Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** SESSION COVERAGE
Next Post: Winchester: State GOP just one percentage point shy of ousting Brady
Posted in:
* Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) has kicked up a hornet’s nest with some comments she made on a radio show about gay people and same sex marriage…
“They’re trying to redefine marriage. It’s a completely disordered relationship and when you have a disordered relationship, you don’t ever get order out of that. So I’m more than happy to take a ‘no’ vote on the issue of homosexual marriage.”
And…
“I’m more than happy to stand up and take a courageous vote here on this issue because it’s the right thing to do. Essentially what they’re trying to do is not just redefine marriage, they’re trying to redefine society.
They’re trying to weasel their way into acceptability so that they can then start to push their agenda down into the schools, because this gives them some sort of legitimacy. And we can’t allow that to happen. The rights to marriage, what marriage is it’s really a natural right…
“It’s the natural right of the child to be with both parents, either in an adoptive nature or in a biological nature. To not have a mother and a father is really a disordered state for a child to grow up in and it really makes that child an object of desire rather than the result of a matrimony.”
Raw audio…
* Rep. Ives followed up with a press release…
It is unfortunate that certain comments I made recently in regards to the redefinition of marriage on a Catholic radio program have been misinterpreted.
I understand there is disagreement over the issue of whether or not to redefine marriage but it is unfortunate that political opponents have attempted to redefine or purposely misinterpret my views on this important matter by pulling two comments out of an approximately 20 minute discussion.
I have made my position very clear but for the purposes of additional clarity, let me restate it:
Like millions of Americans of all partisan stripes including in the Illinois House, including in the nearly three dozen states that have rejected the redefinition of marriage by popular referenda, I properly understand the institution of marriage and the word “marriage” to be defined as the union between one man and one woman. I have no comment on a person’s sexual orientation or personal relationships. That is their private business and I have no interest in meddling in a person’s private affairs.
I have simply made statements in defense of the attack on marriage from certain vocal constituencies who seek to redefine it out of existence. I do not believe it is the government’s place to redefine marriage.
The institution of marriage has existed for thousands of years. It predates government. In fact, government was in part created to protect the institution of marriage because of its critical importance in building civilization. Marriage is today what it has been from time immemorial, the foundation of family and thus the foundation of civilization. As a wife and mother of five, my interest, as I have previously and repeatedly expressed, is to protect the institution of marriage for future generations just as those who came before preserved it for me.
The people who disagree with me have chosen to ascribe meaning to my words that they did not have, just as they are attempting to assign a meaning to the word “marriage” that it does not have.
It is also worth noting that, currently, my position on marriage is the majority position in the Illinois House.
Illinois Review entitled that press release “Ives refuses to cower to left-wing bullies.” The Daily Herald has some react…
State Rep. Greg Harris, the Chicago Democrat sponsoring the same-sex marriage plan in the House, called the comments “unfortunate.”
“I think those remarks were unfortunate. We should be supporting families and commitment, not disparaging them,” Harris said.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:36 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** SESSION COVERAGE
Next Post: Winchester: State GOP just one percentage point shy of ousting Brady
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Doesn’t sound misinterpeted to me. Sounded pretty clear.
Comment by RonOglesby Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:40 am
This woman is West Point. The usual smackdowns won’t work.
People will focus on her use of “disordered.” Obviously not a great choice of word.
But let’s not forget Barack Obama opposed gay marriage until last May. Was the President a bigot in April 2012?
Comment by just sayin' Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:42 am
I agree with her on one point - she has no business meddling in a person’s “private affairs”.
Comment by ChicagoR Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:42 am
She is trying to weasel her way out of it.
Comment by Bigtwich Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:46 am
Harris made comments as the House came to order this morning which made clear, in a pretty funny yet clear way that he didn’t appreciate this statement.
Comment by Not ready for prime time Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:47 am
Check out Rep. Cassidy’s FB update: “The House Weasel Caucus is on the floor.”
Good for her.
Comment by Raymond Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:48 am
Rep Ives - standing athwart history yelling ‘STOP’!
(while history watches her grow smaller and smaller in the rear view mirror…)
Comment by Happy Returns Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:48 am
Greg Harris showed remarkable and admirable restraint in his response. Ives is entitled to her opinion even though I disagree with it. She’s on the wrong side of history and it won’t be long before marriage equality is the law in the US.
