Pat Quinn's Gay Marriage Stance: Illinois Governor Not Sure If He Supports Equal Marriage Bill

Just days after a group of pro-equality lawmakers introduced a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in Illinois, Governor Pat Quinn has expressed some confusion on the topic.

The bill, backed by openly gay state representatives and other lawmakers, would create the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, making "marriage apply equally to marriages of same-sex and different-sex couples and their children" and grant them "the same benefits, protections, and responsibilities under law," the Windy City Times reports.

But Quinn, despite his support from the gay community and his work on passing the state's civil union law, said Tuesday that he is not sure if he supports equal marriage in Illinois.

According to WBEZ, Quinn said he needs to study issues surrounding same-sex marriage before he makes a decision on the matter.

"We believe in civil rights, and we believe in civil unions," Quinn said after signing the civil unions law. "We believe in liberty and justice for all."

Shortly after the law went into effect, several gay rights groups joined a protest calling for marriage equality. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Join The Impact Chicago's Lauren Fleer weighed in on the issue.

"I think it's generally presumed that civil unions are the same thing as marriage and that's a mistake," Fleer said in June. "They gave us civil unions because they didn't want us to have marriage. We have one set of laws for all the straight people and now we're going to give you a separate and lesser set of laws for all you same-sex loving people and that's unacceptable."

Quinn has been widely criticized by state religious leaders for the civil unions law and his pro-choice stance. He would also have to fight social conservative groups if he came out in support of the equal marriage measure.

"Marriage was not created by man or governments," David E. Smith, executive director of the Illinois Family Institute, said after civil unions were approved. "It is an institution created by God. Governments merely recognize its nature and importance."

The Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act would eliminate part of a state law that prohibits same-sex marriages, and allows religious groups to decide what marriages they will perform.

I

Comments

[RationalDubSteppa]

05:30 PM on 02/16/2012

Here we go again with all of this god weirdness!

[SeanMartin]

09:56 AM on 02/16/2012

Well, clearly gay marriage isnt supported by proper Biblical principles. *Everyone* knows that, right?

http://docandraider.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/marriagerites.jpg

:-)

[ewebme]

07:26 AM on 02/16/2012

Quinn is a post sitter. He doesn't give a crap about gay marriage..he does give a crap about how many votes he gets and who he ticks off the least. Marriage was not created by God. It was created by man, who subsequently, continuously, went outside the bonds of marriage to mistresses or multiple wives. Many straight ppl get married without God, in the court system. Civil Unions were just a way to keep Gays quiet. C.U.s are NOT equal. Maybe I should make being Gay my religion and receive tax free benefits for my home (and house of worship). I wonder in 20 years which side of this civil rights movement Quinn is going to want his name attached to.

[James Fair]

01:51 AM on 02/16/2012

Haha. Did anyone chuckle when they saw the photo at the top? Great job Huffpo

[BeninOakland]

02:37 PM on 02/15/2012

Gov. Quinn:

You wanna know what civil unions are? They are a recognition that we gay people have a moral, constitutional, legal, faith-based, child-based, family-based, equality-based, humanity-based, claim on the heterosexual majority, that our lives, loves, families, children, faith, assets, and rights are every bit as important as yours.

You wanna know what else they are? They are a flat-out statement that there is no way on earth you will consider us to be your equals as citizens, tax payers, families, religiously faithful, productive, contributing, law-abiding members of the community.

The REAL question to answer is why must gay human beings, their lives, assets, faith, families, and children, be treated differently than heterosexual human beings.

Marriage is indeed a privilege, or as we like to call it, the resultant of legislated superiority with mandated social inferiority for gay people, with the concomitant legal disadvantaging, all for the sake of an old, deeply ingrained, and absolutely nonsensical prejudice.

There are almost no restrictions on heterosexual marriage as it stands. Any legally eligible man and any woman who met five minutes ago and have enough alcohol in them to think it is a good idea can get married.

you let rapists get married, murders, thieves, serial adulterers, child molesters, bigamists. no restrictions.

