News: April 2008

Headlines

• Domestic Partners Bill Loses!
  
• Marriage Lawsuits and the ERA
• God’s Tug on Your Heart
• Schedule for  2008
• Bits and Pieces

Domestic Partners Bill Loses!

HB 4731, a bill to give same-sex domestic partners who are members of the Chicago Teachers Union failed in the House by a vote of 43-67-1. This legislation, sponsored by Rep. Greg Harris (D), was being pushed by the Chicago Teachers Union. HB 4731 equates same-sex domestic partners with spouses.

This same legislation has been introduced in the past couple of years, but has never had a vote on the floor of the House before. Although the sponsor knew he did not have the votes to pass the bill, the Teachers Union wanted a vote taken, and according to other lobbyists, telling the sponsor not to worry, because the votes would be there.

Illinois does not recognize common-law marriage, but this bill moves to recognize same-sex domestic partners to be the same as married spouses for survivor and death benefits under Illinois law.

Language found in HB 4731 states:

“The designated domestic partner of a teacher shall be eligible to receive survivor and death benefits under this Article in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as a surviving spouse. For the purpose of determining eligibility for those benefits, the date of designation of a domestic partner shall be deemed the equivalent of the date of marriage, and the revocation of change of a designation shall be deemed the equivalent of termination of the marriage. References in this Article and other applicable Articles of this Code to a surviving spouse shall be deemed to include a surviving designated domestic partner.”

This bill sets up a new precedent and new public policy in Illinois law by equating a same-sex “domestic partner” with a spouse.
HB 4731 is a bad precedent that could have been the beginning of a lawsuit under the Equal Protection Clause of the Illinois Constitution to overturn existing marriage law.
Thank you for your prayers.

Marriage Lawsuits and the ERA

HJRCA 2 in Illinois is the ERA amendment to the federal constitution. For years, we have continued to fight the passage of ERA in Illinois, since the scope of ERA is much broader than first imagined. While the concerns brought up here were brought up in the past, they are much clearer because of the actions of the courts and judges in recent years.

Legislators have made accusations that opponents of the ERA have raised false concerns (their words, a “red herring”) about the ERA and its impact on marriage laws. Professor Paul Freund of Harvard Law School testified years ago, already, “Indeed, if the law must be as undiscriminating concerning sex as it is toward race, it would follow that laws outlawing wedlock between members of the same sex would be as invalid as laws forbidding miscegenation.” (marriage between different races).

Because no one can predict how activist judges will rule on the ERA, whether they rule based on the plain meaning of the words, the intent of the sponsors, on the basis of the Lawrence v. Texas ruling that cases can be decided on an “emerging awareness” about conduct, or even on the judge’s own theories of how things ought to be.

Hawaii Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

Hawaii has virtually the same language in their state ERA as the federal ERA. On December 3, 1996, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled in their decision that consistent with the intent that had been shown during consideration of the ERA by Congress, that gay marriages must be allowed under Hawaii’s state ERA (Baehr v. Lewin).
The people of Hawaii amended their constitution on 1998 to allow their state legislature to pass legislation to protect traditional marriage between a man and a woman.

Massachusetts Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

In his concurrence to the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision requiring same-sex marriage (2003), Justice Greaney writes, “when an individual desires to marry, but cannot marry his or her chosen partner because of the traditional opposite-sex restriction, a violation of art. 1 [of the Massachusetts Constitution’s ERA] has occurred.”

The Massachusetts ERA, enacted in 1976 says in part, “Equality under the law shall not be denied

Schedule for 2008

Thank you to those who have already confirmed dates to share our ministries and the Word of God with your local church. It is always an honor to preach the Word of God in your pulpits.

Following are confirmed events where Rev. Vanden Bosch is scheduled to speak. He is happy to give a legislative update, to preach or teach about Christian’s’ responsibility in government.

For information on Rev. Vanden Bosch’s speaking schedule, please call our office, and we will be happy to answer any questions.

