*** UPDATED with video *** Getting personal
Wednesday, Nov 6, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* One of the more interesting stories during the gay marriage floor debate yesterday was told by Rep. Ann Williams…
State Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago, a co-sponsor of Harris’ bill, spoke about a close friend, former reporter Terry Mutchler, and the committed but secret relationship she had with the late state Sen. Penny Severns, D-Decatur, in the 1990s. Severns died in early 1998 after a lengthy battle with cancer that forced her to drop her bid that year for secretary of state.
“Though I never met Penny, Terry told me they considered themselves married. They had a relationship. They shared a home. They were with each other through good times and bad. They were committed to each other as if they were married, but not within the laws of society. In fact, Penny’s [Senate] death resolution didn’t even mention her loving partner, Terry. Can you imagine that? How heartbreaking,” Williams said.
“Terry just wanted what so many people want — to express their love through marriage,” Williams said.
* Another interesting story…
State Rep. Fred Crespo, a Hoffman Estates Democrat, said after the vote that his own mixed-race marriage helped sway him to a “yes” vote.
* Another…
North Side Democratic Rep. Kelly Cassidy recounted how she once rushed at dawn from Springfield to Chicago when she heard her partner had been hospitalized and was in “excruciating pain.”
Even as she hustled to be there, Cassidy said, she faced a dilemma. She worried whether she would be allowed to go “straight to her side” or be denied access over hospital bureaucracy. Cassidy said she found herself “weighing the risks” of whether she should spend an hour collecting legal paperwork that would give proof that she could be allowed to be in the hospital room with her partner, Kelly.
Cassidy issued a challenge to lawmakers to think about what they would say when asked in future years how they voted on legislation to let Illinois become the 15th state to allow gay marriage.
“What did you do when faced with this historic moment?” Cassidy said. “Please, vote ‘yes’ and join us on the right side of history.”
* Another…
Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, said the issue mattered very much to the families that would be impacted, reading a letter from a 10-year-old girl being raised by a gay couple who asked, “Will you let my two dads be married?”
* Another…
Rep. Ed Sullivan, R-Mundelein, voted for the bill after saying his mother-in-law is gay.
“How do I face my children? How do I tell them there’s something wrong with their grandma? I won’t,” Sullivan said.
* And we’ll close with this news from the Twitters…
*** UPDATE *** Video of the proposal…
- South of Sherman - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 9:29 am:
Also interesting, the revelation from Rep. Williams that Terry is working on a book about her relationship with Sen. Severns. That is a book I’m looking forward to reading.
- Served - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 9:34 am:
Empathy is one of the most important qualities a legislator can have in a representative democracy, and it’s one that’s too often overlooked.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 9:54 am:
These testimonies should have been at the beginning and throughout, not only at the end. They are moving. Do they meet the standard of changing an age old institution? Yesterday they did. There are moving stories on the other side of this issue too. More of this kind of debate throughout would have served us better. I do feel that Rep. Harris got his due after walking through a minefield of his own side of the issue. The folks who criticized him should learn something. He prevailed on account of his decency. He showed himself a leader.
- Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 9:55 am:
These stories further serve to debunk the idea that homosexuality is a choice (as if that needed debunking). Who would choose a lifestyle that unfortunately invites ostracism, legal or otherwise? Who would choose to be rejected or risk rejection by family members and society? One of my best friends, who I lost tragically last year to a fire, was gay and told me how much he suffered and had to hide his homosexuality throughout his life, and how one of his siblings rejected him because of who he was.
Yesterday was a momentous day for Illinois. I am very proud of everyone involved who pushed for legalizing SSM, including John Kohlhepp of AFSCME, who took a leave from union work to lobby for it.
- hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:08 am:
What moving story is there on the other side of the issue?
If such moving stories existed why didn’t any opponents rise to tell them before they cast no votes?
