“Roe v. Wade” turned 50 years old on Sunday, January 22nd. This is the infamous U.S. Supreme Court decision that effectively gave us abortion on demand (when you add the impact of its companion decision of the same day, “Doe v. Bolton.”) Here are some comments from some pro-life leaders on the fallout from 50 years of “Roe.”

*Abby Johnson, former head of a Planned Parenthood clinic and one-time “Planned Parenthood Employee of the Year,” is strongly pro-life today because she saw a sonogram of an abortion in her own clinic. This wasn’t a blob of tissue fighting for his life—it was a baby.

She gave me a statement (through email to Jerry Newcombe on 1/20/23)  for this article on 50 years of legalized abortion in America:

“One of the biggest fallouts from Roe is that every woman’s bathroom will now become an abortion clinic if she decides to use the abortion pill to end her unwanted or unplanned pregnancy.”

These pills are marketed as safe. But she warns,

“The use of the abortion pill is about to skyrocket and I don’t think the nation is ready for both emotional and physical ramifications of such sweeping actions. I think it’s going to be horrific, and the pro-life movement needs to be there for these women who need love the most when they are considering abortion and in the aftermath of their decision.”

*Father Frank Pavone, founder and director of Priests for Life, who was recently “laicized” by the Vatican, told me through an email (1/22/23):

“Roe v. Wade has distorted our entire process of self-governance, replacing the will of the people with the imposition of a fake Constitutional right, and allowing abortion, as the only medical procedure with such a status, to grotesquely disfigure everything from city council meetings to Supreme Court confirmation processes.”

*Eric Scheidler, the son of long-time abortion foe Joe Scheidler, heads up the Pro-Life Action League in Aurora, Illinois. He sent me an email (1/23/23):

“The nearly 50 years of abortion on demand forced on the American people by the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision have had a devastating impact on our culture. If Roe had been reversed much earlier — for example, in 1992 when the Casey v. Planned Parenthood case instead reaffirmed Roe — then it would have been much easier to repair that damage. But after two generations of abortion without limits, one of the most extreme policies on the face of the Earth, we have a scene of devastation on our hands. That means the Christians and all Americans of good will need to get involved in not just promoting pro-life laws, but in promoting such fundamentals as marriage, the blessings of children, and the rebuilding of our support communities.”

*“Abortion is bad for women and babies,” notes the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. She admits she had two abortions—and now is so grateful for the forgiveness of Jesus in her life. She warns against others making this same mistake. In fact, Evangelist Alveda King of told me in a recent radio segment, “Life should be celebrated and acknowledged and appreciated from the womb to the tomb into eternity.” Alveda has now started the organization, “Speak for Life.”

This article was originally published at JerryNewcombe.com.

In 1629, the first American balloting for an election occurred in Salem, Massachusetts. The issue? Choosing a minister and choosing a Christian teacher for the colony. “Such is the origin of the use of the ballot on this continent; [Samuel] Skelton was chosen pastor and [Francis] Higginson teacher.”  So writes George Bancroft, an early American historian, on this first election on American soil in Volume I of his 6-volume, History of the United States of America (1882).

Historian Paul Johnson writes in his 1997 classic, A History of the American People: “In a sense, the clergy were the first elected officials of the new American society, a society which to that extent had a democratic element from the start.”

And Christians in America have been voting ever since.

Founding father Samuel Adams once said, “Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote…that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country.”

However, there has arisen a feeling among some professing believers that somehow it is spiritual to not participate in something as earthly as politics.

As the late Dr. D. James Kennedy, noted pastor and author, once said: “A Christian said to me, ‘You don’t really believe that Christians should get active in politics do you?’ And I said, with tongue in cheek, ‘Why, of course not, we ought to leave it to the atheists. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have anything to complain about. And we’d really rather complain than do something, wouldn’t we?’”

But today we find ourselves in such a mess in America that the very least Christians could do is vote, and vote our Biblical values.

Some people have written off elections because they think it’s all rigged. They look at some of the anomalies that have occurred in recent balloting, and they think, “Why should I even bother? My vote won’t count.” Well, if you don’t cast a vote, your potential vote certainly won’t count.

With great understatement, Gary Bauer notes in his End of Day Report (10/28/22), “We know unhinged leftists are not constrained by the basic teachings of Judeo-Christian civilization. They feel justified in doing anything and everything necessary to win.”

But if Christians show up in great numbers, we can overcome the potential for cheating because the Christian conservative voting bloc is huge.

