Gay Marriage | Illinois | News

Illinois Lawmakers Introduce Resolution Affirming State's Ban on Same-Sex Marriage, Urge Constitutional Amendment

In response to lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the prohibition of same-sex marriage in the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, Republican lawmakers introduced a resolution affirming the state's ban on same-sex marriage and urged legislators to support an amendment to the state constitution stating "only a marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized in Illinois.”

ReisThe Press Mentor reports:

State Representatives David Reis (R-Ste. Marie) is co-sponsoring a resolution which upholds the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.
“It is time for the General Assembly to reaffirm their support for Illinois laws reserving the institution of marriage between one man and one woman,” Rep. Reis said.  “The people I represent are adamantly opposed to same-sex marriage and troubled by our Attorney General’s recent dereliction of duty by not defending our state’s policy on marriage.”
House Joint Resolution 95 shows support for Illinois laws reserving the institution of marriage to one man and one woman. The resolution declares the General Assembly's opposition to any efforts to extend the institution of marriage to two individuals of the same sex, whether by statute or by court decision.
The resolution further urges the members of the General Assembly to adopt a constitutional amendment (HJRCA 50) introduced by Rep. Reis stating "only a marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized in Illinois.”

Reis, concerned that the issue will be decided by the courts, wants a popular vote on the constitutional amendment.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. You can tell he's gay from space. When are these closet-cases gonna learn that they're just incriminating themselves?

    Posted by: andy | Jul 25, 2012 9:53:20 AM

  2. Sounds like somebody is (rightfully) scared that all Americans will be treated equally.

    Earth to Reis, your side has lost.

    Posted by: ichabod | Jul 25, 2012 9:57:04 AM

  3. Do "one man, one woman" marriage equality haters really mean that - I assume that means no remarriage if they divorce then, right?

    I love how those 'concerned that the courts would decide' such issues - who decide based on the Constitution - love to rush to vote on rights...despite the Constitution. Can we have a popular vote on the probability that this guy is a closet case?

    Posted by: DP | Jul 25, 2012 9:57:26 AM

  4. Major gayface with this one.

    Posted by: Francis | Jul 25, 2012 10:10:08 AM

  5. Good for him!

    I'm always glad to see people stand by their convictions and not be swayed by the liberal media and its agenda. Marriage is one man-one woman. I have relatives who live in IL and if this ever goes to vote, I'll urge them to vote for traditional marriage. I live in Michigan and in 2004 eagerly voted to keep marriage as one man-one woman and was proud when it was upheld. If it ever goes to vote again, then I'll again vote to keep it that way.

    Just be glad that they aren't arresting people anymore for having same sex relations.

    Posted by: Erick | Jul 25, 2012 10:14:33 AM

  6. Actually they are "Erick." Now scamper back to Free Republic.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 25, 2012 10:35:59 AM

  7. Doubt it will ever come to a vote with Democrats in control of the legislature now and for the forseeable future (Redistricting was done to give Democrats a strong advantage for the next 10 years). Even political junkies point out that the state has been trending more and more Democratic as of late.

    Should Republicans be lucky enough to gain control of the legislature, constitutional amendments need to be approved by a three-fifths majority in both the house and the senate to reach the ballot. On top of that, the amendment is only ratified in one of two ways. Either if Illinois voters approve the amendment itself by a three-fifths majority or by a majority of the ballots cast in the election (Translation: not voting on the amendment is considered a No vote).

    Posted by: Sam | Jul 25, 2012 10:42:38 AM

  8. awe - poor Erick - must be up at night pacing the floors thinking about ALL the Gays and Lesbians that are Married...10's of 1000's of gay cpls MARRIED poor

    Posted by: Disgusted American | Jul 25, 2012 10:50:06 AM

  9. This is so silly. The requirements for getting a Constitutional amendment proposal on the ballot in Illinois are incredibly onerous, and the right-wing fringe couldn't organize a three-car funeral. Nothing like this will happen in the legislature, and Republicans in Illinois tend to be more moderate (Mr. Reis is a notable exception.)

    Much ado about absolutely nothing.

