. (Gay weddings were the general target.) Representatives agreed this right already existed and cut off sponsor Andy Holt (R-Dresden) in mid-sentence to vote the bill down in committee.

Some thought the measure might allow any business to refuse to provide services based on its owner’s religious beliefs—as did the law in Indiana that prompted such outcry last year. (Coincidentally, both Indiana’s and Tennessee’s had been dubbed “The Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”) After signing the law, Indiana’s Republican governor backpedaled by pressing his Republican legislature to amend it to protect LGBT rights.

Legislatures in Arkansas and Georgia passed similar bills protecting faith-based organizations that wanted to refuse to provide services. But their Republican governors put on the brakes as the potential economic impact became clear. Arkansas-based Walmart objected to the law there, and Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson refused to sign it, sending it back to the legislature for a revision that basically mirrors federal law. When Georgia’s bill passed, filmmakers like Disney and AMC threatened to pull out of the state, which is the third leading filming location in the U.S. The NFL warned that it might nix Georgia’s chance to host future Super Bowls. Term-limited Republican Gov. Nathan Deal vetoed the bill.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, governors of North Carolina and Mississippi rushed to sign sweeping anti-LGBT legislation last month.

In terms of an erosion (some say: attack) on LGBT rights, Mississippi’s new law is probably the most extensive passed so far. It protects individuals, religious organizations, businesses, and members of service professions—like counselors and those who supervise foster care and adoptions—when they take actions based on their religious objections to gay marriage or transgender people. It also protects those who enforce policies about gender-specific dress codes and bathroom use at schools or workplaces.

A growing list of cities (including Atlanta and San Francisco) and states (including New York) have banned official travel to North Carolina and/or Mississippi because of their new laws; rockers Bruce Springsteen and Bryan Adams canceled concerts in the states.

North Carolina’s bill began as a reaction to a Charlotte ordinance that would have allowed transgender people to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. The state legislature held a special session to pass a law that not only reverses that, but also strips people of the right to sue in state court over discrimination, and voids all local ordinances protecting LGBT rights or setting a higher minimum wage than the state’s. This funky combination of conservative strictures was introduced and passed in a matter of hours and signed the same day, with many legislators revealing that they didn’t even know what was in it until after the vote.

The fallout was immediate. Last week PayPal announced that because of the law, it is abandoning plans to open a global operations center in North Carolina that would have brought 400 jobs to Charlotte. The world-famous High Point furniture market has said it is receiving feedback that hundreds to thousands of visitors will not come this year because of the law. In one of the lowest blows to a basketball-crazed state, the NBA and NCAA are contemplating whether they will shift playoff games out of North Carolina.

Despite these ramifications, Tennessee and South Carolina are now considering bathroom bills, too. Tennessee’s bill, sponsored by Republican Rep. Susan Lynn of Mount Juliet (who did not respond to an interview request) and Republican Sen. Mike Bell of Riceville, would require that university and public school students use the restroom corresponding to the gender on their birth certificate.

That could pack a more powerful punch here than elsewhere, because Tennessee is the only state in the union—let that sink in—that provides no legal path for changing the gender on your birth certificate. Ever.

This is not the first time a bathroom bill like this has been floated in Tennessee, with supporters arguing that it would protect children from sexual predators. Still, previous versions never gained traction.

Several Republican representatives withdrew their support for this bill after hearing affecting testimony from transgender students, and the issue had been referred for summer study. But after pressure from the Family Action Council of Tennessee, a group headed by former state Sen. David Fowler that seeks to “defend a culture that values the traditional family,” the bill was reconsidered and then passed in a House education committee last week.

It could cost the state millions of dollars. Originally, the bill’s fiscal note predicted no impact, but it was revised to reflect that Tennessee could risk losing up to $1.2 billion in federal education funding—an opinion Attorney General Herbert Slatery affirmed Monday. The U.S. Department of Education has determined that Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination at educational institutions, also bans discrimination based on gender identity.

Because of the financial impact, Bell told the Senate Finance Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday that he wanted another day to digest Slatery’s financial analysis before pushing the bill forward. Because of the question mark about the price tag, the bill could join the stack of unfunded measures that won’t get attention until after the state budget passes, if at all. The American Civil Liberties Union, more than 75 Tennessee clergy members, and businesses such as major local employer Alcoa Inc. have written to oppose the bill. The Tennessean reports that Viacom (parent company of CMT) came out against it last week, followed by several country music stars, and the Nashville Convention and Visitors Corp. indicated several groups are already planning to cancel major conventions if the measure passes.

In an email, Gov. Bill Haslam’s office indicated he is concerned about the Title IX funding ramifications and he trusts local schools and school boards to make appropriate accommodations for students as needed.

Knoxville Mayor Madeline Rogero explained her opposition to the bathroom bill in a prepared statement Friday: “This bill would feed an atmosphere of intolerance that would negatively affect the lives of local families and students, and also could have damaging consequences for tourism and economic development.”