In a decade or so, my kids are going to look back on this debate and wonder what all the fuss was about.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:50 am
The best way to deal with this issue is to get government (state and federal) out of the marriage business… Everyone gets a contract, call it a civili union, straight or gay. Marriage becomes a thing of the Church (the way it always has been) and if your church only marries heteros fine.
I really could care less who is married. If Bob and Tim next door want to be as shackled together as I am w/ the wife… cool. If it doesnt impact me or mine why should I care. Too many people look at this like abortion or guns or any of the other wedge issues. We spend so much time and energy on it in the GA and in the papers that the fact that we are beyond broke, loosing jobs and barely educating our kids get ignored.
Comment by RonOglesby Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:51 am
====weasel their way into acceptability=====
=====certain comments I made …………have been misinterpreted.=====
Does Joe Walsh need a radio partner?
‘The Walsh and Ives Radio Hour- Misinterpreted Actions’ Sponsored by Oberweis Ice Cream
Comment by Endangered Moderate Species Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:52 am
IO’s posting on Facebook lead to a long discussion where multiple posters fretted over being arrested for “hate speech” if SB10 passes and they spoke out against marriage equality.
The level of ignorance of the issue, what’s actually in the bill, and how it directly affects them is astounding. Too many people getting their “news” from the same websites and Facebook pages.
Comment by Former Downstater Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:53 am
== it really makes that child an object of desire rather than the result of a matrimony.==
Feel free to explain what you really meant, Rep. Ives.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 10:56 am
Rep. Ives words speak for themselves, but her history is way out of whack.
–In fact, government was in part created to protect the institution of marriage because of its critical importance in building civilization. Marriage is today what it has been from time immemorial, the foundation of family and thus the foundation of civilization.–
In the Western World, the state did not begin to play a role in marriage until after The Reformation. Plenty of government prior to that.
And since “time immemorial” marriage has had many forms in many cultures, including gay marriage. And as good Old Testament readers, we know they were cool with polygamy.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:00 am
When it comes to “weaseling their way into acceptability” I would accept a member of the Illinois General Assembly as an expert on the matter. However Ives’ views on gay marriage fall far short of legitimacy.
Comment by The Captain Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:00 am
Here’s hoping her ott comments backfire on her and grow the weasel caucus to 60.
Do 60 democrats really agree with this woman that gays are “disordered” and their concerns are illegitimate? Is this the majority position of the caucus “led” by the head of the democratic party? Because your failure to pass same sex marriage will now say that you and jeanne ives are one and the same, coward dems.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:00 am
What’s next? Marriages between multiple people!
Comment by Downstater Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:00 am
@Downstater
==What’s next? Marriages between multiple people! ==
Some people’s religion allows that. Not just in some Muslim sects but religions some folks make fun of right here in the US.
Is it acceptable to baptist or Catholic, Jews, etc? no. But if you are a mormon? They actually had to change to try and join the US…
Comment by RonOglesby Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:02 am
-The woman is West Point-
Well, that explains it right there.
Go Navy!
Comment by Arthur Andersen Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:03 am
By her own logic, I hope she is working overtime to take children away from single parents and preventing those unable to conceive from marrying. Further, I hope she has redoubled her efforts to make divorce illegal.
Sounds like we have our own Illinois version of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. Just goes to prove that putting lipstick on the bigotry doesn’t make it any better.
I’m embarrassed you are in my Party, Rep. Ives.
Comment by LincolnLounger Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:03 am
Downstater: 2 is a multiple
Comment by I don't want to live in Teabagistan Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:04 am
“…so they can start to push their agenda down to the schools?” That’s damned rich. So she’s opposed to teaching Creationism and prayer in the schools too, right? (Snark) Oh wait, that’s different. (End snark)
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:04 am
Oh, well, that explains everything…NOT!
She just digs herself in deeper.
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:06 am
47th ward - it won’t take kids a decade to get that this debate is insane. My kids, 11 and 14, have been following through my updates. They’ve listened to the radio ads on CapFax, and they just look dumbfounded at the comments. The world is changing fast, and my kids at least are 100% on the welcoming committee!