About a decade ago, Alveda King, the niece of MLK, made some interesting observations about Christians and voting in an interview for television.

Alveda told me, “I hear remarks from both sides of the aisle. You know, ‘God’s not a Republican’ and ‘God’s not a Democrat.’ And so, we as God-fearing people don’t need to try to lock in a position to a political party, but certainly our votes must always follow our values.”

One of those values is against abortion and for life. Meanwhile, the left is embracing abortion to the hilt. When we vote Biblical values, we obey what the Lord would have us do.

Writing for the Washington Times (10/30/22), Everett Piper, a former president of a Christian college, opines on how far to the left the left has gone these days because of things like the castration of children and pornography in the schools: “The Democrat party is now so extreme that no serious follower of Christ can align with it. There is no longer any such thing as a ‘Christian Democrat.’”

The aforementioned Dr. Kennedy once declared that it is indeed a sin not to vote. His proof-text was from the passage in the Gospel, where Jesus said that we should render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s (Mark 12:17).

On the issue of voting, he said: “For non-Christian Americans, voting is a privilege and responsibility; for Christians, it is a duty demanded by God that we should fulfill.” [Emphasis his]

It has been said that in America, we get the kind of government we deserve.

Historically, Christians in America applied their faith to virtually every sphere of life, including their politics. While the founding fathers were not all Christians, the vast majority of them were, and more importantly they had a Biblical worldview.

So, for example, they divided power, since they knew man is sinful. James Madison, one of the key architects of the Constitution, noted: “All men having power ought to be distrusted.” This is a Biblical perspective. Sometimes people complain that the Constitution limits the amount of power any one single branch may have. That was by design.

The only poll that counts is the one you cast at election time. Don’t sit this one out. As the late Bishop Harry Jackson once declared, “Too many people died for the right of all people in the nation to vote.”

An Alabama lawsuit on behalf of unborn black babies that’s making its way through the state’s courts is alleging that the abortion industry is deliberately targeting black Americans and other minorities.

If successful, the attorneys and activists behind the case claim that it might ultimately lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent-setting U.S. Supreme Court opinion that struck down state laws against abortion.

Even if the case doesn’t succeed in court, legal analysts and experts in the field say the implications in the court of public opinion are hard to overstate.

The lawsuit was filed by pro-life leader Amie Beth Shaver, named Miss Alabama in 1994, on behalf of “Baby Q,” an African American baby in Alabama who was unborn when the case began. Baby Q represents all other similar black babies in the womb across the state.

According to the complaint, Baby Q and other members of the “class” are being unlawfully discriminated against and targeted for abortion by the industry. Abortion giant Planned Parenthood acknowledges its roots in the eugenics movement, although it says it’s working to rectify that legacy.

“About 80 members of Baby Q’s class, which is African American babies in the womb, lose their lives in abortion every week in Alabama,” Sam McLure, the lead lawyer representing the babies, told The Epoch Times in a phone interview. “Enough is enough. This has to stop.”

Several leaders involved in the case told us that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry more broadly have a long history of racism and support for eugenics, the highly controversial idea that humanity should be “improved” by weeding out allegedly inferior genes from the population.

“This case really boils down to the question of whether states have the right to prohibit eugenics abortion,” McLure added.

Many of the black leaders involved in the case were also behind the Equality Proclamation, signed in 2020 on the 158th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, to shed light on what they describe as the systematic targeting of black babies.

Why Alabama?

Conservative Alabama is the best jurisdiction in the United States to wage this fight, McLure said.

Because of a measure approved by about 60 percent of voters in 2018, Alabama has one of the strongest protections for the unborn in its state Constitution. It says the policy of the state is “to recognize and support the importance of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.”

The Alabama Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized the personhood of unborn babies in other cases not directly involving abortion, McLure and other attorneys involved in the case told The Epoch Times.

The Baby Q case also hinges on a state law known as the Human Life Protection Act, which makes conducting an abortion a felony punishable by up to life in prison. Signed into law by Gov. Kay Ivey in May of 2019, the measure bans all abortions in the state except to protect the health and life of the mother.

That law is widely seen as one of the strongest in the nation prohibiting abortion. It is even stronger than the Mississippi statute currently being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case many legal experts on both sides of the debate believe might overturn or at least scale back Roe v. Wade.

In October of 2019, a federal court issued a preliminary injunction against the Alabama law, arguing that it violates existing U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

As a result, Ivey and state Attorney General Steve Marshall have declined to enforce it for now, as the U.S. Supreme Court once again takes up the issue of abortion.