“I think Tennessee will lose opportunities if the bill continues through the state House,” Henderson says. But she predicts the backlash against Georgia and North Carolina will make Tennessee legislators think twice about sweeping legislation. “I think Tennessee is doing drip-drops,” she says. “I’m not convinced we’ll see a full-scale bill like in North Carolina, but I think we will continue to have bills that chip away” at LGBT rights.

The effort is partly fueled by political maneuvering during an election year, Henderson says. “I definitely think part of this is people trying to energize the base,” she says. “Legislators are trying to show they are doing what they promised and doing things that are consistent with constituents’ core conservative values.”

Democratic Rep. Joe Armstrong of Knoxville says it’s also a function of Republicans being primaried from the right if they don’t follow the party leadership in lockstep.

“It seems like this is a Southern manifestation of trying to polarize people,” he says, adding that the divisive tone of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign (which swept the South) is permeating the General Assembly.

It’s important to note, though, that bills limiting transgender rights—particularly “bathroom bills”—aren’t confined to the South. Massachusetts, Missouri, and Kansas are among other states whose legislatures are considering them, according to the National Center on Transgender Equality. (The Kansas bill would even allow students to sue their school for $2,500 every time they see a transgender student in the bathroom.)

The Counseling Bill

So far, the Tennessee Legislature has given its approval only to the most narrow of the bills, the counseling bill. Armstrong voted against it in committee and on the House floor. He called the counseling measure “strictly a pandering bill,” saying the conservatism demonstrated in these bills “is echoing the Jim Crow laws of 100 years ago, limiting people’s freedoms.”

But he finds it much more tightly focused than the laws passed in other Southern states, so he doesn’t anticipate it will generate the same type of business backlash. He notes that the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce did not take a position on it. Chamber officials did not return a call seeking comment. (Interestingly, state chambers are rarely taking a stand on any of these bills.)

The counseling bill, sponsored by Republican Rep. Dan Howell of Georgetown and Republican Sen. Jack Johnson of Franklin, was opposed by every professional counseling group in the state as well as the national American Counseling Association.

Art Terasaz, director of government affairs for the American Counseling Association, called the proposal a “hate bill that will legalize discrimination against people who are seeking health care.” On April 13,  all 14 of the faculty in the University of Tennessee’s applied psychology programs (which includes clinical and counseling) sent an open letter to Haslam denouncing the measure, saying it “legislates discrimination against some of our state’s most vulnerable citizens and sets a potentially devastating health care precedent in our communities.”

Like the bathroom bill, the legislation is supported (and reportedly partly drafted by) the Family Action Council of Tennessee. Fowler and his group did not grant repeated requests for an interview but sent a press release stating: “The bill respects religious liberty and prevents the American Counseling Association from using Tennessee’s laws to promote government-compelled speech, contrary to the First Amendment. Government should never force any person to speak words to anyone that is contrary to their conscience. Thankfully, 68 Tennessee Representatives still value that fundamental constitutional right.”

Previously, Tennessee law had basically adopted the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics, which already provides a process for referring a case to another counselor but does not allow it to be based solely on the counselor’s own “personally held beliefs.” Opponents call that an open door to discrimination.

Insurance companies don’t allow discrimination by medical providers—whether they treat the body or the mind—and changing state law this way might give insurance companies a reason to refuse to reimburse for mental health treatment, says Lisa Henderson, the legislative and public policy chairperson for the Tennessee Counseling Association and its incoming president-elect. In reality, this will probably just mean fewer people get the treatment they need, she says.

Amendments were proposed that would have forbidden counselors from refusing to treat a teen being bullied and forbidden counselors from charging a patient they refuse to treat, but these were tabled.

“Even someone from the association of religious counselors testified against it,” Armstrong says. “We’re heading down a slippery slope when licensing agencies are all against it and a small minority are pushing the bill, doing it for the purposes of a right-wing agenda. I certainly think we took a step in the wrong direction with this bill.”

Although discussion in the Legislature has focused on counseling for gay and transgender people, the law as written could affect access for many others whose “desired outcomes” don’t align with the counselors’ beliefs. In Tennessee, the only therapists Lisa Henderson knows who were worried about this were actually concerned about having to counsel someone considering an abortion. It’s possible focusing the discussion on sexual preference is cloaking what this bill is really about.

“The conversation in the legislature is, as I feared it would be, much more narrow than what it could be in reality,” Lisa Henderson says. “For them, it’s just LGBT right to care and counselors’ right to religious freedom. Those are the hot topics in popular culture and not necessarily in therapy. I’m watching it become less and less about therapy and more and more about right versus left.”

In this sense, the counseling bill may be like others that have gained traction in legislatures this year: It appears to address a narrow issue, yet in fact affects more

“This is extremely stressful for (LGBT) people because it makes them wonder what’s coming next, and makes them wonder if marriage equality could be successfully undone if a Trump or Cruz got elected,” Sanders says. “People are scared.”