April 6th AM First Baptist Church, Rochelle, IL

April 13th PM Ebenezer United Methodist Church, Calhoun, IL

April 27th AM Grace Baptist Church, Taylorville, IL

May 1st PM Christian County Day of Prayer, Taylorville, IL

June 1st PM Park Meadows Baptist School Graduation, Lincoln, IL

June 29th AM Prairie Baptist Chu  rch, Gibson City, IL

If your church, home school group, Christian School, or civic group would like Rev. Vanden Bosch speak for an event or give a legislative update, please contact our office at (847) 526-7339.

There are still some openings in the spring and summer. Please call if you are interested in scheduling an opportunity for Rev. Vanden Bosch to share the ministry of Concerned Christian Americans and Concerned Christian Ministries

God's Tug on Your Heart

Our ministries are primarily supported by your giving. A number of churches support our ministries on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis. The rest of our support comes in from private donors, such as you.

Because this is God’s work, we depend on Him to work in the hearts of those who hear of our ministry. If you feel God’s tug on your heart to give, please respond.

CONCERNED CHRISTIAN AMERICANS
works on behalf of churches, families, and biblical moral values, lobbying and ministering to legislators.

Concerned Christian Americans, Inc., is not a 501 (c)(3) organization (it is a 501 (c) (4) lobbying organization), and donations to it are not tax-deductible. If you would like to donate to help cover our travel expenses in lobbying the legislature, please send donations to:

Concerned Christian Americans, Inc.
P.O. Box 351
Wauconda, IL 60084

CONCERNED CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES
Ministering to the Christian community, we have received our 501 (c)(3) status from the IRS.
We do not charge an annual fee for our newsletter, but request that you make a donation to help cover the costs of publishing, printing, and mailing our newsletters. Thank you for your consideration.

If you have stocks or securities you would like to donate to Concerned Christian Ministries, please feel free to contact us, or contact our broker, Stan Welch, at A.G.Edwards & Sons, in Springfield, IL. His telephone number there is (800) 999-6895, or you can email him at Stanley.Welch@agedwards.com.

Bits and Pieces

Because of the recent defeat of the domestic partners legislation in the House of Representatives, rumor is that the sponsor of the Civil Unions legislation (HB 1826) will not be calling his bill for a vote. It is sure to get even less than the 43 votes the domestic partners bill received.

HJRCA 28, the constitutional amendment to the Illinois Constitution that would allow elections to recall State office-holders, passed the House of Representatives with a vote of 75-33-3. When Rep. Jack Franks (D), the House sponsor, and Lt. Governor Pat Quinn (D) appeared before the Senate Executive Committee for a hearing, they were both soundly rebuked by Senate President Emil Jones.

The Senate sponsor, Sen. Donne Trotter (D), became the sponsor of the legislation over the protests of the House sponsor. The only way the Recall measure could be stopped in the Senate Executive Committee was by having the Senate sponsor refuse to have it called for a vote. After over one and a half hours of bitter debate, Senator Trotter, the adversarial sponsor, refused to have the Amendment called for a vote (knowing full-well that it would have passed the Senate Executive Committee).

When Rep. Franks requested to the Senate Rules Committee that the sponsor be changed to someone who was friendly to the recall, the Rules Committee voted on party line (3-2) to not allow the sponsor to be changed. To do so would have assured the amendment reached the floor.

Senator Debbie Halvorson (D), who is the chair of the Senate Rules Committee, said that changing the sponsor “would have set a terrible precedent.”  In reality, hi-jacking someone else’s bill is frowned upon in the legislature. Changing sponsors is routinely done at the request of the sponsor in the other House.

Will there be a timely adjournment in May? Very unlikely! A member of the governor’s staff recently told me that the House Democratic staff has told them not to submit a budget until the governor restores all the line-item budget cuts he did to the House Democrats last year.
“Pray for kings and all that are in authority….