Legal filings and attorneys in the Baby Q case also point to the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects unenumerated rights, as well as the 14th Amendment, which provides for equal protection under the law.

Finally, the plaintiffs cite the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which reserves to the states or the people all powers not specifically surrendered to the federal government, as authorizing or even requiring state action in defense of the right to life.

Intervening in the case on behalf of Baby Q are almost 50 state lawmakers and a supermajority of the state Senate, as well as dozens of black leaders from across America alleging that the abortion industry is targeting people based on race.

State Republican leaders are also active on the issue, with the executive committee calling on all GOP officials to use every tool at their disposal to stop abortion in Alabama, including shutting down clinics.

The Objective

The Baby Q case, originally filed in October of 2020, is aimed at forcing the government “to protect preborn African-American children from discrimination and to ensure their equal protection under the law,” according to court filings.

“The abortion industry has systematically targeted the African American community for extermination by abortion, and this history is undisputed,” said McLure, citing historical evidence and even recent statements.

More than 20 million black babies have been aborted in the United States, and are three to five times more likely to be aborted than white babies, said McLure, who noted that this sort of racial targeting is clearly prohibited under state and federal law.

“In New York City, more black babies are killed in abortion than are born alive,” he continued. “In Alabama, black Americans make up 27 percent of the population, and yet they make up more than 60 percent of the abortion cases. Nobody can argue that this is not deliberate.”

The plaintiffs in the case are asking the court to order Ivey to enforce the Human Life Protection Act and protect unborn children in the state from abortion and discrimination based on their race.

Eventually, the goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade and restore protections for the unborn that the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case undermined nearly 50 years ago.

Because equal protection and prohibitions on racial discrimination are so firmly established in U.S. jurisprudence, the activists and attorneys behind the case believe it might be a game-changer in the abortion debate.

The next major milestone will come on April 20, when the judge will hold a hearing on the issue after more than a year of inaction.

“Finally, on April 20th, these African American babies are going to get their day in court,” McLure said.

The previous hearing, which took place virtually on Zoom, dealt with whether the case should be public. While the abortion industry is seeking to keep the case behind closed doors, the state judge expressed a willingness to keep the proceedings open.

Attorney Brent Helms, who is representing the legislators seeking to intervene in the case, explained part of the rationale in a phone interview. “If the judge denies this case, that offers us the opportunity to get to the Alabama Supreme Court,” he said. “When the legislature looks at this case, Alabama’s law is more strict and says that the unborn child is a person with constitutional rights,” Helms continued. “Those rights cannot be denied without due process and equal protection.”

He added, “That means the child’s right to life would supersede or at least compete with the mother’s alleged right to privacy, as the right to life is an enumerated right, while the mother’s privacy rights to obtain an abortion were discovered in the penumbras as opposed to actually being written down.”

Regardless of how the state circuit court judge rules, the losing side is expected to immediately appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court. The court is known as one of the nation’s more conservative state supreme courts. From there, it’s practically certain that the losing side will appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Role of the US Supreme Court

Numerous legal experts told The Epoch Times that the courts involved in the Alabama case may wait until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks before making any major decisions.

However, the Mississippi statute only protects unborn babies after 15 weeks, while Alabama is seeking to protect them from the time of conception. The Baby Q case also deals with racial discrimination, while the Mississippi case doesn’t.

The plaintiffs and intervenors hope the apparent conflict between the Alabama state Supreme Court’s positions and the federal district court’s rulings will be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of protecting the right to life of the unborn in Alabama and beyond.

McLure, the lead attorney for Baby Q, said justices from theU.S.  Supreme Court have been leaving “breadcrumbs” in their opinions regarding what elements they might like to see in a major abortion case.

In his concurring opinion issued in the case of Box v. Planned Parenthood, for example, Justice Clarence Thomas raised the issue of racial targeting as an important component.

“We think the type of case the U.S. Supreme Court wants to take on to return abortion issues back to the states involves eliminating the abortion industry’s history of racial targeting, a purely state law claim, and a reliance on the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” McLure said, noting that the Baby Q case had all of those.

“Obviously, we care about all life in the womb, but this case in particular deals with the racial targeting of children of African descent and this is a key issue,” he added.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s own 1973 ruling on abortion acknowledged that if the “suggestion of [a fetus’] personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] amendment.”

The people of Alabama, as well as many medical and scientific experts, have concluded that unborn children are indeed persons, attorneys and leaders involved in the case said. Thus, under the reasoning in Roe v. Wade, the high court must act.

