We’ll start the day on an up note:
Illinois lawmakers on Wednesday approved legislation allowing civil unions in this state, and the governor has indicated he will sign it, making Illinois one of only a handful of states to grant to same-sex couples a broad array of legal rights and responsibilities similar to those of marriage.
Advocates of the legislation, who had pressed the matter for years, pointed to the outcome as a sign that acceptance of gay men and lesbians is growing and not only on the coasts.
“Sober, clear-minded, cautious Midwesterners are taking this action,” said Rick Garcia of Equality Illinois, a gay-rights group.
Opponents complained about the timing of the vote (during a fall session before newly elected legislators arrive) and said they feared civil union legislation might ultimately harm the institution of marriage. “This will be the entry to a slippery slope,” Ron Stephens, a Republican state representative, said. “The next thing we’ll see will be consideration of gay marriage.”
No, it is not marriage, but it is a step in the right direction.
OH NOES SLIPPERY SLOPE TO GAY MARRIAGE!11
Hey, fuckwad Illinois Republican state rep – look around. Gay marriage central – aka Massachusetts – has the lowest divorce rate in the country. Suck. On. That.
Good for Illinois!
I think that right wing’s obsession with what folks do in bed is a perversion.
Edited becaue my fingers are too fat for this keyboard.:-)
@Cat Lady: If, during a discussion of gay marriage, you say “Suck. On. That.” to a Republican, I think we all know how it will end. They seem a bit obsessed with the ramming of things down throats, etc.
Saw that on the local news last night. I wasn’t even aware that it was being debated. The newsreader for the TV station we were tuned to solemnly intoned “none of our downstate legislators voted for it”.
Which isn’t really news, now is it?
I was also sort of taken back by this. Never even knew it was on the radar. Of course, if it keeps them from dealing with the actual shitstorm of financial difficulties, I guess they’re all happy.
Just wondering how this will be framed as Democrats doing nothing on gay rights issues and ultimately being the same as the Republicans?
The appeal on DADT is still going forward, so there.
Divorce rates in 2004 (via wikipedia):
USA (no same sex marriage): 3.6/1000 pop
Netherlands (same sex marriage since 2001): 1.91/1000 pop
I also noticed that in 2007 (the latests I could find, but 6 years after the introduction, so pretty much stabilized), only 2% of marriages in the Netherlands, about 1,300 out of 70,000 were same sex. Translating that to the USA, even if we managed to force same sex marriages on say Wyoming, they would be looking at 1 (one) gay wedding per week.
why dont you just link Douchehat again.
another happy day on the lowrent Atlantic circle jerk.
@matoko_chan: WTF does your comment have to do with the post?
yeah, that’s half the fuckin’ point.
as a native illinoisan, i must say i’m pretty happy right now. it’s something.
I’d prefer full marriage rights, but I agree that civil unions are better than no rights at all.
Have the anti-marriage folks produced any evidence at all that the few states that legalised gay marriages are having terrible problems that are due solely to that one so-called “special” right ?
Didn’t think so.
Another example of the up is down world we live in. If Republicans weren’t such flaming hypocritical closeted fucktards, they would be trying to force gay marriage down everyone’s throat in defense of marriage. Turn Wyoming into Brokeback Mountain II – Cowboy Wedding Boogaloo.
Yes, a step in the right direction.
A big thumbs-up for the citizens of Illinois!
I think we can all agree that there is no real closet that hides hypocritical Republican fucktardery.
Definitely a good start. It should be noted that the law allows for both gays and straights to sign up for a civil union; not too important but I think it’s interesting from a legal standpoint. Well cheers to my state for finally doing something good in recent times.
Yes, Mr Stephens, yes it will, because over time more and more people, ordinary people will see us, their gay friends and workmates and children, just living their lives together. They will realise that it’s lovely and beautiful and, most important of all, ordinary, and that our lives are just like theirs (although generally with better interior design and more threesomes).
They will realise that all of the stupid arguments that the bigots in our midst wheel out – that letting two men marry somehow damages the perfection of their own marriage, that children with two mums will grow up to be serial killers, that people will start marrying their dogs – are bigoted, meaningless lies next to the wonderfulness of two people being in love and wanting to get married.
