Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

Nov 30, 2010 Full story: CBS2 49,788

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Full Story

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

#37110 Jan 14, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
That's some rockin' descriptive skills you have there, NoQ. I bet you've worked your little three incher into a frenzy!
NoQ only has a 3-incher if you measure starting from behind his sack. If you measure from the pubic bone, it's a micro-schwanz.
Michael Clark Duncun

San Ramon, CA

#37111 Jan 14, 2013
Southern Lady01 wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot the two entire cities of Sodom & Gamorrah that God destroyed because of homosexual acts. God called it an abomination. I would call that a sin.
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Yeah,right,UmmmK! What ever you say! Tell us,have you met Tattoo or Mr. Rourke yet? Your religious fantasy begins tomorrow! That particular fairy tale had absolutely nothing to do with being gay! What an ignorant bone head you are! De plane,de plane,de plane!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#37112 Jan 15, 2013
Michael Clark Duncun wrote:
<quoted text>Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Yeah,right,UmmmK! What ever you say! Tell us,have you met Tattoo or Mr. Rourke yet? Your religious fantasy begins tomorrow! That particular fairy tale had absolutely nothing to do with being gay! What an ignorant bone head you are! De plane,de plane,de plane!
Ok. Then they were just sick twisted perverted idiots that made God sick so he killed them all. Whatever he fixed what he didn't want. You'd think they'd learn.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#37113 Jan 15, 2013
JD St Louis wrote:
GAY PEOPLE THINK THEY CAN MAKE SOMETHING THAT IS IMMORAL MORAL ITS A SIN IN GODS EYES AN YOU WILL BURN IN HELL FOR IT UNLESS YOU REPENT
Yeah, yeah....blah, blah.

Meanwhile, back here in the real world...

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#37115 Jan 15, 2013
Southern Lady01 wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot the two entire cities of Sodom & Gamorrah that God destroyed because of homosexual acts. God called it an abomination. I would call that a sin.
Unless you can prove that your god actually destroyed two ancient cities for the reason you describe, your argument has no merit.

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#37116 Jan 15, 2013
Southern Lady01 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok. Then they were just sick twisted perverted idiots that made God sick so he killed them all. Whatever he fixed what he didn't want. You'd think they'd learn.
Well, then, your god must really want gays and lesbians around because here we are...always have been, always will be.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#37117 Jan 15, 2013
Southern Lady01 wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot the two entire cities of Sodom & Gamorrah that God destroyed because of homosexual acts. God called it an abomination. I would call that a sin.
Well; sugar
.
It didn't work
.
We're all still here!
.
nana-nana-na-NAH!
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#37121 Jan 15, 2013
Worm wrote:
That is what they said in school!
Recommended New York sex ed site offers middleschoolers tips on eating feces, bestiality, fetishes
WARNING: very explicit content.
NEW YORK - The recommended curriculum for a mandatory sex education course to be implemented in New York middle and high schools next year directs students to a website that details “safe sex” practices regarding bestiality, coprophagia, and other extreme sexual fetishes.
The New York Post reported on Saturday that assignments in a workbook recommended by city education officials included giving middle schoolers “risk cards” to rate the safety of such activities as anal sex, oral sex, and “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant.”
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg defended the sex curriculum as necessary to combat the city's STD infections and out-of-wedlock births.
Teens are also told to learn the route from school to the nearest family planning clinic and research its confidentiality policy, or to report on condom brands and features such as lubrication.
But one of the most extreme aspects of the curriculum is its referral to “Go Ask Alice,” a website run by Columbia University that offers comprehensive analysis of sex fetishes and their hygienic pitfalls.
“The idea of experimenting with scat play might heat things up in the bedroom (or bathroom, or anywhere else you choose), but it’s always a good idea to consider the risks of a behavior before acting upon (or getting action from) it,” states the website in one page entitled “‘Scat’ play — is eating feces safe?” Other areas discuss pornography, drinking urine, and “favorite sexual positions.” One page proposes to overcome lack of information on the bestiality due to “stigmatization” of the practice.
The NYC Parents’ Choice Coalition has launched a campaign against the new curriculum, urging parents to opt their kids out of the program. However, the city’s Department of Education defended the information as more in-depth instruction on safe-sex practices, and noted that abstinence would also be taught.
Mayor Bloomberg defended the sex curriculum as necessary to combat the city’s STD infections and out-of-wedlock births.“We have a responsibility, when you have an out of wedlock birthrate and a sexually transmitted disease rate that we have in this city, to try to do something about it,” said the mayor on Monday.“Shame on us if we don’t.”
CNN reports that the NYC Department of Education will mandate that all schools have a sexual education curriculum by next spring.
Click here for NYC Parents’ Choice Coalition’s contact page for Mayor Bloomgberg and the NYC Department of Education.
Do you plan to enroll?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#37122 Jan 15, 2013
Worm wrote:
That is what they said in school!
Recommended New York sex ed site offers middleschoolers tips on eating feces, bestiality, fetishes
yawn...lies posted on several fundamentalist christian sites and nowhere else.