The hope is that, through the courts, the abortion industry can be prevented from targeting unborn persons based on race, and eventually, state governments can regain the authority to protect all unborn lives, McLure said.

Racism in Planned Parenthood, Abortion

Dozens of prominent black leaders from across the United States are involved in the case, arguing that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry have been deliberately targeting the nation’s African American population and other minorities.

It started with Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, black leaders told The Epoch Times.

In her writings and her speeches to groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), Sanger openly advocated for eugenics to control the reproduction of populations she believed were less desirable.

Indeed, in 1939, Sanger launched the infamous “Negro Project” to pay and train black leaders to promote birth control and other measures in the black community.

Eventually, when Alan Guttmacher took the helm of Sanger’s organization, abortion became a major element of the campaign, Georgia gubernatorial candidate and Baby Q intervenor Catherine Davis told The Epoch Times in a phone interview.

After Guttmacher and his allies were able to get the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down state laws protecting the unborn, “Planned Parenthood established their abortion clinics primarily in communities of color across America,” Davis said.

Among other evidence, she pointed to an investigation using 2010 Census data showing that about 80 percent of the organization’s abortion clinics were located in minority neighborhoods.

Planned Parenthood would claim that their clinics are located where there is “the greatest need,” Davis said.

“But if you look at their marketing, they are regularly targeting black Americans,” she added. “On Halloween, they even tweeted out that it was safer for a black woman to have an abortion than to carry the baby to term. This is outrageous.”

According to Davis and the dozens of other black leaders involved in the case, this is racist population control and eugenics.

“The closest example of this is what Hitler did in Nazi Germany,” she added. “Look at Planned Parenthood: This is exactly what Hitler was doing to Jews, but Sanger’s program was more successful because they take care to disguise their agenda as ‘helping’ women and protecting their ‘right’ to abortion.”

Another prominent leader involved in the case, Martin Luther King Jr.’s niece and pro-life leader Alveda King, called this battle “the civil rights issue of our time.”

“No racial group in America has ever been more left out of societal protection nor suffered more deliberate discrimination, dehumanization, agonizing dismemberment, and death legally imposed upon them than black children,” she said.

“The Baby Q case is a gauntlet,” King told The Epoch Times in an email. “Pray that the hammer of justice will rule in favor of life.”

The controversial racial component of abortion also was highlighted nationally in the 2009 documentary “Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America,” which argued that the targeting of black Americans through abortion constitutes a genocide.

Planned Parenthood Data Speaks

In recent years, as the Black Lives Matter movement gained prominence, almost 20 Planned Parenthood affiliates have issued public acknowledgments of racism within the organization.

Planned Parenthood of Greater New York, for instance, condemned Sanger’s “racist legacy,” while announcing that her name would be removed from its building.

“There is overwhelming evidence for Sanger’s deep belief in eugenic ideology,” the group said. “Removing her name is an important step toward representing who we are as an organization and who we serve.”

Planned Parenthood of Pacific Southwest, meanwhile, acknowledged “white supremacy of the past and present,” including “our own organization” and the “implicit bias” that it said still exists within Planned Parenthood today.

“Planned Parenthood has been complicit in upholding systemic racism,” the group’s Illinois affiliate said.

Similar statements confessing to “present participation in white supremacy” and acknowledging that Sanger’s “racist ideals” have “shaped Planned Parenthood today” were issued by numerous other affiliates.

And yet, the massive disparities continue, advocates say. According to a legal filing by black leaders in the Baby Q case that cites state health statistics, 63 percent of the 7,538 “unborn children killed by abortion providers in Alabama” in 2019 were black.

This shows abortion providers “intentionally target African American children,” the black leaders said in the legal filing. And this “violence” based on race would never be tolerated in any other context, they argued.

Where the Case Goes Now

Later this month, a hearing on the case will be held in state court in Alabama to hear arguments from the various parties involved.

In its response to the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood Southeast asked the court to dismiss the case, based on lack of jurisdiction and Baby Q supporters’ alleged failure to identify a claim where the court would be able to provide relief. Neither the national Planned Parenthood office nor the Southeast office responded to requests for comment about the Baby Q litigation or the claims of racism.

The governor’s office is taking the same position as the abortion industry, urging the court to dismiss Baby Q’s case and refuse to allow legislators behind the Human Life Protection Act to intervene.

Gov. Ivey’s office didn’t respond by press time to requests for comment on why the governor has declined to enforce the Human Life Protection Act or why she is asking the court to dismiss the case. Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office also didn’t respond by press time.

