“They have called this the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act,” said state Rep. David Reis, R-Ste. Marie, “but I think they should call it the Religious Persecution and Marriage Unfairness Act.
“But when you’re a county clerk and you don’t believe in same-sex marriage and you have to issue that license, that’s religious persecution.”
Reis urged those at the rally to tell legislators “to protect the institution of marriage in Illinois, and that they have civil unions and we don’t want any more.”
Pastor Richard Giovannetti of the Standing in the Word Ministries of Morris, told the crowd that “when we have gay marriage we are going to enslave millions of people back into a lifestyle that we know that God can set them free from.”
Pastor Linda Jernigan, who said she was “a former lesbian” who now operates a ministry in the Chicago area, asked repeatedly, “Did you know that God can deliver homosexuals?”
She said it was “a chosen behavior” and that “if you allow God, He can change your behavior.”
“Don’t believe the lie,” she said, “that homosexuality is a civil right. It is not a civil right. Homosexuality is a choice.”
Their concerns ranged from morality to intricate questions on religious freedom to the basic laws of human nature.
“It’s a plumbing issue, it comes down to basic plumbing,” said David Webster of Washington, as he stood outside Gordon-Booth’s office. He borrowed the plumbing idea from David Zietlow, an engineer and member of Grace Presbyterian, who wore a necklace of male and female pipe fittings.
Many insisted they had nothing against homosexuality, that they were there strictly to defend the sanctity of traditional marriage. But Robert Stine, a retired Peoria doctor, inadvertently touched on how much attitudes have changed about homosexuality when he said, “In fifty years it’s gone from being a felony to political, legalized status.”
Brian Elsasser of Princeville, a Peoria County Board member who rode on one of the buses organized by the Peoria diocese, said, “I pray and I love all humankind, no matter what they do. But that doesn’t give us the right to take an institution, which was ordained by God, and change it in Illinois.”
* Meanwhile, the only Senate Republican to vote for gay marriage has been hit with robocalls…
State Sen. Jason Barickman’s vote last week to allow same-sex marriages in Illinois has infuriated some conservative groups, including Family PAC, a Chicago-based group that already is calling for his resignation.
In robocalls to constituents in Barickman’s conservative district north of Champaign, the group urged voters to call Barickman’s office to register their anger.
“Was Barickman representing you, or the Chicago homosexual community?” asked Sandy Rios of Family PAC in the automated call. “Call Barickman today and tell him you’ve cast your last vote for him, and ask him to resign.”
* But Barickman was actually doing opponents a favor…
Barickman, a 37-year-old attorney who joined the Senate in January after beating state Sen. Shane Cultra, R-Onarga, last year, said he decided to vote “yes” after helping draft an amendment to the legislation that is designed to protect churches from reprisals if Illinois becomes the 10th state in the nation to allow gays to marry.
“It’s a vote that I understand that some have varying opinions on, but I feel that I voted in the correct way,” Barickman said. “The language in the amendment preserves those religious liberties that are so important to so many people.”
* From a lobbyist who worked with Barickman on the bill’s rewrite…
The original bill that came out of [Senate Executive Committeee] in lame duck session provided that:
* No church or religious institution could ever be required to solemnize a marriage in conflict with its beliefs. (This provision remains intact in the new bill.)
* Churches/religious institutions did not have to make any facility available for a same-sex wedding if the facility’s “primary use” was for religious purposes.
A facility qualified for this protection if:
* It was only occasionally open to non-members and did not charge money for their admission, and
* It was never open to the general public.
SB10, as passed, provides that anything deemed a “religious facility” does not have to open its doors for a same-sex marriage. This means that under no circumstances can the following types of facilities be required to hold a same-sex wedding:
* Sanctuaries
* Parish halls
* Fellowship halls and similar facilities.
“Religious facilities” do not include:
* Hospitals
* Businesses
* Schools
* Social service organizations
If a building has multiple uses, the test is applied on a “room by room” basis. For example, a gay couple cannot be barred from a hospital. But if the hospital had a chapel, that chapel could not be forced to host a gay wedding.