Poor pathetic Worm/ Cool Hand Luke/ Blair/ Samatha/ Brenda Lee/ Lone Gunman...such a pathetic creature.
Cool Hand Luke

Scranton, PA

#37123 Jan 15, 2013
Is this a fundamentalist Christian website? Or are you lying to deceive the reader?

.

Gay Sexual Practices Lead to Uptick in Disease

>
FECAL SEX About 80% of gays admit to licking and/or inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it are probably at even greater risk. In the diary study,5 70% of the gays had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result?--the "annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent, whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." In 1992,26 it was noted that the proportion of gays engaging in oral/anal sex had not declined.

>

Gay Men and Shigellosis
What is Shigellosis?
Shigellosis is a disease that causes stomach cramps, fever, diarrhea and sometimes bloody diarrhea.
What causes Shigellosis?
Shigellosis is caused by the Shigella bacterium. Shigella is found in feces (shit).
Who gets it?
Anyone can get Shigellosis. Gay men get Shigellosis at higher rates than others. People with a weakened immune
system get more sick than others.
How do you get it?
You can get Shigellosis when feces comes in contact with your mouth. This can happen with oral/anal sex play. This
can happen when you use your fingers or hand for anal sex play and then touch your mouth. Even microscopic
amounts of feces that get into your mouth can cause Shigellosis.
How can I avoid Shigella?
Play safely. In addition to safe sex guidelines to prevent HIV, maintain good hygiene. Wash every
part of your body that is sexual with soap and water before, after and between sex play. Use condoms
or other kinds of barriers like dental dams, latex gloves or plastic wrap and be aware of
what body parts may have come into contact with feces during sex play. Wash them with soap
and water. Use condoms with sex toys, and discard the condoms after use.
What do I do if I think I have Shigellosis?
• If you think you have Shigellosis, see your doctor.
• Inform your partners.
• Wash your hands a lot.
• Don’t have sex until 7 days after symptoms end.
• Talk with a medical provider about what you can do to reduce your risk.
publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/docs/Shigellosi...
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
yawn...lies posted on several fundamentalist christian sites and nowhere else.
Poor pathetic Worm/ Cool Hand Luke/ Blair/ Samatha/ Brenda Lee/ Lone Gunman...such a pathetic creature.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#37126 Jan 16, 2013
Cool Hand Luke wrote:
Is this a fundamentalist Christian website?
Ah, Worm/ Cool Hand Luke/ Blair/ Samatha/ Brenda Lee/ Lone Gunman...not even bothering to deny that you are all the same person just spamming up the boards.

And, hey - thanks for admitting that your previous post was, indeed, lies from a fundamentalist christian website!

Poor. sad Worm/ Cool Hand Luke/ Blair/ Samatha/ Brenda Lee/ Lone Gunman...so obsessed with gay men...and only gay men...hmmmm
Blair

Burlingame, CA

#37127 Jan 16, 2013
Syphilis infections rising dramatically among New Brunswick homosexuals

Tue Feb 28, 2012 15:32 EST
Comments ()
Tags: homosexual, New Brunswick, syphilis

FREDERICTON, February 28, 2012 - The New Brunswick Health Department has issued a warning that syphilis is spreading at an increasing rate among the province’s homosexuals and that strategies to prevent infection and reduce risk of transmission by infected individuals seem to be ineffective.

According to the January issue of the New Brunswick Disease Watch Bulletin, infection numbers have gone from fewer than five cases per year before 2008, to 9 in 2009, 37 in 2010 and 57 last year, with 10 cases already reported in the first two months of this year.

