The media is finally starting to awaken to the gay marriage petition drive.
Opponents of gay marriage hope to give voters a chance to speak out on the issue through an advisory referendum this fall, a move that could affect political races by bringing more conservatives to the polls.
Organizers of “Protect Marriage Illinois” predicted Monday that they will have enough signatures — thousands more than the 283,111 needed — to get a referendum on the November ballot.
It would ask voters whether they think the Illinois Constitution should define marriage between a man and a woman as the only valid legal union in Illinois. The results won’t change the constitution but could influence whether lawmakers ever take that step.
“The people don’t want their children taught in school that marriage is between one man and another man,” David E. Smith, project director for Protect Marriage Illinois.
Critics argue the petition drive is just an attempt to mobilize conservative voters.
Read the whole thing.
- Cassandra - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 8:14 am:
Anything legal that gets more people to the polls of whatever political stripe is fine with me. although I find the gay marriage issue utterly boring.
Democrats will raise a fuss, of course, because
behind all the rhetoric about voter rights they really believe that only the liberal left has the answer as to how we should lead our lives and spend our money (by giving it to the government, of course).
- Pat collins - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 8:27 am:
I am not sure they have enough signatures to get it on the ballot. We all know you need 2x or so the limit.
But, as an ancedote, when I voted in 2004, one lady in line was asking if gay marriage was on the ballot.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 11:35 am:
Its called Democracy. Instead of relying on sympathetic judges with God-Complexes, citizens are requesting that legislators consider the majority of citizens.
Arrogant folks think they are SO smart. They think they know all about marriage and do not understand how our laws evolved to where they are today. It’s not an accident. We tried other forms of partnerships over the course of humanity. There is a reason we have made the one man-one woman monogamous marriage a legally recognized standard. It is because the other forms failed to create a stable family in which to build a society. And that is what law is all about, protecting societies.
This is what has been proven so far regarding alternative partnership lifestyles. We already have real life guinea pigs fighting to keep these lifestyles functioning…
Polygamy - tried it, doesn’t work. The Mormons wished they never played with it. Areas that still practice this old Mormon belief, have staggering social disorder impacting local and state governments. Look at what it does to women and children, and you will see that polygamy is sexist and wicked.
Families without marriages - tried it, doesn’t work. Take a look at fatherless families. We are paying a huge social cost. Fatherless teens are teens needing a family that withstands common daily struggles. Fathers are important to society. We are relearning this the hard, and stupid, way.
Some folks call this tradition, some quote the Bible. Critics call it narrow minded old fashioned and worst. But what it is scientifically is very clear - evolution.
Its called evolution. It works, and we are the proof. What we have today in traditional heterosexual monogamous marriage has been the basis of the most successful culture in history. What do you consider a success? Evolution considers success survival.
How can a gay marriage survive in evolution? It doesn’t. Sorry, but biology trumps it. No kids, no gene pool, no future. Gay couples must depend on society to create what it cannot biologically - a family. Evolutionary, this is like a bike with flat tires, workable, but bound to lose the race. For a society to legalize this form of partnership is a society willing to enable it to overcome biology and evolution. When it comes to survival, a society will be forced to back out of this agreement and let gay marriage wither once again on the historical vine. We’ve seen this before.
It is time we stop pretending that failed forms of partnerships can somehow work if given the right conditions. These conditions don’t exist in reality.
There is no harm in letting citizens, regardless of how they defend it, let their instinct guide them on something as basic as marriage. Sure, they probably will look silly to academics when they wail from pulpits, quote the King James Bible, or stammer. But what they are really doing is instinctive and necessary for their own survival. It is time to get humble, recognize what our ancestors accomplish in creating what we have, and stop pretending we know better than they.
- JIMBO - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 12:46 pm:
VanillaMan - Call it what it is, you think the government should have control over the personal lives of its citizens.
You speak of reality. The reality is that there have been gay people throughout history. Seems as though man has survived so far. So you can speak of reality but its funny, your reality differs from history.
- THE HANKSTER - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 12:49 pm:
Cassandra - What are you talking about now?? You think the government limiting who can get married is not telling citizens how to live their lives? How can you possible, with any sense, say that this issue is based on the democrats telling people who tl ive their lives? What a joke, yet again.
- Lincoln Lounger - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 2:50 pm:
The people in charge of this goofy effort couldn’t run a three car parade. I hope the gays hire good lawyers and get this charade thrown off the ballot. It will take a lot of time, effort, and expense, but the Nut Brigade will not have enough signatures to withstand decent scrutiny.
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 3:48 pm:
I think marriage should be taken out of the state’s hands all together. Just have civil unions for any two people who can totter up to a JP together neither of them already being in a civil union. Yes, churches could still handle the paper work side of the civil union, but the civil union would be what the government handles, the marriage would be what the Church handles.
Marriage is too tied up in Sacrament and Church to be tainted by the state’s handling anyway.
If there is to be no civil unions for gay folk, I don’t think straight folk should get civil unions either. Either the public benefits are for the public or they should not exist for anyone.