Comment by it'smyopinion Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:07 am
47th ward - it won’t take kids a decade to get that this debate is insane. My kids, 11 and 14, have been following through my updates. They’ve listened to the radio ads on CapFax, and they just look dumbfounded at the comments. The world is changing fast, and my kids at least are 100% on the welcoming committee!
Comment by it'smyopinion Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:07 am
Dear Rep. Ives - as best I understand it, the “agenda” that’s being pushed is to let all Illinoisans enjoy benefits of marriage. That’s it. None other thing; quit resorting to outdated, homophobic stereotypes.
Comment by Peoria Pete Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:10 am
Please post rep Harris’ remarks. I am stuck dealing with a VIP visit and can’t access my laptop
Comment by Soccermom Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:10 am
Keep moving, there’s nothing to see here, and remember, we are the party oi the big tent
Comment by steve schnorf Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:13 am
Your views weren’t misinterpreted Rep. Ives. You were pretty clear when you said “weasel their way into acceptability.” I have no idea exactly how somebody is to interpret such comments as anything other than hate speech against gays. You are against gay marriage. Fine. But what you said is unfitting for a State Representative and you should be ashamed of what you said. You can get your point across without being derogatory to gay people. It was a disgusting comment.
Also, you can’t on the one hand say it’s not the government’s business to redifine marriage while on the other say it’s the government’s business to define marriage. The inconsistency is glaring.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:14 am
==I properly understand the institution of marriage ==
You properly understand the institution of marriage? Just caught that little gem of a comment. I’m glad Representative Ives is around to tell me how much of a weasel and unacceptable I am as a gay person, and now apparently how improper my beliefs are. She’s the gift that just keeps on giving.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:22 am
Gotta love how Ives prefaced her remarks by saying she went to Springfield to tackle fiscal issues - not social issues - and then promptly busts out a bigot grenade.
“Oh, well, as long as you asked, I do have some fire and brimstone to serve up for the party’s far right wing …”
Comment by Raymond Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:26 am
Clearly, she’s campaigning to be the next state GOP chair.
Comment by Ray Midge Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:27 am
If really I wanted people to closely scrutinize my family and personal life, I would describe others’ relationships as “completely disordered.”
Just sayin’.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:31 am
Just because you call it marriage, people won’t still accept it as so. Give them civil unions with same benefits as marriage and leave it be.
Comment by Wumpus Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:35 am
Wanting to keep government out of our lives, except where the bedroom is concerned.
Comment by Aldyth Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:36 am
@Wumpus:
Why do you care? Here’s a novel idea for people: keep your noses out of other peoples lives. I could care less if you accept it or not. If it affected you I might, but since it doesn’t then I really don’t think it’s any of your business. How about you just leave it be, huh?
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:37 am
“The institution of marriage has existed for thousands of years. It predates government.”
Really Jeanne? What did the Greeks and Romans say about it, and is not their form of government the basis for our outstanding western civilization?
I’m Catholic, and I have yet to find one single instance Christ said anything about someone’s orientation.
On the contrary, there are many, many instances of him criticizing the hypocracy of religious leaders of that time and the treatment of the poor.
Maybe she can comment on that next time she is on the show.
Comment by I dream of Jnne Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:51 am
–Downstater: 2 is a multiple–
A math lesson or any whiff of reason is an effort wasted on this crowd.
Comment by David Ormsby Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:54 am
- people won’t still accept it as so. -
I don’t care what bigots accept or don’t accept in their own minds.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:58 am
Rep. Greg Harris has been more than a bit disingenuous on this issue. His comments after enactment of civil unions were to the effect of we won’t try to move forward on same sex marriage until 1) some progress is made on fiscal and pension issues and 2) we are confident the votes are there. Well, neither one occurred, but here is Harris pressing forward anyway when he knows he can’t get certain of his Dem colleagues to sign on. His efforts now look they are just about picking a fight with far right GOP conservatives for the purpose of distracting from the pressing fiscal issues.
Harris just doesn’t impress. His lone contribution to solving the fiscal issues was to issue a release last year saying cutting human services is bad. Duh. He is a Johnny one-note on the issue of same sex marriage and a lightweight on everything else.
And lets anyone question my motives, I am an old school moderate/libertarian Republican who thinks the state should get out of the marriage business altogether.
