Skip to comments.
IFI Condemns 'Planned Subversion' of IL Marriage Law by Cook County Clerk & Chicago Homosexual Lobby
releases.usnewswire.com ^
Posted on 02/27/2004 8:55:36 AM PST by chance33_98
IFI Condemns 'Planned Subversion' of IL Marriage Law by Cook County Clerk and Chicago Homosexual Lobby
2/27/04 11:27:00 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: State Desk
Contact: Deb Schloemer, 630-790-8370, or Peter LaBarbera, 630-717-7631, both of the Illinois Family Institute; http://www.illinoisfamily.org
GLEN ELLYN, Ill., Feb. 27 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Illinois Family Institute Executive Director Peter LaBarbera today condemned the "planned subversion" of the state's marriage law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and criticized Cook County Clerk David Orr for referring to the law he hopes to overturn as Illinois' "perceived" marriage law.
Homosexual activists such as Chicago's openly "gay" alderman Tom Tunney (D-44th) are now urging the Cook County Board to direct Orr to issue "marriage" licenses to homosexual couples in open defiance of Illinois' defense-of-marriage law, which expressly prohibits "a marriage between two individuals of the same sex."
Speaking Wednesday as a guest on the WTTW-TV program "Chicago Tonight," Orr said, "I don't have any authority at this point to marry people in violation of the perceived Illinois law. I believe ... that there's a conflict between the existing law which says marriage shall take place between a man and a woman, and ... the constitution, which says, 'Thou shalt not discriminate.'"
Orr is strategizing with pro-gay activists and said "one of the options being discussed ... is whether or not one issues a marriage license, or many like they did in San Francisco, as a way of testing the law; as a way of getting into court and hopefully being victorious there." He also viciously smeared advocates of a constitutional amendment protecting marriage by comparing them to past advocates of slavery-a "cheap shot" that steals the noble heritage of the Christian-led abolitionist movement, LaBarbera said.
"Just what does David Orr mean when he says the 'perceived' law on marriage in Illinois?" LaBarbera said. "The law is the law, and if he is plotting to subvert it, he should be removed from his position. Imagine the chaos that would ensue if we began talking about the 'perceived' law against shoplifting, or the 'perceived' ban on drunk driving."
A proposed amendment to Illinois' Constitution (HJRCA 31) codifying marriage as one-man, one-woman is bottled up in the House Rules Committee, despite hundreds of calls to Speaker Mike Madigan requesting that he push for HJRCA 31 to be released to a standing committee.
IFI is a non-partisan, non-profit organization committed to defending marriage, family and the sanctity of life in Illinois.
TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: civilunion; homosexualagenda; marriage; peterlabarbera; subversives
To: chance33_98
When was gay marraige passed in Sodom and Gomorrah?
To: chance33_98
Guess the next step in all these cities is an endless line of court challenges regarding visitation, custody rights, banking, insurance, inheritance, property titles, ad infinitum...
They are going to keep this in the courts and force it.
3
posted on
02/27/2004 8:58:39 AM PST
by
OpusatFR
(Kerrycrats are the Know-Nothings of the 21st Century)
To: chance33_98
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't a planned, organized effort to violate the law called conspiracy? If any actual organization becomes involved, then doesn't RICO apply?
4
posted on
02/27/2004 8:59:25 AM PST
by
kevkrom
(Ask your Congresscritter about his or her stance on HR 25 -- the NRST)
To: Chi-townChief
You've got the ping list, Chief....
5
posted on
02/27/2004 9:00:26 AM PST
by
unspun
(The uncontextualized life is not worth living. | I'm not "Unspun w/ AnnaZ" but I appreciate.)
To: kevkrom
Silly....
RICO only applies to people kneeling on sidewalks in front of abortion clinics praying the rosary.
6
posted on
02/27/2004 9:01:42 AM PST
by
OpusatFR
(Kerrycrats are the Know-Nothings of the 21st Century)
To: chance33_98
If the Winnetka town clerk was pasing out handguns, to get the perceived handgun ban tested, I imagine he would be stopped.
Don't you?
7
posted on
02/27/2004 9:04:46 AM PST
by
Jim Noble
(Now you go feed those hogs before they worry themselves into anemia!)
To: chance33_98
These "marriage licenses" do not violate the law, since the "marriage" of the individuals named on the "license" is void, both in the natural law and by the state law which gives it voice.
It will violate the law to treat two men or two women who have gone through a sham ceremony as if they were married, which is of course impossible.
The licenses, per se, are meaningless.
8
posted on
02/27/2004 9:07:44 AM PST
by
Jim Noble
(Now you go feed those hogs before they worry themselves into anemia!)
To: AbsoluteJustice; Barnacle; BeAllYouCanBe; BillyBoy; cfrels; cherry_bomb88; chicagolady; ...
PING (courtesy, unspun)
To: Chi-townChief
Thanks, Chief.
Is there a conspiracy to violate the law in the works here?
10
posted on
02/27/2004 9:59:48 AM PST
by
unspun
(The uncontextualized life is not worth living. | I'm not "Unspun w/ AnnaZ" but I appreciate.)
To: unspun; m1-lightning
BUMP and ping m1
11
posted on
02/27/2004 10:15:44 AM PST
by
TheRightGuy
(ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
To: TheRightGuy
I've never understood why gay right groups say they are treated unfairly when it comes to marraige. A straight man can't marry a straight man. A gay man can't marry a gay man. A straight man can't marry a gay man. The laws apply to all, equally. Some just wish to disregard the law and do what they want. Constitutional amendment; so be it (unless of course we could persuade them all to move next to a volcano)
12
posted on
02/27/2004 12:00:04 PM PST
by
m1-lightning
(God, Guns, and Country!)
To: m1-lightning
A straight man can't marry a straight man. A gay man can't marry a gay man. A straight man can't marry a gay man. The laws apply to all, equally. Oh, go shut up! You are making far too much sense!
< /sarcasm>
But in the words of the immortal Steve Goodman:
"There are men who love women who love men,
the are women who love women every now and then,
there are men who love men because they can't pretend,
They are men who love women who love men."
13
posted on
02/27/2004 12:26:23 PM PST
by
TheRightGuy
(ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
To: Jim Noble
Don't know why anyone can claim discrimination. Anyone -- heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual -- has the exact same rights to marry a person of the opposite sex.
There is no discrimination. Period.
I wish someone would point out to the ignorant talking heads that Utah was not allowed to join the Union until it renounced and prohibited bigamy. Perhaps some Mormons would now like to re-apply for multiple wives.
14
posted on
02/27/2004 12:32:12 PM PST
by
mwl1
To: Fitzcarraldo
Q: When was gay marraige passed in Sodom and Gomorrah?A: Just before the cities were destroyed.
15
posted on
02/27/2004 5:26:35 PM PST
by
reg45
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson