Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

“Emphasis added” roundup of the anti gay marriage rally

Posted in:

Illinois

* As expected, there was some over the top rhetoric during the Illinois Family Institute’s anti gay marriage rally yesterday…

“Our religious freedoms are under attack here. Our faith is under attack here. Where we go to church on Saturday or Sunday is under attack here,” shouted the Rev. Lance Davis, pastor of New Zion Covenant Church in Dolton, bring many in the crowd to their feet. “And we need to stand up and defend our rights, defend not only our rights, but our own family. And I tell you, God will move on our behalf.” […]

Davis said he thinks he has “60-percent” of the 20-member House black voting bloc in his corner against the bill and said anyone who votes for same-sex marriage can expect a political challenge either in a primary or general election.

“Frankly, we have been meeting behind the scenes and making sure those who are for Senate Bill 10 are those who are on our radar as relates to replacing because they do not speak for the constituency and the majority of our people,” Davis said.

* More…

“Once homosexual marriage becomes the law of the land here in Illinois, the state and public school system takes over the moral teaching of our children…this by forcing acceptance of this dangerous, disease-filled, deviant and dead-end lifestyle as a good choice for our kids,” said Christian activist Jim Finnegan, president of Illinois Choose Life.

* Gay marriage proponents estimated Tuesday’s rally size at about 5,000, while the Secretary of State Police estimated the number at 3,000. Illinois Review estimated Wednesday’s anti gay marriage crowd size at 4-5,000, above the SoS Police’s estimate of 2500. IR is casting some doubt on the SoS numbers…

Questions are being raised over how many each side of the marriage debate had in attendance at the Capitol between Tuesday and Wednesday’s rallies.

Other than some photographs, no real evidence was provided.

* Bruce Rauner skipped the event…

“There was no compelling reason for him to be in Springfield,” Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf told the Chicago Sun-Times.

* From Sen. Kirk Dillard’s prepared remarks…

I want thank David Smith and the Illinois Institute for bringing us together today and a special thank you to the African American clergy who are protecting our religious liberties under heavy pressure to the contrary. You are the backbone of our state and I am so proud to fight this battle with you.

Ever since “The Campaign” came out, “backbone” quotes should probably be avoided by all candidates.

* And we’ll close with a pic of a somewhat outdated sign…

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:31 am

Comments

== African-American clergy…are the backbone of our state.==

I wonder how many other issues Sen. Dillard agrees upon with the African-American clergy?

* More mandatory minimum sentences that disproportionately affect African-Americans?
* Repealing Obamacare?
* Cutting Medicaid?
* Opposition to a graduated income tax?

My guess is that the good senator parts company with the “backbone of the state” on all of those issues.

Comment by reformer Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:41 am
It’s a heckuva thing when in 2013 “mainstream” GOP candidates for governor of Illinois can stand with folks who direct that kind of abuse on their fellow citizens in the name of God and family.

Honestly, I didn’t think it would happen here.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:42 am
They want a small government… small enough to be in your bedroom

Comment by Pat Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:43 am
By the standards they hold for bible-based marriage, my father should have been able to sell me to my husband’s family for a flock of chickens and a couple of goats.

I haven’t seen God doing a whole lot of smiting because that definition of marriage has gone by the wayside.

Comment by Aldyth Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:48 am
That sign is outdated.

But it’s not nearly as wild as some of the signs at the Pride parade.

Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:48 am
“D-Lard”, “Backbone”, hard Right turn…

Kirk is indeed running “The Campaign” … campaign.

Just like 1998 John Kass would be repulsed at the 2013 “John Kass”, the real former COS to Edgar, would have taken the 2013 Kirk Dillard and just pummeled this guy, instead of embracing all the hate.

Unless its a “backbone” - “Right” Cam Dillard?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:50 am
Other issues aside, as far as I’m concerned God abhors painting any disagreement with your doctrine as an attack on your religious freedom. You’re entitled to your views, but give this kind of rhetoric a rest.

Comment by Excessively Rabid Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:52 am
Kirk Dillard is thinking that this move to the right will vault him into the gov mansion? In Illinois? Yeah, that’ll work. NOT

I guess it’s easier to run right rather than run a decent primary campaign.

Comment by dupage dan Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:52 am
It seems like the only solution might be for a Supreme Court ruling defining equality in marriage. So, a majority of folks in Illinois are for marriage equality. Its would be a shame if the threat by a minority of religious zealots to run candidates against legislators who would vote for marriage equality turns out to be the only reason why no vote is taken.