But my friends andy and paul, a devoted couple for over 40 years, sickness/health, richer/poorer, longer than all of the Fatman's marriages put together, can't get married.

[corwin]

08:59 PM on 02/15/2012

Ben,
Run on sentences much?Conciseness is a virtue?
And, Ben-often I'm accused of using my intellect to bludgeon people,so 'm taking care to be kind. Of course there are restrictions on heterosexual marriages.There are restrictions in terms of age,consanguinity,and the number of spouses . (Even for Mormons.0
I know this is huffPo,whee factual info is scarce. But,thought isn't actually forbidden here. it's just considered in poor taste
Oakland,huh?

[BeninOakland]

12:23 AM on 02/16/2012

I'm not quite sure what your point is. I said almost no restrictions, legally eligible. I know what I said. 250 words is a bit of a consriction.

In any case, I stand by what I said,and made my point clearly. If you wish to criticize the writing style, that's another issue

[SeanMartin]

08:13 AM on 02/16/2012

I'm sure this has *something* to do with the points he's making, but for the life of me.....

I guess when you cut through it, what you're saying is "We dont get to do everything we want, so why should you get to do anything at all??"

[Mindy Czech]

01:36 PM on 02/15/2012

Any time someone brings their god into the marriage equality debate as a way to explain why it needs to be banned, they have automatically lost any credibility they may have had. Come up with a better argument, Mr. Smith. One that's based on secular science, not religious superstition.

[dennybop]

03:37 AM on 02/16/2012

Thanks Mindy-
I agree. The moment I hear god or invoked in the discussion I move on. I won't allow others to frame the discussion based on religion. We live in a nation of secular laws, not theocracy or (as you point out) superstition.
I have no intention of taking part in a discussion that sets me up to fail before even opening my mouth. I also have no intention of asking another to come up with a "better argument". They don't have one.

[HoosierInMaryland]

07:11 AM on 02/16/2012

I ask them to come up with a non-religious argument. After all, we live in a secular nation, and a Constitution that does NOT mention religion except that no religious test shall be used and the government may not enact any law that impinges on the citizens right to exercise the religion of their choice. I don't care if their argument's only 'half as good', just come up with a non-religious argument.

I've never gotten a non-religious argument, except those that can only be interpreted as "I think gay sex is 'yucky' ", which is not really an excuse at all, just a personal opinion.

[AliveInNYC]

01:09 PM on 02/15/2012

This issue has been at the forefront of American politics for several years, how could he possibly be "not sure" on the topic?

Thats just as disingenous as Clarence Thomas saying he never formed an opinion on Roe v. Wade even though the ruling came down while he was in law school and everyone was talking about it.

[corwin]

09:03 PM on 02/15/2012

Look. Chicago is collapsing.Illinois is collapsing.Even the Non Smart People are realizing this.Gov Quinn can't really do anything to improve the economic situation (cut taxes,cut Public employees perks) without enraging a core group.Asking him to take a position on this is asking him to offend one group or another.

and,in terms of science,any trait that restricts reproductive potential is a dysfunctional trait. Not that it's a bad thing

[RainbowTeacher]

08:15 AM on 02/16/2012

Do you have any scientific proof or just your uninformed opinion? Do you know anything about evolutionary biology?

[hollywoodjaxx]

12:09 PM on 02/15/2012

Why, did some one propose to him?
Everybody is supposed to be equal in this country Gov....get over your homophobia...they won't hurt you.

[Skeptical Cicada]

11:59 AM on 02/15/2012

I take it that Gov. Quinn has no interest in seeking the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.

[corwin]

09:03 PM on 02/15/2012

I doubt there will be a Democratic Party in 2016.why would you think so?