Col. John Eidsmoe, a prominent constitutional scholar in Alabama who has worked closely with multiple state Supreme Court justices, told The Epoch Times that he doesn’t anticipate a ruling by the Alabama courts until after the U.S. Supreme Court issues its opinion in the Mississippi case. That ruling is expected by this summer.

“The general feeling is that the Supreme Court will uphold the Mississippi law, but it is not clear yet whether it will overturn or simply modify Roe v. Wade,” added Eidsmoe, a professor of Constitutional law at Oak Brook College of Law & Government Policy as well as senior counsel for the Alabama-based Foundation for Moral Law.

Alabama’s Supreme Court, he said, would likely want to wait for a favorable decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on the Mississippi law before moving on this. Eidsmoe also believes that, with its current makeup, the U.S. Supreme Court would be likely to uphold Alabama’s law protecting the unborn as well.

Potentially even more important than the legal issues is what this case could do in the court of public opinion, he said.

Multiple experts and leaders involved in the case told The Epoch Times that these may be the last days for Roe v. Wade, legal abortion, and racial targeting of minorities by the industry. The outcome of the Baby Q case may play a key role in that historic shift.

This article was originally published by the The Epoch Times.

Wheaton College, once one of the finest Christian colleges in the country, proves yet again that evangelicalism has been corrupted by anti-biblical worldviews.

Recently, during a question-and-answer time following chapel, Wheaton College president, Philip Ryken, was asked if Wheaton teaches critical race theory (CRT). Presumably, the student was not asking whether professors teach about CRT as a much-criticized theory. Presumably, the student was asking if any professors promote or affirm CRT as they teach it. It has been reported that Ryken seemed uncomfortable with the question, but ultimately admitted that yes, Wheaton College does teach CRT.

As I wrote earlier (“Wildly Woke Wheaton College Professor Nathan Cartagena,” “Critical Race Theory Finds a Home a Wheaton College” ) Wheaton College Assistant Professor of Philosophy Nathan Cartagena teaches CRT. His faculty webpage says, “His teaching and scholarship focus on race, racism, [and] critical race theory.” So committed is he to promoting CRT that he made employment at Wheaton conditional on his freedom to promote it.

Cartagena is not alone. Here is the content of several slides Wheaton College Associate Professor of Anthropology Christine Jeske recently showed in class:

1. Race is a concept that was created by white people to gain social and economic privileges.
2. “Whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow ‘them’ to be more like ‘us.’ (Peggy McIntosh)
3. whiteness—A normative structure in society that marginalizes People of Color and privileges White People
4. Assumed racial comfort of whiteness—the habitus of whiteness learned in the United States includes: ▫ white people being able to avoid thinking about race ▫ white fragility

On Oct. 29, 2021, another Wheaton College anthropology professor, Brian Howell, tweeted twice on an article appearing in First Things Magazine and the subsequent response from a Wheaton College theology professor:

1. “Thank you, @commentmag, for providing space for a thoughtful response to a lamentable piece [by Gerald McDermott in First Things Magazine]. You model the sort of Christian commentary we desperately need today.”
2. This is exactly the right response to a lamentable piece from @firstthingsmag. Thank you, @vbacote! Please. Do better, First Things

In both tweets, Howell linked to the “thoughtful response” by Wheaton’s Vince Bacote, Professor of Theology and Director of the Center for Applied Christian Ethics.

The “lamentable” article to which Bacote was responding is titled “Woke Theory at Evangelical Colleges”  by Gerald McDermott, editor of the anthology Race and Covenant, that includes essays by, among others, Alveda King, Carol Swain, Glenn C. Loury, and Robert L. Woodson, Sr.

In a measured tone, McDermott warns Christian parents who “assume that evangelical institutions are free from” secular ideologies like CRT to look more closely at such institutions given some recent events at Wheaton College, Baylor University, and Samford University. He provides specific evidence to justify his concerns.

Bacote begins his “thoughtful response” by expressing his “exasperation and anger” about McDermott’s “lamentable” article, which Bacote claims suffers from “minimal evidence, anonymous voices, and suggestions of infidelity to the faith.” He described the article as “ephemeral” and “thin, because the article seems not to be the result of an effort to know what is really happening at institutions like my own and others.”  Bacote “wonders whether McDermott thought to go to the sources of purported wokeness at Wheaton, Baylor, and Samford, instead of merely to the voices of concern or worry.”