Comment by Jim'e' Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:54 am
I wonder if Dillard had taken a few steps left (instead of the miles right) and ran as a Conservative Democrat, would he have had better luck in a primary against Pat Quinn?

Comment by Timmeh Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:56 am
So which candidates for governor made appearances? Well besides Dillard?

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:57 am
We could have skipped both of these events really. Whoever remains undecided wouldn’t be swayed by this. There’s an intelligent conversation to be had.

Comment by A guy... Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 10:57 am
Dillard is becoming unelectable in the general election. He’s lost my vote in the primary with this spectacle. Rutherford is now my only option.

The GOP needs to realize that 34% of Republican voters favor gay marriage. That goes up to 52% for Republicans under 50 and 81% for all voters under 30. Those numbers are nationwide from a Washington Post poll in March, so Illinois numbers may be even higher. Either way, these numbers are only going in one direction over time.

Comment by Southwest Cook Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:18 am
“Questions are being raised over how many each side of the marriage debate had in attendance” and ultimately the answer is “So what?” It’s not like the number necessarily has any relation to the actual number of people who support that point of view.

Comment by Skeptic Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:23 am
I am puzzled that anyone would accept the claim that Democratic legislators need to be worried ab out a primary challenge if they vote yes on gay marriage. This is what Rev. Lane Davis is asserting in the quote above and the theme also shows up in an article today in the Trib. It is nonsense. Gay marriage first became an issue for state legislators in 1993. Over the last 2 decades, there have been many votes in many states on the issue, sometimes taking the form of a proposed ban and other times taking the form of legalization. There isn’t a single Democratic state legislator anywhere in the entire United States who has lost a seat to a primary challenge over support of gay marriage. It has never happened. The risky vote for a Dem worried about a primary challenge is a no vote. But that message has been lost b/c the pro-gay marriage side is not conducting its campaign competently.

Comment by Richard Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:27 am
Kirk Dillard’s is this nation’s backbone… DLard ‘014

Comment by Midstate Indy Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:35 am
“Rutherford is now my only option”

He also opposes the bill. Looks like you are out of options.

Comment by Jaded Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:35 am
=== He also opposes the bill. ===

People can be moderates without agreeing on every single issue.

Unless, of course, there are now “moderate” litmus-tests in addition to the “conservative” ones.

Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:42 am
I still don’t understand the ‘our religious freedoms’ argument. Nobody is saying any church has to let two people of the same gender get married in that church–though there are churches which would not have a problem with that. The ones that do, fine–no gay weddings there. Nobody is asking the churches to change their rules about that. All anyone wants is the civil rights due them as citizens or legal residents of the United States.

Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:42 am
I’m a little tired of the numbers game. It doesn’t matter which rally was bigger. They were both huge. What matters is that the people who this would affect the most (the gay and lesbian community) support the passage of this bill.

I mean look, if the issue at stake were education, wouldn’t it make sense to give a bit more weight to the voices of students and teachers? Yeah, education affects everybody, but it affects students and teachers more. So their voices should count for more. It’s hard to get politicians to sign onto such thinking, because votes don’t work like that, but it’s the truth. We need to listen to the voice of those who actually have a stake. And the bigger the stake, the lower the voice.

My two cents anyway.

Comment by FoxValleyPride1 Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:45 am
Over 2500 came from Chicago,so how many came from the bottom of the state. So numbers are defintely not adding up. One thing I know,is that “truth will prevail.”

Comment by ggirl50 Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:47 am
That’s “The bigger the stake, the LOUDER the voice.

Comment by FoxValleyPride1 Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:48 am
always find it interesting when churches try to convince the government to establish or codify their religion…

Comment by bored now Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 11:53 am
==One thing I know,is that “truth will prevail.” ==

It will indeed. Maybe not during this session, but soon.

Comment by TooManyJens Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 12:05 pm
@Jaded

Rutherford supported civil unions and did not stand in front of a rally with sign saying “Homosexual marriage is an abomination”. I am a libertarian Republican looking for a GOP gubernatorial candidate who can win the general. That is my only litmus test. That eliminates Brady (obviously) and Rauner (Romney 2.0). Dillard had a shot, but he lost it by standing next to hateful social extremists.

