LEGISLATORS ARE NOT LISTENING TO ME!

On April 30^th, I wrote a blog, “Having Carnal Relations or Not Should Not Matter.”  It was semi-tongue in check about how the Illinois Civil Union bill did not have any language regarding whether the parties to the union have sexual relations or not.  While I might have been trying to be ironic in my writing, what I wrote makes perfect sense. 

Because there have been stories about how bill Sponsor State Rep. Greg Harris wants to bring up the matter during the upcoming veto session of the legislature, I checked the language of the bill again.  It has NOT been amended in any way to require a relationship that needs to be anything more than just friends "hooking up" solely for the provisions the legalized civil union allows.   It would give new meaning to the phrase, “friends With benefits.” 

Every story refers to the bill as legislation for gay couples, but there is no such language in the actual bill!  Governor Patrick Quinn supports the bill saying it sends a message to companies that Illinois has laws which respect the diversity of the state.  But the bill says nothing about diversity! It is just a legal way for friends to watch out for each other.  It clearly explains a civil union as “a legal relationship between 2 persons, of either the same or opposite sex.”  It also says that parties to a civil union are, “entitled to the same legal obligations, responsibilities, protections, and benefits as are afforded by the law of Illinois to spouses.”  Nothing about carnal relations needed.  Why aren’t the legislators listening to me?

Section 25 tells us who can NOT be in a civil union:

 “The following civil unions are prohibited:

(1) a civil union entered into prior both parties attaining 18 years of age;

(2) a civil union entered into prior to the dissolution of a marriage or civil union or similar legal relationship of one of the parties:

(3) a civil union between an ancestor and a descendant or between siblings whether the relationship is by the half or the whole blood or by adoption; and

(4) a civil union between first cousins.

The bill  Synopsis As Introduced:
“Creates the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act. Defines "civil union" as a legal relationship between 2 persons, of either the same or opposite sex, established in accordance with the Act. Provides that a party to a civil union shall be entitled to the same legal obligations, responsibilities, protections, and benefits afforded or recognized by the law of Illinois to spouses. Prohibits certain civil unions. Provides that the Director of Public Health shall prescribe forms for an application, license, and certificate for a civil union. Contains provisions regarding: application for a civil union license; certification of a civil union; and duties of the county clerk and Department of Public Health. Provides for dissolution and declaration of invalidity of a civil union. Provides that a marriage between persons of the same sex, a civil union, or a substantially similar legal relationship other than common law marriage, legally entered into in another jurisdiction, shall be recognized in Illinois as a civil union. Contains provisions regarding construction, application, religious freedom, severability, and other matters.”

There is no mention of love, living together, sexual relations between the partners, etc. etc. etc.  It is a union that can be entered into by filling out a simple application and giving it to a county clerk. And then “a copy of the completed certification form the county clerk or the return provided to the Department of Health by a county clerk shall be presumptive evidence of the civil union in all courts.”

One does not have to be homosexual, lesbian, transgender, or bisexual because the parties can be of opposite sex according to the bill.  So why is it called gay civil union?  It’s not.

So like back in April, I write again, to anyone who has a good health insurance plan that allows for “spouses” to be covered, I say, “Will you Civil Union me?”