The New Brunswick Health Department is particularly concerned that most of the syphilis infections are occurring in the homosexual community.

“Since late 2009, 92 per cent of cases have been male. Most male cases have reported only male sex partners (MSM),” the Disease Watch Bulletin states, highlighting that the disease does not seem to involve traditional high-risk groups such as prostitutes or injection drug users.

“This outbreak does not appear to involve traditional high-risk groups such as sex trade workers, patrons of sex trade workers and injection drug users,” the bulletin states.

“We seem to unfortunately have a trend,” Dr. Denis Allard, New Brunswick’s deputy chief medical officer of health, told the Canadian Press.“We hope we can have an effect on it, but for the time being it seems to be as high or higher than last year.”

Allard pointed out that most of those infected are between 20 and 25, and although the health department has posted information on syphilis on it website and produced flyers and posters directed to the homosexual community, the spread of the disease is linked to an increase in promiscuous sexual behavior.

“People these days tend to go on the Internet to find partners there and don’t seem to inform themselves very much, they just want to have sex, and they get infected. These are people who have multiple sex partners, especially if these sex partners are anonymous,” Allard said.

The Disease Watch Bulletin notes that success in reducing the incidence of sexually transmitted infections is affected by the ability of the Health Department to trace and contact the sexual partners of infected individuals, but this is hindered by the anonymous nature of homosexual sex encounters.

“In New Brunswick, contact tracing is often challenging because one in three syphilis cases have reported having anonymous sex partner(s) in the last year. These challenges are compounded by multiple anonymous contacts associated with the Internet and bathhouses as well as by the apparent transient nature of some cases into and out of the province,” the Health Department explained.

Dr. Allard concluded that the increase in the number of sexual partners is likely contributing to the increase in syphilis infections.

“It could be that people are a little more promiscuous in their sexual behavior,” he said.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#37128 Jan 16, 2013
Cool Hand Luke wrote:
Is this a fundamentalist Christian website?
No
.
It is neither fundamentalist nor christian
Vito

Totowa, NJ

#37130 Jan 16, 2013
My Gosh! He told the truth!
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
No
.
It is neither fundamentalist nor christian

Since: Nov 08

Mattoon, IL

#37131 Jan 16, 2013
-YUM- wrote:
Second conversation,,, this one to the governor,,,, wth happened with medical pot bill?????????? You need to get on that!
Sounds to me like he and most of the idiots in office are already on it, or something stronger, what a bunch of crappola!!
Flocko

Phoenix, AZ

#37132 Jan 16, 2013
Opinion

Print Article | Email Friend | Reprint Permissions

The newest front in the battle over marriage

by Paul Benjamin Linton

Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:25 EST
Comments (2)
Tags: gay marriage, illinois, marriage






July 4, 2012 ( thePublicDiscourse.com )- Illinois is now “ground zero” in the ongoing battle to preserve traditional marriage. On May 30, 2012, the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., filed separate lawsuits in the Cook County Circuit Court (which includes the City of Chicago) on behalf of a number of same-sex couples challenging the Illinois law that reserves marriage to opposite-sex couples (Illinois does, however, already recognize same-sex civil unions). The lawsuits, which raise only state, not federal, constitutional claims, name a single defendant, David Orr, the Cook County Clerk, who has the responsibility and duty of issuing marriage licenses and registering the solemnization of marriages after they have been performed. Mr. Orr, a longtime advocate of same-sex marriage, has announced his support for the plaintiffs’ lawsuits, has expressed his opinion that the failure to recognize same-sex relationships as marriages is unconstitutional, and has stated that he expects his counsel, Anita Alvarez, the State’s Attorney of Cook County, to support his position, which she has now done. She has filed an answer in each case admitting that the reservation of marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the equal protection guarantees of the Illinois Constitution.

In the meantime, Lisa Madigan, the Attorney General of Illinois (and daughter of Michael Madigan, the powerful Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives), has filed petitions to intervene in both cases, not to defend the existing law, which one would normally expect the Attorney General to do when the constitutionality of a state statute is drawn into question, but to attack the law. At this point, there is no one in either case who is willing to defend the law. A lawsuit in which both sides support the same result is, to say the least, odd.

An uncharitable mind might be tempted to believe that these lawsuits are collusive, i.e., that they were brought with the understanding (express or implied) that neither the defendant (Mr. Orr), nor his attorney (Ms. Alvarez), nor the Attorney General (Ms. Madigan) would defend the challenge, resulting in a judgment striking down the statute and enjoining its enforcement. That belief would be reinforced by the fact that many of the plaintiff same-sex couples reside in counties other than Cook, yet did not file their lawsuit in their own counties. As a result, the Illinois law prohibiting same-sex marriage may fall without a single shot being fired in its defense. And if no one defends the law, then it follows that no one is in a position to appeal a judgment invalidating the law. So same-sex marriage may come to Illinois without the Illinois Supreme Court ever having had an opportunity to rule on the constitutionality of the existing marriage law.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

In a further irony, because Mr. Orr was sued only in his capacity as Cook County Clerk, and not also as a representative of a class of Illinois county clerks, an unappealed judgment striking down the marriage statute would bind only him, not any other county clerk in Illinois (there are 102 counties in the State). As a consequence, Illinois may have not one, but two sets of marriage laws, one for Cook County, where same-sex couples could marry, and another for the rest of the state, where they could not. That is obviously an intolerable situation that cries out for judicial intervention at the highest level. It may be hoped that one or more individuals or organizations with a stake in this fight will seek to intervene to defend the law.
Flocko

Phoenix, AZ

#37133 Jan 16, 2013
For now, it seems worthwhile to examine the merits of the two lawsuits. In a Chicago Tribune op-ed piece aptly titled “Marriage on the rocks?” University of Chicago Law Professor Geoffrey Stone heralds the lawsuits filed by the ACLU and Lambda and predicts that the plaintiffs will prevail in their challenge to the Illinois marriage law. Professor Stone, however, presents a very distorted and one-sided view of the legal and political issues surrounding the same-sex marriage debate, and the lawsuits he welcomes are meritless.

The ACLU and Lambda raise four principal arguments against the state marriage law. First, they argue that reserving marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the “fundamental” right to marry the person of one’s choice, which right is supposedly protected by the liberty language in the state due process guarantee (art. I,§ 2). But, with the exception of a decision of the California Supreme Court four years ago (In re Marriage Cases), which was overturned by Proposition 8, and, arguably, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s decision in Goodridge v. Dep’t of Public Health (2003), which redefined marriage to include same-sex relationships, no state or federal reviewing court has ever held that the substantive due process right to marry includes the right to marry someone of the same sex. The right to marry has always been understood to be limited to marrying someone of the opposite sex. That is clear from a series of Supreme Court decisions tying the right to marry to the procreation of children, see, e.g., Loving v. Virginia (1967), Zablocki v. Redhail (1978), Turner v. Safley (1987). In a very old case, Maynard v. Hill (1888), the Court characterized the institution of marriage as “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.” So much for the “fundamental” right argument.

Second, the ACLU and Lambda argue that reserving marriage to opposite-sex couples denies same-sex couples the equal protection of law guaranteed by art. I,§ 2 of the Illinois Constitution. Presumably, this argument, as it is developed by the plaintiffs (to date, only the complaints have been filed), will claim that classifications drawn on the basis of one’s sexual orientation should be subject to the same rigorous standard of judicial review that applies to classifications based on race (strict scrutiny) or gender (intermediate scrutiny). There is a major difficulty with this argument, however.

In interpreting the state equal protection guarantee, Illinois courts follow federal precedents interpreting the Equal Protection Clause. But there is no Supreme Court decision subjecting classifications based on sexual orientation to the standards that apply to classifications based on race (strict scrutiny) or gender (intermediate scrutiny). In Romer v. Evans (1996), the Supreme Court struck down Colorado’s Amendment 2, which barred special legislation protecting gays and lesbians, under the rational basis standard of review. But the narrow and focused prohibition of same-sex marriage cannot be equated with the breadth and scope of Amendment 2. And every federal court of appeals to have considered the issue has concluded that classifications based on one’s sexual orientation are subject only to the “rational basis” standard of review.

The reservation of marriage to opposite-sex couples easily passes that standard. Extending marriage to same-sex couples would not promote either of the two primary purposes for which society recognizes the institution of marriage—providing a stable environment for children procreated by heterosexual sexual activity and providing the benefits of dual-gender parenting for the children so procreated.
Flocko

Phoenix, AZ

#37134 Jan 16, 2013
Third, the ACLU and Lambda argue that the reservation of marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the privacy rights of same-sex couples under art. I,§ 6 of the state constitution. The privacy language has been applied only to privacy of personal information and evidence gathering by law enforcement officials; it has never been applied to conduct. Moreover, it is difficult to understand how the right of privacy, which is a shield to protect persons from unwarranted government intrusion into their private affairs, can be converted into a sword for demanding public recognition of a private relationship.

With the exception of the California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Marriage Cases, no state or federal reviewing court has upheld a privacy-based challenge to a law restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples, and several courts, including the Arizona Court of Appeals, Standhardt v. Superior Court (2003), the Hawaii Supreme Court, Baehr v. Lewin (1993), and the Washington Supreme Court, Andersen v. King County (2006), have rejected such challenges. Indeed, in one of the cases advocates of same-sex marriage frequently cite, Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court, in striking down the Texas sodomy law, stated that the case “does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter.”

Fourth, the ACLU and Lambda argue that the reservation of marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the prohibition of sex discrimination under art. I,§ 18 of the state constitution. But that prohibition has no application to a law that treats men and women equally. Neither a man nor a woman may marry someone of the same sex; both may marry someone of the opposite sex. With the exception of a two-judge plurality opinion of the Hawaii Supreme Court, Baehr v. Lewin (1993), which has been described by one constitutional law scholar as one of the ten worst state supreme court decisions of all time, no state or federal reviewing court has accepted the “sex discrimination” argument against marriage laws. Such arguments have been rejected by the California Supreme Court, In re Marriage Cases.

Professor Stone parrots the public opinion polls purporting to show that a majority of Americans now support same-sex marriage, but those polling results have not shown up in the only poll that counts, the one on election day. Thirty states, most recently North Carolina, have amended their constitutions by popular vote to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Stone’s only explanation for these results is that “single-issue, single-minded voters, well-funded by religious organizations and driven by religious fervor, can effectively block the will of the majority.” Thus, by a remarkable feat of verbal prestidigitation, tinged by an anti-religious prejudice, Stone manages to turn a majority vote into a minority point of view.

The fact that advocates of same-sex marriage uniformly oppose public votes on state constitutional amendments that would define marriage as a union of a man and a woman is telling evidence that they do not believe what they say. If advocates of same-sex marriage believe that the people of Illinois are now prepared to accept same-sex marriage, let’s have the General Assembly put the issue on the November ballot and we’ll see who wins. Same-sex marriage should not come in the back door, via an arguably collusive lawsuit in which no one charged with the responsibility of enforcing the law actually defends it.
hey sweet cheeks

Chicago, IL

#37135 Jan 16, 2013
Southern Lady01 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok. Then they were just sick twisted perverted idiots that made God sick so he killed them all. Whatever he fixed what he didn't want. You'd think they'd learn.
where have you been --we missed you bullcrap post on topix--post somr pictures THATS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE !!
Mac1978

Evansville, IN

#37136 Jan 17, 2013
Saluki Rod wrote:
I wonder how long it'll take the Neo-Nazi Far Right Christians to mobilize against this? It's just letting gays be married, what's the big freaking deal? I'm straight, and see no harm to society.
The bible sees harm. Don't hate us for believing in our religion. You're just as bad by criticizing us.
Only god can judge, yet it is our job to tell others about the grace if the one and only Lord and savior, share that he died on the cross to forgive all the worlds sin, and as long as we accept him and praise him, and tell others of his greatness, we will be accepted into the gates of Heaven!
We stand up for what our God wrote in scripture, and FIRMLY BELIEVE!
Fear no one but The Lord, God Almighty!
You will answer to God when your time comes as all of us will. I have done my part in sharing to you the TRUTH. It is up to you to accept and stand firm, or let it go in one ear and out the other and have to come before my Father when your time is up, regretting that you accepted this sick, twisted society ran by Satan and his puppets.
You have been informed!
I will pray for you and many others in this exact situation.
Jesus Loves YOU!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min Tony Rome 1,108,939
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 20 min Mister Tonka 98,196
IL Illinois Governor Recall Amendment (Oct '10) 34 min NevadaBob 1,918
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 2 hr Blwlgo 4,016
Abby 9-13-14 2 hr cheluzal 19
Ask Amy 9-13-14 2 hr cheluzal 15
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 2 hr TRD 68,464
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 3 hr LRS 177,956
Amy 9-15 7 hr liner 10
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••