Bacote also acknowledged the temptation to take the “road of holy rage,” but decided instead to write “from a place of lament.” Yeah, right.

Bacote blames the adoption of a “secular gospel” by “evangelical institutions”—presumably including evangelical colleges like Wheaton—on the failure of these institutions to do the following:

to become places founded on the biblical truth of a God who wants His people to be agents of justice, places that are part of a kingdom whose citizens pursue a primary fidelity to God alone … places filled with kingdom citizens who love their neighbors as themselves  … places that lead the way in showing how people across races and cultures can live well together; places whose members seek a sanctified life expressed by forms of public engagement that help our country become a place of flourishing for all citizens.

Ironically, Bacote doesn’t provide any evidence for his rather breathtaking indictment of evangelical institutions. He doesn’t even try to prove that evangelical institutions have failed to become places founded on the biblical truth of a God who wants His people to become agents of justice or that they have failed to become places filled with kingdom citizens who love their neighbors as themselves. Bacote provides less evidence for his expansive charges than McDermott does for his limited claims.

Bacote alleges McDermott took a statement made by Dr. Sheila Caldwell out of context—a statement McDermott included as evidence for his claim that Wheaton may be awokening.

Until June, Caldwell was Wheaton’s Chief Cultural Engagement Officer, a position she left to become Southern Illinois University System’s Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Chief Diversity Officer. In order to fill in the gap that so incensed Bacote, I will provide more of the context of Caldwell’s surprising (and some would say inappropriate) speech to students at Wheaton’s “Inaugural Racialized Minority Recognition Ceremony” (to clarify the murky sophistry, this was Wheaton’s first racially segregated graduation ceremony). Here is the larger context of the quote McDermott included in his “lamentable” article. These are the words of Dr. Sheila Caldwell:

We must resist America and her institutions when they place limits on our God-given abilities and attempt to regulate us to a caste system, which is defined as a system that presumes the supremacy of one group over another based on arbitrary boundaries to keep the right groups in their assigned place. In other words, if you are a racialized ethnic minority, the caste system communicates that your place in society is beneath the majority or privileged caste. …

As a black woman, many have tried to condition me to believe that if I do not assimilate or if I do not conform to the white power structures or if I’m not deferential and submissive to the patriarchy, then I’m a problem, [that] if I speak boldly, and directly, and clearly that I’ll be perceived as someone who is angry or ill-tempered. Their aim is to have me shrink myself to make them feel more comfortable and to not resist the caste position that was not only assigned to me but my parents, my grandparents, and my great-grandparents in America.

And I’m not the only woman from a racialized ethnic background that has been imprisoned by a tyrannical caste system. One aspect of living with dignity is acknowledging others who have suffered under the dominant caste. Dr. Larycia Hawkins was another woman who experienced more pain than protection because she was not a member of the privileged group.

During my early tenure at Wheaton College, I embarked on a listening tour and came to learn from the testimonies of over ninety individuals that Dr. Hawkins was deeply admired by faculty, staff, students as well as alumni in the Wheaton College community. Every last one of them initiated a conversation without my prompting. I’ve never spoken to Dr. Hawkins. I’ve never met her. But without my prompting, over ninety people decided they wanted me to know what they thought of her.

The overwhelming majority spoke favorably about her unflappable disposition and deep convictions that was [sic] misinterpreted by some as insolence and insubordination.

As I close out my tenure at Wheaton College, I continue to bend my ear to stories told and untold about Dr. Hawkins. Stories that speak to her walking with dignity and declaring her full humanity as a black woman, stories of her maintaining grace, integrity, and composure when she was pressured to know her place and stay in her place. She refused to defer to structures and processes that would cement her position in the American caste system.

In the same way, I would encourage you to not only resist powerful, inequitable infrastructures but to work relentlessly and passionately to pursue anti-racism—not only for yourselves—but for all who are equally, wonderfully, and fearfully made in the image of God.

What I would also like to say is that the spirit of God led me to say that, so please don’t call the Alumni Office. Please don’t email SAC [Senior Administrative Cabinet].

Does it concern Bacote or Howell that while First Things subscribers were free to read McDermott’s article or not, Caldwell delivered her screed to a captive audience there to see their children’s accomplishments honored—not to hear an embittered social justice warrior accuse without evidence Wheaton College of racism?

I’m not sure how Caldwell knew that it was the spirit of God that led her to condemn her employers at a graduation ceremony and without providing evidence. And I’m not sure how she knew it was the spirit of God that led her to remain silent on other aspects of the Larycia Hawkins mess—aspects that many of the parents in the audience might not have known.