    Posted by: LincolnLounger | Jul 25, 2012 10:59:11 AM

  10. Erick is proud of the KKK and AlQeida, too. People standing up for their convictions...

    Posted by: RHR IN TN | Jul 25, 2012 11:00:11 AM

  11. When will people realize that all this debate is just a huge waste of time and taxpayer money. SCOTUS will soon strike down DOMA and all of the state bans will be erased from the law books.

    Posted by: DiatribesAndOvations | Jul 25, 2012 11:02:45 AM

  12. Always the fat asses.

    Posted by: SteveEck | Jul 25, 2012 11:06:25 AM

  13. @DIATRIBESANDOVATIONS That's not how it works...

    Posted by: Mike8787 | Jul 25, 2012 11:08:10 AM

  14. That depends on how SCOTUS rules, Diatribes. Best case scenario, you're right, but that's a much more difficult battle than simply having Section 3 ruled unconstitutional.

    Posted by: kpo5 | Jul 25, 2012 11:19:05 AM

  15. "Small government" Republicans at work. Alas, Lincolnlounger, though they may be blowing hot air in Illinois, nationally this isn't the Republican "fringe" position but rather the Republican-mainstream-Romney position. Republican majorities have never been good for gay rights, quite the contrary.

    @Diatribes: You're misinformed. The DOMA cases headed to the Supreme Court involve only the section of DOMA that involves legally married couples receiving federal benefits. There is no legal magic wand that will automatically "erase" state bans.

    Erick = Dinosaur

    Posted by: Ernie | Jul 25, 2012 11:24:47 AM

  16. @ERICK I looked up the word "troll" in the dictionary and saw your face next to it.

    Posted by: jam | Jul 25, 2012 11:25:21 AM

  17. @KPO5 There is absolutely zero chance that the DOMA cases are going to do any more than striking down the federal statute -- and, at that, it is likely to only strike down Section 3. DOMA challenges have nothing to do with state constitutional or statutory bans on same-sex marriage.

    Posted by: Mike8787 | Jul 25, 2012 11:43:51 AM

  18. He looks like Marcus Bachman

    Posted by: Steve | Jul 25, 2012 11:45:22 AM

  19. stupid faggot. get out of the bathroom stall and come out as a happy gay man and stop trying to make it worse for the rest of us.

    Posted by: tc in bk | Jul 25, 2012 11:45:34 AM

  20. Even if DOMA Section 2 were gone, that still wouldn't mean nation-wide same-sex marriages. There is still the public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit clause that allows states to ignore laws and statuses from other states if they go against the state's clearly defined public policy - such as an anti-gay statute or amendment.

    Posted by: Steve | Jul 25, 2012 11:46:56 AM

  21. @ erick, it'll be so fun undoing all the homophobic laws that your generation has put in place. Love a 20 year old gay guy.

    Posted by: J. | Jul 25, 2012 12:08:06 PM

  22. What year does he think this is, 2009?

    Posted by: Ray Ivey | Jul 25, 2012 12:13:56 PM

  23. I'm surprised republicans would be behind this.

    Posted by: patrick | Jul 25, 2012 12:45:36 PM

  24. It will never get signed into law and they know it. Republicans in Illinois means farmers. It's the south part of the state, minus Carbondale and Edwardsville where the Universities are, those are liberal and democratic. This is just something for them to do because the Republicans in Illinois get nothing through, can't find they ass with both hands and are laugably inept.

    And as for Erick -- if you're straight the only reason to come to a gay site is to masterbate. I'm surprised you could type with one hand.

    Posted by: Bart | Jul 25, 2012 1:17:23 PM

  25. fun fact - whenever a politician goes to their base and talks up the anti-gay angle what they're actually saying is "my fiscal policies are going to f**k you all over, so i'm hoping you're so stupid and bigoted that you'll vote against them gays and in doing so also vote against your own financial interests"

    and it works. because only stupid people in 2012 are anti-gay.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jul 25, 2012 2:46:23 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Romney Aide Assures UK Paper That 'Anglo-Saxon' Mitt Understands Britain, Unlike African Obama« «