- A guy... - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:50 am:
hisgirlfriday, there are a lot of people whose faith is their bedrock on this one. Don’t judge them either. The Pope was talking to you too. If you have 20,30,40, 50 or more years invested in your marriage, you know a little something about the covenant and sacrament you’ve entered into. If you feel the need to protect that precious institution, you will do so buoyed by a faith that marriage is so utterly special, that it should remain unchanged for eternity. What’s moving is the love of marriage and the person you’ve entered it with. Heteros have done plenty of damage to the institution on their own I might add. But, look into the eyes of a couple entirely unified as one celebrating a 50 year union that resulted in their raising children and all the trials and tribulations that contribute to the landscape of love lines (and some of sadness) on their faces, and you’ll understand what they’re protecting. I’m not arguing against gay marriage. I am telling you factually, that what is achievable under traditional marriage is not achievable under gay marriage physiologically. That’s part of what marriage was defined as. Time will tell what the result will be of the new definition. It may hold some pleasant surprises, it may not. Many of the most ardent supporters of SSM are younger people. Younger people are always more open to change because; it’s their Godly nature to be, and they usually have little or nothing invested in the tradition. That only comes with age and experience. Marriage, in and of itself will win if everyone, gay or straight take it with the utmost seriousness it deserves. Don’t know if I “moved” you or not. If I haven’t, you’re not worth moving.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:04 am:
A Guy, I can’t imagine how a couple of other people getting married has any impact on my marriage or family at all. Not a bit.
I do know, for sure, that the Little Pumpkin across the street will be able to walk to school without wearing a Scarlet “G” on her coat. And for that, I’m so happy I can’t see straight.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:14 am:
We’re lucky that Springfield is our capital, and not Teheran or Riyadh.
I’ll be at church on Sunday, giving thanks for this happy day. Can you dig it?
- Gail D. - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:15 am:
I remember Terry Mutchler when she worked for Penny Severns. I had no clue there was a personal relationship outside of work.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:26 am:
–“How do I face my children? How do I tell them there’s something wrong with their grandma? I won’t,” Sullivan said.–
You’re a rock star, dude. Til the last dog dies.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:41 am:
===Many of the most ardent supporters of SSM are younger people.===
Thanks!
Signed,
Michael J. Madigan, “young person”
Yikes!
- hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:50 am:
A guy…
My faith is my bedrock in SUPPORTING same-sex marriage rights for gay people. It is so arrogant the way that some anti-same sex marriage people act like they speak for all Christians in opposition to same sex marriage.
And as a woman, I am quite thankful that you are 100 percent wrong about marriage being unchanged by eternity in that married women now enjoy rights to property and contract that they would have been denied at the founding of this country, let alone in Biblical times.
You haven’t “moved me” to your position because your arguments are historically unsound and altogether unpersuasive.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 12:07 pm:
his girl, the mission now is for folks like you and Slinger to remove the acrimony from victory. Act like you are, and the social change won’t come with the legal one. I never said anything about women’s property rights. You extrapolated something that wasn’t there. Argue on the merits and leave the rest of the baggage somewhere else. I’ve already stated that I’ve been (and continue to be) undecided on this. I’ve always been willing to listen to all sides.
And O Willie, glad to see Mike Madigan isn’t considered young by your standards. Mine either. Quit being so cute with this. You’re a savvy guy who has access and exposure to polls. You understood what I meant by referring to the popularity of SSM among younger demos. Your using MJM as your example is exactly the kind of junk you are critical of others on this site for. Look at a poll of people in MJM’s demo, the results would be a lot different. It turned out the way it was supposed to. Be fair Willie. It’s more like you.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 12:20 pm:
==I’ve already stated that I’ve been (and continue to be) undecided on this.==
Also, pick a side. You are either for equality or against it. Choose.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:02 pm:
–his girl, the mission now is for folks like you and Slinger to remove the acrimony from victory.–
Please copy-and-paste my acrimonious writings in the wake of the House vote. I’ll happily remove them.
But I’m with HGF. I’m a man of faith and I’ve been giving thanks in the last 24 hours for this simple act of justice.
- Archiesmom - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:06 pm:
The human faces are what change minds. It is difficult to look a gay friend or family member in the eye and tell them they cannot enjoy the same rights that you do simply because the person they love is of the same sex. It is obvious that moved a lot of people and changed some votes.
I’ve been married 22 years, and I did not feel my marriage crack and begin to crumble when that vote was taken. I had tears in my eyes to know that dear friends of mine in committed relationships would able to get married next year in their home state. Marriage, in these days, is a civil institution regulated by the states. A religious ceremony is private to the couple involved, and while it has great meaning personally, it does not confer civil rights. The license the state gives to your priest or minister makes that marriage valid in the state’s eyes. I hope people can start to learn to separate the two.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:15 pm:
Slinger, do it with the class and decency of Greg Harris, who disagreed, but understood, how people with a different opinion felt. Sorry to hear the “Little Pumpkin” across the street had to wear a letter on her jacket. I also don’t believe it, but I understand the metaphor you’re trying to cite. Now that the law has passed, be patient and kind with people who will be taking some time to get used to it. No one should be mean to a child. That’s awful. The law is one thing. Now the societal acceptance needs to follow so the spirit of the law is achieved.
