RECENT  POSTS:  » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

05/22/2009

Civility spreading midwestward?

by Jeremy Hooper

IllinoisLots of promising coupling-centric stuff is going on in the northeast. But now some nice noise is popping out of the Prairie State:

The Illinois General Assembly is expected to approve a measure next week that would legalize civil unions, according to an LGBT activist.

Rick Garcia, political director for Equality Illinois, said Thursday he's "absolutely" expecting the full state House and the Senate to pass a civil union measure either Tuesday or Wednesday. The bill has support from Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D).

Illinois poised to approve civil unions [Wash. Blade]

A C.U. system would be a nice step, for sure. Then maybe the lawmakers could look to the west at their pals in neighboring Iowa, peer through the corn fields and see that full equality has not corrupted a damn thing, and then bump up the system so that C.U. instead stands for Complete Uniformity. That is, after all, the inevitable endgame.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. For now: Power through the rights so that our local families and children will finally get some protection!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

It's also more ammo for the argument that a separate class is inherently unequal.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | May 22, 2009 2:59:37 PM

I agree with you RainbowPhoenix. I'd rather see all the separate rights attained without the umbrella "civil union" because it's just plain offensive to me. But hopefully this'll be a stepping stone like it was in Vermont & (hopefully) New Hampshire.

Posted by: Bruno | May 23, 2009 1:07:24 AM

Bruno: Yea, civil unions are offensive to most of us (this site has been a MAJOR civil unions critic over the years). But I think what RainbowPhoenix is saying is that this will be a good thing, as having this system will prove that separate is unequal, and that they must be bumped up to full marriage. That's exactly what we've seen happen in every last civil union state (with New Jersey civil unions likely to evolve within a year).

Posted by: G-A-Y | May 23, 2009 8:37:19 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails