State Rep. Greg Harris.____________
Will Illinois soon become the fourth state in the U.S. to provide civil unions to same-sex couples?
According to Equality Illinois' Rick Garcia, recognition of civil unions in this state will happen. 'It's no longer a matter of if these relationships should be recognized and protected,' he told Windy City Times. 'It's a matter of when.'
On March 21, a civil union bill passed the Illinois House Human Services Committee, 5-4. Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, went before the committee to advance the Religious Freedom and Civil Union Act, or HB 1826, which would grant same-sex couples in Illinois civil unions. The next step will be for the bill to go to the full House for consideration, where it will need 61 votes to pass.
In February, Harris introduced a bill, the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, which would legalize same-sex marriage in Illinois. However, after speaking with his colleagues, he decided it would be best to take a different approach in order to give gay Illinoisans the rights and protections they need as soon as possible.
'It was very clear as I talked to my colleagues that there would not have been the votes to move same-sex marriage in Illinois,' Harris explained. 'People did understand the fairness and equality argument, but they thought in their districts, the word 'marriage' would have made it very difficult for them to support. That's why then I brought forward the civil union bill. There were people of very good intent—they could support equality, they could support justice—but when you put the whole marriage debate into it, it would have made it very difficult for them.'
The civil union bill would grant same-sex couples entering a civil union all of the same rights, benefits and protections of marriage, with one exception. There will be no provision for minors to be married with either parental or judicial approval.
The bill also allows religious denominations the right to deny a civil union if it feels it conflicts with its beliefs and traditions.
Harris and Garcia both know this will not be an easy battle.
'I think this will be a very difficult vote,' Harris said. 'One, you are dealing with a huge number of individuals, many of whom have not really given a lot of thought to this issue before, so it's new territory for them. Also, we know our opponents are now totally galvanized to take their message of discrimination out to representatives across the state.'
Yet Garcia remains an optimist for two reasons: the questions committee members asked on Wednesday, and the reasons members gave for voting 'no.' In his opinion, questions and reasons for opposition were legitimate and not based on anti-gay bigotry. Both were an indication that things have changed since the right for a non-discrimination bill, which took 30 years to pass.
'I've been doing this for years, and with the non-discrimination bill, you had representatives just say filth—right-wing, anti-gay filth,' Garcia said. 'This time, we had representatives ask questions that are legitimate questions to ask. It seems to me to be a big change. I believe we have the answers—I know we have the answers—to these questions that representatives have raised, and if they are good, God-fearing people, they are going to be persuaded to get on board. I noticed there is opposition, but not animosity.'
Garcia added that any animosity and ignorant bigotry the opposition is presenting has been falling on unresponsive ears. He also believes that this time around, 'We don't even have to appeal to their hearts—just appeal to their minds and provide the answers.'
Although it looks like the bill narrowly passed the House committee, people need not worry, Garcia said. 'When we look at that, we always have to take into consideration politics. In almost any vote, especially a vote like this, politics plays a very big role.'
'It took 30 years to pass the non-discrimination bill,' Garcia continued. 'This bill isn't going to be passed in 30 days, but it's also not going to take 30 years to do it. I think we're at a very healthy and good position to move this forward in the near future.'
He cited local and national polling as an example, which indicates that people support the recognition of same-sex couples in some way ( although they are uncomfortable with the word 'marriage' ) .
Both Harris and Garcia agreed that there is a lot of work to be done. Although Illinois has made some great gains in terms of LGBT equality and protections, Garcia reminds, this bill would essentially be creating a whole new chapter in the state's civil code—not simply amending the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution Act. 'I think that should tell us that you have to appeal to a lot of people, especially politicians,' he said.
If passed, Illinois would join New Jersey, Connecticut and Vermont in offering civil unions to same-sex couples. Massachusetts is the only state that has legalized same-sex marriage.