For example, Caldwell could have mentioned that Larycia Hawkins said Muslims and Christians worship the same God. Wheaton administrators and the Board of Trustees may have found that more significant than Hawkins’ unflappability.

On Dec. 10, 2016, Hawkins wrote in a Facebook post,

I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book. And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God.

I wonder too if Bacote was troubled by the absence of evidence from Caldwell for her claims.

Who tried to condition Caldwell to believe that she had to assimilate or conform to white power structures or to believe that if she spoke directly and clearly, she would be perceived as angry?

How did that conditioning happen?

What specifically are the white power structures to which she was conditioned to assimilate?

Was this conditioning implemented by one person, two, ten? Were the conditioners white or black? Was the conditioning part of a system, or was it committed by sinful individuals? If it was part of a structure, what was the structure?

Who misinterpreted Larycia Hawkins’ “deep convictions”?

What specifically did Hawkins say that was viewed as “insolence and insubordination”? Who viewed Hawkins’ mysterious statements as “insolence and insubordination”?

Since “Every last one” of the ninety people “initiated a conversation” with Caldwell about Hawkins without Caldwell’s “prompting,” what exactly was she asking when she embarked on her listening tour over three years ago? It’s odd that alumni would seek out a new employee to share their unsolicited feelings about a person who hadn’t worked at Wheaton for three years. Enquiring minds would like to know a bit about the political orientation of the ninety people who pursued Caldwell to share their unsolicited feelings about Hawkins.

One wonders if Caldwell thought to go to the sources of purported lack of protection for or misinterpretation of Hawkins or if Bacote thought to go to Caldwell for the names and evidence.

Bacote may have a point about the failure of evangelical institutions to address justice from a biblical perspective. I can’t recall hearing from Wheaton College professors or President Ryken about the injustice of men masquerading as women and invading women’s bathrooms and locker rooms. I can’t recall hearing about Wheaton profs protesting the manifestly unjust sexual integration of women’s sports or the efforts to compel teachers to refer to students by incorrect pronouns that deny God’s created order. Do the social justice warriors among Wheaton faculty protest the obscene novels and plays purchased with their tax dollars and which promote biblically prohibited sexual deviance to children? Do Bacote, Howell, and other wokesters at this leading evangelical institution lead the fight against the chemical and surgical mutilation of minors and adults as a “treatment” for healthy bodies created by God? Do those failures exasperate and enrage Vince Bacote and Brian Howell?

In conclusion, Gerald McDermott’s thoughtful warnings are warranted.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Wheaton-College-Is-Not-Your-Grandfathers-College.mp3

Before you watch the video below, get yourself a bucket into which you can spit those nails.

This video was taken by unhinged, self-righteous, virtue-signaling, illogical, morally vacuous, anti-Catholic, homosexual activist Pennsylvania State Representative Brian Sims (D-Philadelphia) while for over eight minutes, he harasses an elderly woman who is praying the rosary in front of a Planned Parenthood abattoir, repeatedly calling her actions shameful, disgusting, and grotesque.

He begins by hurling the common but ignorant challenge so many feticidal maniacs hurl at those who believe all humans are created in the image and likeness of God: In rage, he demands to know how many babies she has fed and clothed today. If anyone can get him off that high horse he’s riding and get him to take some valium, they should ask him if he thinks opposition to infanticide is a position that can be rationally and morally held only if one is committed to adopting, feeding, and clothing every baby whose life is spared.

He repeatedly accuses her of telling women what they can do with their bodies, which, unless he’s dimwitted, he knows is a lie. No defender of the right of humans in the womb not to be exterminated are telling women what they should do with their own bodies. They’re trying to tell pregnant mothers what they should not do to the bodies of their living children. Of course, Sims knows that, but lying liars lie.

Sims castigates her multiple times for the sin of being white, by virtue of which unchosen, morally neutral condition she has a lot—according to Sims—to repent of, including of trying to stop mothers from having their human offspring exterminated. While castigating her, he—a big, burly, buffed-up hulk of a man—makes sure to virtue-signal that he too is white and, therefore, has some reparations to make to—well, everyone, I guess. Ironically, while confronting her in front of an organization that targets the babies of women of color, Sims shouts that she is racist.

He rails on about the praying woman’s purported judgmentalism, condemning her for allegedly “shaming” women,  even as he spews his unholy judgment like virus-infected spittle on her, recording her in order to publicly shame her.