Demoralized, I’ll pick a side at a time of my own discernment, not yours. I’m not even sure I accept the premise that this was a question of “Equality”. I’m for equality. If it was a civil rights bill, why didn’t they call it that? It wasn’t. They didn’t. It was a bill to redefine the definition of marriage. The civil elements of marriage were already in place. The bill passed. It will become law. Some number approaching half of the population will need to adapt to this to make sure that what you can’t legislate, you can facilitate. Work that way.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:29 pm:
==Slinger, do it with the class and decency of Greg Harris, who disagreed, but understood, how people with a different opinion felt.==
Please point out to me my indecency. I never claimed to have class, but that’s in the eye of the beholder.
Peace be with you, brother.
- MrJM - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:36 pm:
The social change is a demographic inevitability that far preceded the legal one. But your concern is noted.
– MrJM
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:38 pm:
- A guy… -,
With respect,
My mocking of the “young” line is to point out that there is an “age, sex, color, religion” shcism in deciding on SSM, definitive to ANY claiming superiority of the arguement, one way or the other.
That’s it.
When My Party feels the need to make it all about “Christians”, or “business owners” or “women”, there is this terrible practice to add the “must” “only” “every” to these groups, and to use that leverage to bring about a plurality of words, where a plurality of people MAY exist, but is not exclusive to the arguement.
Again, that’s it.
As for ===…the kind of junk you are critical of others on this site for.===…
I mock exactly the same under the “every”, “only” “must”, “never” unbrella. Period. So, the ===Quit being so cute with this.=== is a bit out of place, considering mocking, is what is going on.
I would not consider “Many or Most …” in either chamber of the General Assembly … that “young” group of which you speak, and since their votes … on a Bill … made the passage possbile …yeah, you get a tweak. It is up to you, how you want to take that tweak.
I will “Quit” … when I want to, or Rich feels I have overstepped my bounds here as a rude guest.
My tweak got to you, but it’s a tweak all the same.
- Archiesmom - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:18 pm:
I just read that Rep. Naomi Jakobsson’s son Garrett passed away last night after she came down to Springfield got the vote. God bless them all.
- Archiesmom - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:19 pm:
*for the vote*. Sorry, I was tearing up when I wrote that.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:28 pm:
==It was a bill to redefine the definition of marriage.==
And you nor anybody else has explained why it matters. Please, please, please tell me how it affects your marriage.
== The civil elements of marriage were already in place. ==
No, they weren’t. Illinois couples in a civil union could not avail themselves of hundreds of federal benefits.
=I’m not even sure I accept the premise that this was a question of “Equality”==
Then what exactly do you think it was if it wasn’t at least partially about equality? You talk around this issue and I still don’t think I have figured out what the heck it is that you believe.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:36 pm:
OW, your party and my party are the same party. We differ a little, but not by much. No “tweak” taken. Your posts are way more often than not, well thought out and insightful to me. Occasionally, you drop a cheapie. Can’t be disappointed sometimes if you don’t respect the disappointer most the time. Yesterday was the most intelligent this debate has been since this issue has been on the front burner. Respect passed it more than any of the shouting did. Rich wouldn’t toss you. You’re good for business. You should threaten to leave to get a tax break! lol
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:23 pm:
- A guy … -,
I agreed it has been the best discussion, less the dopey Tom Morrison connection to Palygamy.
Kind words you have said, but I am a guest all the same. That is my first and last thought. All my posts I stand by, and when I am wrong, I try to correct that too, but in complete reality, I post what I post and it is up to the readers if I disappoint them. What makes this place great, is everyone calls out everyone, and you better be able to make your arguement, especially if it may be against the grain.
The biggest losers yesterday were all the shouters, from both sides, because the Illinois House is what has always been, the People’s House, and that is always impressive to see, and makes me proud every time the General Assembly rises to the occasion to be the Adults that we know they are.