[Heidi Dietrich]

11:59 AM on 02/15/2012

I don't know if gay is a genetic thing based on cellular activity that's different from heterosexuals or not. I've thought about it but I can't figure it out. As a Christian, I know what the bible says but I also know that regardless of what I think about it, this hatred of gays is NOT acceptable. I just don't understand that MORE than I don't understand whether it's genetic or not. But here is one thing I DO know. I do know that it is wrong to spew hatred over them. I know that the people who talk about the bible are picking and choosing which parts they want to obey. They act unloving towards homosexuals and try to get them fired from J.C. Penney (I'm talking about Ellen Degeneres) yet they do not act as Jesus would. I have worked with gay people. Are we saying that because a person is gay, they do not have the right to work for a living and we should be able to dictate whether or not they are able to provide for themselves? This is just WRONG and if that's their brand of Christianity, they better stay far away from me. I have seen far too many "Christians" pick on people they view as less than themselves. I was treated badly for needing help after a knee surgery and became a non person after an epilepsy diagnosis. I can empathize with the gay community over the treatment they have recieved.

[Mindy Czech]

01:33 PM on 02/15/2012

I'm not sure what biological factors made me gay either, but I do know that I was born this way. Why? Because I was only ever attracted to girls, starting back in Kindergarten and probably even before then. I wasn't sexually assaulted by the age of five, so that couldn't have turned me gay. I wasn't exposed to any out gay men or women, so that couldn't have turned me gay. I just was. People try to argue with me, saying one of two things: I'm lying, or that of course I liked other little girls because every little girl eschews boys and wants to be with other girls. It's so ridiculous and insulting. Also, I am sometimes loathe to tell people that I was sexually assaulted because people try to use that as an excuse, but that didn't happen until after I knew. I was also assaulted by both males and a female, so by that logic, I should have turned hetero after being assaulted by the female. But I digress. Anyway, I don't really care what makes me gay, I just know that I am and that I wouldn't change it if I could.

[Heidi Dietrich]

03:46 PM on 02/15/2012

Whatever the factor Mindy, you deserve to be treated with respect. Friended.

[Tribalenvy]

01:53 PM on 02/15/2012

You express your thoughts on the matter with an open heart and mind. Should you choose to support marriage equality or not, I am touched by your response.

I strongly support marriage equality. Regardless of what you decide, thank you. The world is a better place when we approach such topics in a thoughtful and caring manner.

[CogentThought]

11:58 AM on 02/15/2012

"We beleive in Equality" EXCEPT for you.
Another gutless politician putting his finger up to see which way the wind is blowing.
Another "fierce advocate" from Chicago.

[SameBoat]

04:50 PM on 02/15/2012

Always makes you wonder which finger they're using, doesn't it?

[chairsmissing]

11:58 AM on 02/15/2012

"Marriage was not created by man or governments."

Yes it was.

[SameBoat]

04:54 PM on 02/15/2012

Simple solution: it is a civil contractual instrument, as evidenced by the requirement to obtain a license from the state. Let those who wish to consecrate it through their churches continue to be able to do so. Why, why is this so difficult?

[SeanMartin]

08:16 AM on 02/16/2012

Perhaps the good governor would like to go back to marriage's original intent: the transfer of property from the bride's family to the groom's, with the brie just part of the inventory.

[BeninOakland]

12:01 PM on 02/16/2012

"with the BRIE just part of the inventory"

Along with the fondue set and the car,clears and the caviar.

Sean, is that YOU?

[TBJ]

11:50 AM on 02/15/2012

Whatever his stance is, that picture mashup is hilariously leading.

[Over The Hill]

11:39 AM on 02/15/2012

So far so good, Gov (civil unions, pro choice), now it's time to step up to the plate and hit it out of the park. Doing what is right will cost you, but it will still be doing what is right, and may gain you more support than you will lose.

[troyrobertdavid]

11:34 AM on 02/15/2012

Why is it so hard to fathom that any loving, committed couple that intends to spend their life together would want to be recognized and protected under the law as anyone else? How do you look at two consenting adult couples and then look at one and say; yes, you are consenting adults and you can decide that you can be each other’s next of kin and receive all the benefits, rights and protections that go along with that, and then look at the other couple and say; no, even though you are consenting adults you cannot decide who you want as your next of kin and deserve no legal protections what so ever?