Is there anything illegal about taking their petitions and signing them with fake names so they lose on examination? I realize this is unethical, and I probably wouldn’t do it, but I’m wondering what kind of checks they do.
- Anon - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 4:01 pm:
It is ridiculous to have that number of signatures to have a referendum for anything.
Let the gay community have a pro-gay marriage referendum. It will fail.
19 out of 19 states where similiar referendums took place ALL passed. Sometimes 4 to 1 as in Alabama. Even passed in more liberal Oregon or Colorado. EVERYWHERE. NOWHERE did gay rights suceed. NOWHERE. gayrights is a misnomer.
MARRIAGE by definition INHERENTLY is between a man and a woman. It is like trying to change an apple in to an orange and change definition.
- Anon - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 4:04 pm:
Rick Garcia and his wizard of Oz lobbying is deadly afraid of this referendum because it will pass and it will prove conclusively and emperically that the public does not support this radical agenda. Garcia has been snowing the public.
- NIEVA - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 8:39 pm:
Hey Rich, If you read this did you know effective July 1 same sex partners can be insured on the state plan. So if I have a straight relationship but unmarried I can’t insure my girlfriend. But if I am gay or lesbian I can. As far as I know this is for all state employees.
- kdruben - Tuesday, May 2, 06 @ 11:03 pm:
Nieva… the reason for this is because of the fact that gay people can’t get married and heterosexual people can. Those gay people getting insurance for their partners have to pass a pretty high bar (i.e. live together for three years, joint bank accounts, legal documents signed, etc.)…
Either way, this state turns into a blood bath if the issue is on the ballot. I have lived in Maine where the issue is consistently on the ballot and every two years, they see an increase in the anti-gay hate crimes, and a NASTY divisive referendum campaign that only serves to bring the extreme idiots out.
- Rachel - Thursday, May 4, 06 @ 11:44 am:
Vanillaman, what are you talking about? I don’t remember gay marriage ever being legal anywhere until here recently. What are you so afraid of? As for “How can a gay marriage survive in evolution? It doesn’t.” And how do you base this? Have you never heard of donors, surragacy? Or the best one yet. ADOPTION. How many gays and lesbians are adopting children out of foster care that fell victim to the hetero lifestyle. If you believe that marriage is only to spread your seed then I truelly hope your not married. Marriage is about love and commitment between 2 loving adults and IF they decide to have a family then they do. As for gay relationships not surviving, you really need to educate yourself. I think gays and lesbians are doing pretty dang well in commited relationships considering all of the hate and discrimination they have to deal with on a daily basis. There are a lot of hetero couples who never have kids. Or hetero couples that have to use donors or surragacy. Are you trying to say these couples should not have the right to be married as well? As for the religious right pushing this issue. Aren’t they being very hypocritical since they support adultery? There’s a lot more adulterors in this country than gays and lesbians. Shouldn’t they be attacking them instead of supporting them? But that wouldn’t be good for their PR or their donations. Illinois is better than this. We’re an intelligent state thats not bullied by religious fears. We all know its the right thing to approve gay marriage. If not then get rid of all marriage.
- Kevin - Thursday, May 4, 06 @ 5:51 pm:
““The people don’t want their children taught in school that marriage is between one man and another man,†David E. Smith, project director for Protect Marriage Illinois.”
As a hetero married man with kids I find this comment absurd. I realize that Mr. Smith has a right to his own opinion, but really what is he suggesting? I am very PROUD of some of my best friends who just happen to be gay. I get a first hand look at gay families. I’m here to tell you there not any different than the rest of us. We have BBQ’S on weekends, we take camping trips together. They are great parents. But anyway, back to the comment. Ok, so they got their signatures, which I’m hopeing they at least got them the honest way unlike what they were doing in Massachussets and got busted lieing to people. They want to put discrimination into the constitution and ban gay marriage. Ok, as of right now there is no legal gay marriage in Illinois, but that is not stopping gay and lesbian couples from getting married anyway and having families. My family went with at least 70 other people to Canada to be present at our friends wedding. They have a marriage certificate, it was done by a Reverend, they exchanged vows and rings and all in front of their family and friends. Seems like their married to me. My point is, gays and lesbians are still going to fight for their rights, they will still get married and they will still raise kids which brings me to the whole (not wanting kids taught about gay marriage thing). Think about it, where do you think these kids from gay families are going to school? With all the rest of the kids. They are drawing family portraits, they are having their moms or dads present at school and at functions or sporting events. What is Mr. Smith going to come up with next? Seperate schools for their kids, homeschooling for gay families. Why is it so wrong for kids to know that other types of families exist? What I’m pissed off about is my 10 yr old son went on a field trip to look at art and came home talking about nude paintings. Now thats a concern. My friends oldest son had some issues when he told his friends that his moms were getting married. And they told him that they couldn’t, but when he got back from the trip he was so excited to go to school and take his pictures and talk about his moms wedding. Then it was all ok, so you see, unless you decide to lock your kids in the basement they will eventually learn what the world is really like. And realize its great having such a mixed group of people living together. Why do we all have to be the same? People need to stop thinking so much about what others do in the bedroom and look at people for who they are as a person.