The clock is ticking for an Illinois House bill legalizing civil unions.

The final action deadline was extended to this coming Friday, but that did not stop Bob Mueller and Chris Jessup from hitting the Westmont train station Saturday to drum up support. But not from the people you would expect.

Though many equate civil unions with gay marriage, Mueller and Jessup targeted a different audience: senior citizens.

“This will give them legal protections without losing their economic benefits they’ve earned throughout their entire lives,” said Mueller.

Mueller organized the event that brought legislative bill supporters out to several suburban train stations. The bill, called the Illinois religious freedom protection and civil union act, would provide same and opposite sex couples the same state-level rights, benefits and responsibilities as marriage, but would not require religious institutions to recognize or perform them.

Bill sponsor Greg Harris, D-13th District, of Chicago, said the bill has been gaining momentum.

“People are just now beginning to understand (it) has tremendous impact for seniors,” who can lose their pensions or social security if they remarry, he said.

Lorreto Cowhig, a planner for the Northeastern Illinois Area Agency on Aging, which serves the Mayslake Village district, said it an issue she has encountered.

“(Seniors) say ‘If we get married, he’ll lose her social security, or she’ll lose his,” Cowhig said. “They consider themselves married psychologically, emotionally and spiritually, but not legally.”

Illinois Family Institute executive director David Smith, who opposes the bill, said he was not familiar with the senior issue “but it sounds like an attempt to circumvent or cheat the pension company,” he said.

However, Harris disagreed.

“It’s not so at all. They’ve (seniors) worked all their lives, or their spouse has. They’ve worked very hard for social security, but just because of the technicality of the way the law was written they would lose it,” he said.

Smith said civil unions and the bill are “a ruse for gay marriage.”

“It’s the same thing: Official government recognition of homosexual relationships that are dangerous and unnatural. Polls show there is less of a reaction to ‘civil union’ than ‘gay marriage.’” Smith said.

Though the legislative session will soon end, Harris said he is optimistic the bill could make it to the House floor if the session extends into the summer like last year.

“We’re not feeling under the gun,” he said.

Both state Rep. Patti Bellock, R-47th District, of Hinsdale, and Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-24th District, of Hinsdale, said they were not clear on all the terms of the bill.

“Should the bill ever get to the Senate, I certainly want to hear from my local religious, legal and pro-family groups with respect to whether a version of civil unions is a defacto gay marriage or not,” Dillard said. “I don’t believe against discriminating against anyone. I believe legitimate gay couples need a way to contractually protect themselves.”