Marriage Equality for Illinois

The conservative Chicago Tribune:

Much of the opposition stems from religious concerns, such as those cited by Cardinal Francis George, who has urged a “no” vote. We fully understand and respect the cardinal’s view that same-sex marriage violates natural law. But nothing in this bill affects the church’s authority to define what is right for Catholics. It recognizes the difference between religious rites and civil institutions.

The Catholic church, after all, bars remarriage by divorcees, but Illinois grants marriage licenses to them. Allowing same-sex marriage does not limit the freedom of religious believers to reject it; it merely allows those who differ to practice what they believe.

Which is the best argument ever and I wish I’d thought of it. The Church is in no danger of being sued out of existence by divorcees demanding the right to marry with its sanction, therefore, I mean, whatever, and can we get back to making sure poor people are fed please?


The future of gay couples’ right to marry in Illinois could very well, as god intended, rely on the automobile industry. Illinois Senators have attached the legalization of gay marriage as an amendment to House Bill 4963, which itself amends the state’s Collateral Recovery Act. Feasibly, a bill which seeks to “define ‘automobile rental company'” could also end up defining marriage in the nation’s fifth largest state.

The bizarre move comes after Senate Republicans succeeded in blocking the bill from getting a first hearing Wednesday. So, as a last ditch effort, the bill’s champion, Sen. Heather Steans of Chicago, has tacked legalization of gay marriage as an amendment to another bill that was already scheduled for a vote Thursday. Illinois’ General Assembly is in its last days.

The bill passed out of a Senate committee tonight, clearing the way for a full vote.

About damn time my state joined the rest of the civilized world.


3 thoughts on “Marriage Equality for Illinois

  1. Damn. I’m embarrassed that I hadn’t thought of that argument, either. Glad someone did.

  2. That is a terrific argument (second marriages without a Catholic Church-sanctioned annulment), and one you’re going to hear a lot of if you’re anywhere near me.
    As for amending a bill to get an unrelated matter through a legislative body, that’s a trick older than Robert’s Rules of Order. I wonder how often this little tactic is pointed out when Republicans do it in the Illinois lege? Regardless, good indeed on Heather Steans, and “too bad” to the renders of garments and clutchers of pearls.

  3. Old family friend posted this earlier this morning, and I’d like to share it:

    I have a very interesting and personal reaction to today’s marriage equality vote in Illinois. First guy I ever had a crush on was in my freshman year of college. It was terribly unrequited, and ended with him embarrassing me at a crowded college party by shouting at me, “I’M NOT GAY!” Today he lives in Chicago with his husband-to-be and is instrumental in the Illinois fight for marriage equality. So there. 😉

Comments are closed.