Comment by Southwest Cook Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 12:12 pm
D-Lard was misquoted, he meant to say “cause Filipino Tilt-a-Whirl operators are this nation’s backbone…”

Comment by PoolGuy Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 12:39 pm
I’m still trying to figure out how Jim Finnegan can be labeled a Christian activist. Maybe loving you neighbor as yourself is for other people.

Comment by Ggal Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 1:19 pm
–protecting our religious liberties under heavy pressure to the contrary.–

What about gay people’s religious liberty? Maybe their religious beliefs (life mine) allow them to be married?

What about my religious liberty? I believe in ordaining gay people and believe gay marriage is perfectly acceptable in my faith. Of course, this liberty is being denied because we’re worried about certain peoples ability to use the law to discriminate and calling that liberty.

Comment by Ahoy! Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 2:11 pm
Illinois has placed limitations on voter initiatives and the use of referendum questions. Nevertheless, the legislature has the power to place a proposition on the ballot for the voting public to weigh in on. I am rather amazed that the SSM advocates prefer to let legislators or judges determine the issue instead of allowing the voters to play a direct role in the decision.

The beauty of the SSM movement is that they will argue out of both sides of their mouths to achieve their aims. In New Mexico, the legislature has repeatedly declined to consider legislation to permit SSM, so the SSM proponents ran to court claiming that their is a “stalemate” in the state legislature because they cannot advance their interests there since they lack the votes. In Illinois, the SSM gang is working the General Assembly and in the courts simultaneously.

Comment by Just Wondering Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 4:19 pm
Well, Just, if we were talking about *your* rights, would you choose one path over the other?

Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 5:21 pm
That was meant to read above: “…and ludicrous.”

Comment by Just The Way It Is One Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 7:08 pm
I find this issue so sad. So confused. So in opposition to The Gospels.

When I was a kid in the late 60s, at my Lutheran Church in DeKalb, an interracial couple and their three children showed up one Sunday. They wanted to join the church.

For weeks, they went to services. The kids went to Sunday school. They became my friends. They still are my friends.

The father was a black man from New York, the mother a white woman from Stavanger.

It was quite the scandal, very divisive for the old Scandinavians of the day.

For years, the old Norwegian immigrants in my family circle used to get together after church for fellowship and a Sunday meal:burnt-beyond-recognition roast beef, half-boiled potatoes, weak dark gravy and unspeakable cabbage (you’ll notice, peasant Norwegian-American cuisine never really caught on in the states).

For weeks after the family arrived, after the meal, and a after a couple of beers and shots, there were some epic arguments.

My Old Man would roll around the Norwegian in the back of his throat and spit it like thunderbolts at those who would keep the family out the church. His friends, the people he loved, would do the same in opposition.

Friendships were damaged forever.

But rightly so, given the stakes.

Today, we’re making choices like that.

After a few weeks, it didn’t matter. The black father, the white mother, and their three children stopped coming to church. They got the message.

To many of the “faithful” in my church, they were not welcome in God’s House.

To this day, that’s still hard to choke down. I’ve never forgotten that. I never will.

The two dudes across the street raising their little girl are not a threat to my family, they are a blessing in our lives.

The ladies down the street who adopted two older, orphaned children — one, a young lady now on a full academic ride to Michigan and another, a young man defending his country in the United States Air Force — are the greatest neighbors anyone ever had and angels by anyone’s definition.

I, my wife and my kids are lucky to know them all.

Times change, and I understand that change takes time and can be scary to some.

But it’s 2013, we are in the Land of Lincoln, and the time is now for all God’s children to walk it like we talk it.

On this issue, I am in earnest – I will not equivocate – I will not excuse – I will not retreat a single inch – and I will be heard.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 7:37 pm
Gee, Word–sounded like something out of an FDR Speech or somethin’…serious discrimination in any form does reek. Quite a story. Thanks for sharing. (But what are we still doing commenting? We should probably BOTH go lighten up some, grab a cold one, and go tune-in on the World Series for awhile now)…!

Comment by Just The Way It Is One Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 7:53 pm
Preach it - wordslinger -,

The only way things will change for the better is to talk about the ugliness, face it, and then attack it to do what is right.

I am always learning, so you keep serving up the lessons.

Much… Much respect.

Thanks for always willing to share.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 8:41 pm
Wordslinger - Very well stated. Let people live as they choose.
It is time to pass SSM. The time for demonizing is long past.

Comment by Super Fly Thursday, Oct 24, 13 @ 8:54 pm