Comment by Meanderthal Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 11:58 am
http://www.openbible.info/topics/man_shall_not_lay_with_man
Comment by anon Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:01 pm
@anon:
Nice drive-by. I always like a good drive-by Bible throw.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:04 pm
**Harris just doesn’t impress. His lone contribution to solving the fiscal issues was to issue a release last year saying cutting human services is bad. Duh. He is a Johnny one-note on the issue of same sex marriage and a lightweight on everything else.**
You really don’t know much about Greg Harris or how he engages in issues.
Comment by dave Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:10 pm
Dave, yes I do. That is why I wrote what I wrote.
Comment by Meanderthal Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:27 pm
She only has $2,500 in the bank. Eychner could max-out to any Democrat up there tomorrow and there would be a race.
Comment by Crazy Like A Fox Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:30 pm
===Eychner could max-out to any Democrat up there tomorrow and there would be a race. ===
She could raise more from the HGOPs for sure. That district is very GOP. Only way to defeat her is via the primary.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:35 pm
Meanderthal, I think you’d be pretty hard-pressed to find many people in either party in the State House who would agree with any part of that comment. He is widely respected.
Comment by Car3 Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:35 pm
Ahhh crud, gotta go so I can’t take time to comment. AT 1:00 p.m. I am scheduled to attend a nakedness uncovering but I gotta make sure none of my relatives are being “uncovered”.
Comment by mongo Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:38 pm
If that is true, it just goes to show how little you have to actually do to be respected in Springfield these days.
Comment by Meanderthal Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:43 pm
Rep Ives is full of enlightening insights. During Wednesday’s debate over banning “large” capacity clips, she argued that since most people are poor shots, they need to be able to fire more bullets.
She seems to take this approach in her stance against SSM. Fire a bunch of shots against it in the hope one will hit.
Personally, I recommend a different approach: work on your aim. All those random shots do your causes more harm than good.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:46 pm
She must be able to learn something. After all, she very pointed included heterosexual couples who adopt as being acceptable. Unlike John Eastman from NOM who seems to think there’s something wrong with families that aren’t blood relatives.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:49 pm
I got to thinking some more about my “big tent” comment. We do welcome into our party people with some fairly controversial views. I will start by listing those who believe the earth is less than 10,00 years old and therefore dinosaurs walked with men. Perhaps others can point out more examples of our big tent approach.
Comment by steve schnorf Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 12:58 pm
Schnorf, is that The Flinstones Caucus? Or are they Dinos — not an acronym, just after Fred and Wilma’s pet?
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:02 pm
- It is also worth noting that, currently, my position on marriage is the majority position in the Illinois House. -
If your not alone, then it must be okay! My 7 year old tried that last night when he called his little brother an “f-in’ retard” which had to be acceptable language because he friends say it. (BTW, he really did say F-N, not the word that would have gotten him in huge trouble.)
Comment by SG8prl Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:02 pm
word, “anti-evolution” caucus
Comment by steve schnorf Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:04 pm
Schnorf: I am confused, are you big tent because you welcome folks who think the Earth is older than 10,000 years or because you welcome the folks that think the Earth has been around for less than 10,000 years? The young Earthers seem to be the “face” of the party lately.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:10 pm
@ anon 12:01 - here’s another drive-by …
Comment by olddog Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:15 pm
retransmitting 1:15 p.m. with the link (I hope) …
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/us/politics/gay-marriage-brief-gets-more-republican-support.html
Comment by olddog Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:17 pm
Schnorf - it’s a big tent, but a big tent where certain folks are directed to step into one of the closets in the big tent after they step inside.
Comment by Just the Facts Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:19 pm
@Meanderthal - How about talking about the issue instead of attacking a good man? Can you make the case for the state not treating all couples and families equally?
Comment by Ray Midge Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:26 pm
Just the Facts, the moderates don’t want to expel the ultra-conservatives. But you cannot say the same for the ultras. Y’all need to stop being so paranoid about anyone who disagrees with you.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:26 pm
Ives has exposed herself as bigoted on this matter. Shame on her…
To the point about Fred Eychaner and the $…. how much has he spent on this effort to date? Given the resources invested and the changing attitude about this issue around the state, I’m surprised this one isn’t yet put to bed.
Comment by Bardo Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:52 pm
protect me oh Lord, inoculate me against the Ives.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:52 pm
Beware the Ives of March
(right back at you, Amalia!)
