Watch the votes for marriage equality come in at the Illinois House of Representatives. (November 5, 2013).
The General Assembly today narrowly approved a gay marriage bill, clearing the way for Illinois to become the 15th state to legalize same-sex unions.
The bill got 61 votes in the House, one more than the bare minimum needed to send the measure back to the Senate, which quickly signed off. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn has said he would sign the bill into law should it reach his desk.
Reaction is rolling in tonight from the White House to City Hall.
President Barack Obama issued a statement praising the General Assembly.
“As president, I have always believed that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally under the law. Over time, I also came to believe that same-sex couples should be able to get married like anyone else,” he said in the statement. “So tonight, Michelle and I are overjoyed for all the committed couples in Illinois whose love will now be as legal as ours – and for their friends and family who have long wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and equally under the law.”
Mayor Rahm Emanuel issued a statement following the House vote.
“Today is a critical moment in history for Illinois and for the entire LGBT movement. Finally, gays and lesbians across our state are guaranteed the fundamental right to marry, and countless couples with children will be acknowledged for what they are under the law – families just like everyone else,” said Emanuel in the statement.
The House vote followed more than two-and-a-half hours of debate in which supporters said it’s time for Illinois to make marriage equal for all and opponents raised concerns about protecting the institution of marriage and the religious beliefs of those who say marriage should be between a man and woman.
Sponsoring Rep. Greg Harris told colleagues that a series of “proud moments and difficult decisions that have brought honor upon the people and the state of Illinois, and we find ourselves at another one of those moments today.”
The openly gay Democratic lawmaker from Chicago said the state’s civil union law has saddled Illinois with “inequality, unfair burden and harms added layer by layer to people simply because they live in the state of Illinois.”
“To treat all our citizens equally in the eyes of the law, we must change this,” Harris said.
Rep. Mary Flowers, D-Chicago, pointed to a passage in the book of Genesis that a man leaves his father and mother to “cleave to his wife.”
Same-sex couples will “not be truly married in God’s eyes” and that neither the church nor the legislature has the ability to overturn the basic tenents of the Bible, Flowers said.
“This debate is a joke,” Flowers said.
Near the end of the debate, Speaker Michael Madigan spoke in support, saying that civilization has been based on two people finding each other. “Who am I to judge that they should be illegal?” Madigan said of same-sex couples.
State Rep. Ed Sullivan of Mundelein, one of the few Republicans expected to vote in favor, said he was voting for gay marriage because of the influence in his life of his mother-in-law, who he said is a lesbian.
Opponent Rep. Tom Morrison of Palatine said he supports “natural marriage” between a man and a woman. Morrison, a Republican, said redefining marriage could have far-reaching social implications. “Why is the state concerned with personal relationships anyway?…Real marriage is the building block of human civilization,” he said.
Morrison said a vote against the bill does not mean a lawmaker is a bigot.
Rep. Jeanne Ives, a Wheaton Republican, questioned whether religious beliefs would be protected. She called the bill “the worst in the U.S.” for protecting such freedoms.
Rep. David Reis, a Downstate Republican, contended the bill would not protect individual religious beliefs for people like judges who might be asked to perform gay marriages in counties where churches decline to do so.
Rep. Kelly Cassidy, an openly gay North Side lawmaker, begged lawmakers to consider what they will tell people in the future about the vote.
“What did you do when faced with this historic moment?” Cassidy asked.
She recounted how she had to rush from Springfield to Chicago to be with partner who was hospitalized while being in excruciating pain. But Cassidy said she had to weight whether she could go “straight to her side” or spend an extra hour picking up paperwork that showed she had the legal right to be with her.
“Please, vote ‘yes’ and join us on the right side of history,” Cassidy said.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie equated the gay marriage vote to states that once outlawed interracial marriage.
“Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others,” said Currie, D-Chicago.
Flowers blasted efforts to equate the fight for same-sex marriage to the fight for civil rights by African Americans.
“Homosexuality has nothing to do with race,” Flowers said.
“When I was discriminated against, it wasn’t because of who I was. It was because of the color of our skin,” Flowers said, pointing out that people were sold into slavery because of the color of their skin.
Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo, said he “can’t think of a single way” that approving gay marriage would hurt his own marriage to his longtime wife.
“This is not the time to be timid,” Franks said.
Other lawmakers cited the Bible as a reason to deny same-sex marriage.
In arguing against gay marriage, Republican Rep. Dwight Kay of Downstate Glen Carbon told fellow lawmakers the nation was built on the bedrock of Biblical scriptures before the U.S. Constitution came along.
Kay called on lawmakers to “stick by” their convictions rather than walk away for the “expediency of the moment.”
“You shouldn’t deny your own experience or your own conviction,” Kay said. “My conviction happens to be that this (gay marriage) is wrong, but my conviction is that scripture is right.”
Rep. Ken Dunkin, the chair of the legislature’s black caucus, countered Kay’s remarks, saying it was not long ago that discrimination was ingrained in laws that denied rights to African-Americans.
“Jesus loved everyone,” Dunkin said.
Dunkin also questioned how there could be an issue today on “whether two people who love each other, who are committed to one another, want to commit to themselves for the rest of their lives.”
Harris had been under intense pressure by gay rights activists to call the measure for a vote during the fall veto session, which is scheduled to end Thursday. Some lawmakers privately had asked the matter be delayed until January, when they’ll know who their primary opposition will be and could better weigh whether to take what for some remains a risky vote.
Efforts to pass the bill received a recent boost from House Speaker Michael Madigan, the powerful Southwest Side Democrat who is also head of the Illinois Democratic Party. Madigan had come under fire from some who argued he wasn’t doing enough to win support for the measure in the chamber he controls, though supporters acknowledge his involvement has been “critical” in gathering votes.
The bill initially needed 71 votes to pass, but that threshold fell to 60 after the legislation was amended to change the effective date to next June 1. Because the bill was altered, it will have to return to the Senate, where Senate President John Cullerton says his members are prepared to approve it for the second time.
Supporters have painted the issue as an opportunity for lawmakers to plant their feet on what they say is the right side of history. They point to public opinion that has shifted dramatically in favor of same-sex marriage in recent years, and note the summer’s landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down the definition of marriage as between a man and woman for the purpose of receiving federal benefits.
While the ruling was hailed as a major victory, gay rights advocates argue it has created a two-class system in which gay couples living in states that recognize same-sex marriage have more rights than their counterparts in states that haven’t legalized gay marriage, including Illinois.
Under the measure, the definition of marriage in Illinois would change from an act between a man and a woman to one between two people. Civil unions could be converted to marriages within a year of the law going on the books. The legislation would not require religious organizations to perform a marriage of gay couples, and church officials would not be forced to allow their facilities to be used by gay couples seeking to marry.
Religious leaders opposed say the bill doesn’t go far enough to protect their rights. For example, they contend they might be forced to provide health insurance to an employee’s same-sex spouse.
Author: Monique Garcia and Ray Long
Publication: Chicago Tribune – Clout Street
Date: 5 November 2013
For AME press release click here