What’s This About Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn Predicting Civil Unions By Christmas?

Though I’m always skeptical of politicians making promises about the future, especially ones that involve Christmas as a timeline, I do like what I’m hearing from Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who says civil unions in the state could be a reality by the end of the year. The votes are there in the Senate and maybe the House, by Quinn’s count. Of course his remarks came during an endorsement review meeting with the Chicago newspaper Daily Herald, where politicos know it’s in their best interest to make promises — but it’s also worth noting where Quinn’s remarks did not arrive: on the campaign trail.


But don’t expect a vote to come up if the bill won’t pass: State Rep. Greg Harris, the Chicago Democrat sponsoring a bill to legalize civil unions beginning next year, says, “It’s not in my interest to have show votes to call people out on it. … This election, it’s a difficult environment to run around and ask people how they would vote on something.”

Bummer. Votes to get lawmakers on the record are my second favorite kind.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #civilunions #illinois #marriage stories and more



    Now we’re talking. Responsible GLBTs everywhere should be watching, and consulting, on this initiative. Making sure the bill is written right. It’s what should have happened at the national level instead of DADT.

    This time, gay activists, prohibit the Log Cabin Republicans from having input into the process! They are agents provocateurs, and set the cause of LGBT civil rights back by years, by making sure DADT, instead of a well-written, inclusive civil unions bill, was brought to the Senate floor first. If, notwithstanding this defeat, there are states where initiatives truly in ALL gays’ interest (not just in the interest of gays who want to join, or stay in, the military– a very small subset of all GLBTs), then these initiatives need to be focused on by the forces of the LGBT civil rights movement.

    And knock off this “queer” stuff, when you’re consulting with anyone in the mainstream political process who might be on the side of doing us all good! Blacks wouldn’t proudly call themselves “nigger” in public. Vietnamese wouldn’t call themselves “gook”. Jews wouldn’t call themselves “kike”:

    “Hey, I’m Josh, and me and my girl Yetta are kikes. Hey, us ‘n our nigger friends Rashaan and Taisha are going to the movies. Wanna come?”

    The idea and process of “appropriating the slurs of your oppressors as self-identification” has never worked for any other oppressed minority, what makes you think it is not confrontational and regressive in our case? Maybe some folks feel better after they’re in people’s faces saying what queers they are, on paper, online, for real face-to-face, doesn’t matter how, but you’re doing us all harm for the sake of your own perception of enhanced self-image.

    William P. Homans

  • Dickie

    Not to be a real nay-sayer, but the civil unions bill has been introduced twice already in Illinois and hasn’t gone anywhere. I would LOVE to see it actualized, but am just a but cautious. But I will be contacting my reps about this and seeing if I can’t help start a fire there, even if one of my reps is a co-sponsor of the bill!

  • kevin

    Like the U.S. Congress, the Dems have controlled Springfield, IL for many years…with solid majorities, and have only future promises to show for gay rights. Funny, there’s an election in November and Quinn is saying things will improve by Christmas. The timing’s curious, no?

  • edgyguy1426

    Pandering is what it is, he’s not an equality supporter..why settle for less?

Comments are closed.