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 1:55 pm
Honestly, how do people like this get elected to office? What are her credentials? Is she some expert on ancient sociological history? She seems to have not a shred of common sense when it comes to speaking out on her position on the subject.
Comment by Midwest Mom Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:01 pm
===Beware the Ives of March===
Or, if she decides to lead a major demonstration against this bill, beware the March of Ives.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:28 pm
And if she looks like a curled up piece of wood, is she Berl Ives?
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:30 pm
I do not see how people wonder how Ives was elected.
Ives’ district is anchored around Wheaton. Ives was a Wheaton City Council member so she had quite a bit of name recognition in the ‘core’ area of the district. She won an open GOP primary with several candidates.
I would agree with Rich in that she isn’t going to be ousted in a general by any Dem no matter how well funded. Wheaton aint voting Dem any time soon. She has more to worry about from a primary challenge and her comments do wll to protect her right flank.
train111
Comment by train111 Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:37 pm
I’m a constituent of Ives and have one comment after hearing her thoughts on this issue: she ROCKS! Finally someone in polirics unafraid to say the common sense that most people in our state know to be true.
Comment by Being real Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:39 pm
==Finally someone in polirics unafraid to say the common sense that most people in our state know to be true.==
Just because it’s common sense to you doesn’t mean that “most people in our state” agree. Recent poll results indicate otherwise; and the trend shows people’s “common sense” is quickly moving in favor of allowing same sex marriage.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:56 pm
==Finally someone in polirics unafraid to say==
Um, lately, there has been no shortage of right-wing politicians bashing gays and their rights.
==the common sense==
Hatred isn’t common sense.
==that most people in our state know to be true.==
The polling says otherwise.
Comment by Roamin' Numeral Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 2:57 pm
I didn’t see a lot of common sense; more like a lot of ahistorical nonsense.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:05 pm
BTW, I think Rep. Harris has been very impressive on this bill and this issue. He has not yelled, thrown things, called people names, etc. I understand the frustration of some of the folks on the minority side, but the theatrics are becoming absurd and not helping bring anyone over to their side.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:07 pm
Gotta love someone quoting Leviticus. Do they still stone people in Wheaton?
Comment by Lefty Lefty Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:18 pm
I think I’m saying if I can be in a party that welcomes both me (tho I’m far from sure about that any more) and people who believe (what are to me) unbelievable things, how can I want to push out people who believe things that are (to me) offensive?
Comment by steve schnorf Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:19 pm
===Beware the Ives of March===,
I hope I can use that sometime - wordslinger -!
WOW!!
To the Post,
Maybe Ives and McCarter can go to the friend of Sen. McCarter that owns that restaurant and Ives… and McCarter … can just talk and talk and talk, until the hole gets so deep, the darkness itself becomes black.
I have a new name for their Caucus …
The “The world is Flat, the Earth is the Center of the Universe, and Darwin is evil” Caucus …
I know, a bit wordy, but I wanted to make sure everyone knows that the Caucus doesn’t go back to the Flintstones, it just goes back to the Ill-Educated!
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:24 pm
@Being real:
I suppose if bigotry and hate are what you look for in a representative then you got a great one.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:46 pm
Rich -
The HDems are going to have to play offense somewhere - why not pick an easy target. If the LGBT community lines up to raise and donate heavy amounts of money to a Democrat, then the HGOPs would have to put valuable resources into what should be a safe seat. I don’t know if there will be an upset win or not but it puts another square on the chessboard into consideration.
Comment by Crazy Like A Fox Friday, Mar 15, 13 @ 3:56 pm
In the 1920’s people also said that women shouldn’t vote or have a say politically due to what the bible says about women. Read 1 Timothy 2. It is made clear by god that women are not to speak in authority over men. Rep. Ives wouldn’t even have her job today if people fought to keep women from their rights using gods word as the rationale. I am sure many women in the 1920’s were called disordered and attempting to manipulate their way into acceptance. Thank god those women fought to be treated fairly even though the bible says differently. I could use all the same arguments she uses in terms of womens rights. Maybe we should take her rights away in the name of the way the world has been until the 1920’s.
Comment by Equal Rights Monday, Mar 18, 13 @ 1:25 pm