We are all on the slippery slope, with you clawing at the ground trying to stop us sliding down. You are losing a little bit more every day, and your little victories, each time you reverse our hard won rights, each time you succeed in throwing out a judge because they believed in equality, will, in ten or twenty or thirty years, be seen as the final death throes of your dead, dead, discredited hatred.
Oh, and fuck you.
Oh no! Not the slippery slope! Hide your children!
The anti-gay rights crowd is quickly becoming a parody of itself.
Sister Machine Gun of Quite Harmony
No, why should they? Aside from the fact that such “evidence” is mainly opinion, rather than fact? The hard-core “anti-marriage folks” – the AFA or NOM sort – don’t need or want any “evidence”: they’re going on the foundational assumption that Teh Ghey is Evil Bad and Wrong in and of itself – with their objections typically cloaked in religious terms so as not to look like complete jerkwad bigots; assuming they care.
That same-sex marriages don’t cause any “special problems” – or, for that matter any relevant “problems” at all – isn’t the point: for the Homophobe Lobby, it’s all a matter of “morals” – i.e. faith-based prejudice – and so things like facts and reality don’t really have to be taken into account. Also, the Big Bad Evil Homo Agenda provides the hucksters with a handy strawman to get the rubes to part with their cash: why would they want to ruin their game?
Good for Illinois: if civil unions ARE a “slippery slope” to marriage equality, I hope this provides the State with a nice slick coat of oil to speed the slide along….
Huh? I live downstate and both my representative and senator voted for it. Does “our” only include Republicans now? (Stupid question, I know.)
Suck It Up!
meh, half a loaf. total capitulation.
damn straight it’s a slippery slope from civil unions to marriage. cause anyone joined in a civil union is going to say they are married. once that happens, everyone starts to wonder why there is a distinction and it is removed. it’s a losing battle against semantics.
in a year or two (perhaps as many as three) there will be gay marriage in illinois. and elsewhere. those finally given their rights will rejoice; most people will yawn and the loons will shout because they equate volume with righteousness. the world will fail to end yet again; society will strengthen, not crumble and a new generation will be born never knowing a time gays couldn’t marry, nor understanding quite why that was.
that is progress.
As a happily co-habitating gay Illinoisan, I applaud this measure and am surprised by it as well. Hooray for the slippery slope! Now, where’s my sled?
Actually I was reading a bit about the bill, and it seems the only thing that Civil Unions are not granting to gay people in Illinois is the word marriage. Otherwise they grant members of a civil union all the rights given by the status of “spouse.”
Half of the bill is about protecting the church’s right to define what constitutes a marriage, and the other half is basically letting gays get married and call it something else. (Oh but old people can get a civil union and then get 2 social security checks, go old people go!)
So now we are calling the same thing, two different things, because some religious people are stupid.
I actually have a private hope that this bill will lead to the total separation of church and civil marriage. It seems more logical that the government would provide “Civil Unions” to everyone, straight and gay, and if they want to get religiously married in a church with god and all that, they can. Ideally one could then also not allow the church to perform Civil Unions, which would fully seperate the idea of church marriage and legal marriage. (Thus ending any logical grounds for religious people to complain about the gays having rights.)
An added side benefit to this is that it would also get rid of that totally weird thing where people get ordained on the internet and then perform the ceremony, what the HELL is that? You are an accountant you don’t get to marry people.
Here’s to a little more lube on that slope!
From the Chicago Tribune:
A Republican voted for civil unions? Be still, my heart. I may just have to invite him to my Big Gay Civil Union ceremony.
Its about time Illinois thinks of everyones rights (with liberty and justice for ALL), not just those of the strait community. The opinions of those of you who are noticably upset, which is hilarious, doesnt matter at this point. You continue to amuse the gay community with your bashing comments. At the end of the day WE gay people will continue to sleep & wake cheerfully as you kick and fuss while our deserving rights are passed. =)
Wow.. you people who say gay marriage will lead into marriage of animals must really be plain stupid.. haha Let me school you guys. Were human, are we not?.. Were able to make our own choices and speak up, are we not?.. How and why would gay marriage make it okay to marry and innocent animal who cant even speak? Yet alone make choices for itself. And then us gay people are called “stupid and confused”.. You people who think this way contradict your own sick thoughts.