He repeatedly charges her with immorality, which is rich from a man who endorses human slaughter, voluntarily places his homoeroticism at the center of his identity, and celebrates cross-dressing.

Clearly, his moral code is not derived from Scripture, so what is the source of his moral code, which includes the right to slaughter humans and engage in unnatural sexual acts that harm bodies, minds, hearts, and souls? Do his moral convictions arise from within his own mind and heart? If so, how does he know they’re true?

Is he a scientific materialist who believes humans emerged from the primordial ooze and evolved from random happy accidents? If so, his moral beliefs are merely accidents of nature as well and have no claim on anyone. His high dudgeon would be too a biochemical accident—perhaps an undigested bit of beef—and not something rationally or morally coughed up on any elderly women of any color.

Come to think of it, what if the elderly woman had been black—someone like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s niece, pro-life warrior Alveda King?  Sims would have lost a quarter of his venomous screed.

Remember this video the next time you have an opportunity to support a crisis pregnancy center, pro-life organization, or candidate for public office who has the wisdom and spine to stand boldly for the unborn. Remember it when you next have an opportunity to speak truth but are tempted to remain silent to keep the peace. And remember it as the movement to legalize infanticide grows.

And let this inspire you to speak out against the efforts in Illinois to make human slaughter even easier.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your state senator, state representative, and to Gov. Pritzker. Ask them to stop targeting innocent pre-born children and vulnerable women in Illinois. Ask your state senator, state representative, and Gov. Pritzker to oppose all anti-life legislation.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/RepSims.mp3

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.

Written by Anne Reed

For those of who have fought for the reversal of Roe v. Wade for years, it has seemed, at times, like a giant too powerful to topple. But the landscape is changing. As little David stood with five smooth rocks in hand, one made its way to the slingshot. Maybe, just maybe, a similar rock is prepped and ready in our day. Now.

Politically speaking, the divide between abortion supporters and opponents is as wide as the east is from the west. With the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the air has become increasingly volatile as the real-life prospect of overturning the 1973 landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide is coming into view.

Also remarkable is the timing of a new film Roe v. Wade, produced by Alveda King, niece of the late Martin Luther King, Jr. The movie is currently under production and is causing quite a stir.

A number of cast and crew members have quit, citing the pro-life slant or confusion caused by the privacy requirements concerning the script. You would think it was being produced by President Donald J. Trump himself the way the liberal, agenda-driven mainstream media is going after it – thus the great need for confidentiality.

Tucker Carlson of Fox News put his finger on it when he asked director Nick Loeb a rhetorical question during a recent interview:

“If you try to make a film that doesn’t celebrate that Supreme Court decision as a watermark in the advancement of the human race, I think you’re going to run into some trouble, don’t ya’ think?”

Well, that was a mouthful.

I always find it amusing when the left refers to the court case as “Roe” for short as they make their rabid pro-abortion case – as if Roe herself was making their case. Not so. Ms. Roe (Norma McCorvey), who died last February, longed to see the case overturned. She wrote two books detailing the behind-the-scenes manipulation and lies, and her new life as a Christ follower and pro-life activist: I am Roe (1994), and Won by Love (1998).

The liberal media is working hard to discredit the Roe v. Wade movie – anything to keep the truth buried in the dark. But in the midst of the fierce attacks, the producer and director are determined to show on the big screen the back alley manipulating that brought the infamous case to the Supreme Court and to its perceived final victory.

Let’s just look at one article published by Yahoo News from The Cut as an example. The writer went so far as to link a story from Jezebel.com, an internet site sharing a name with King Ahab’s wife, the biblical supermodel of rebellion and wickedness. While the site attempted to paint Martin Luther King, Jr. as pro-abortion, Alveda clarified that while her uncle never supported abortion, his wife did, as did Alveda herself in her early years. Alveda now openly shares about her past abortions, as well as her transformation from darkness and death to light and life.

The Yahoo article criticized the movie for including Center for Medical Progress investigative video footage exposing Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted baby organs and its eerily calloused contempt for human life. Of course, the author of the article is sure to remind her readers that Planned Parenthood “vociferously and repeatedly denied” the actions portrayed in videos that were, by the way, provided in their entirety on YouTube.

The writer also claims the film will likely be rated R because of “several graphic scenes depicting aborted fetuses,” including one showing “a dozen buckets of tiny fetuses and baby parts” found in an abortionist’s hotel room during a police sting.

It is baffling that abortion proponents find it morally repugnant to show “graphic” actual images of aborted fetuses. If it is merely a clump of cells, a parasite, contents of pregnancy, or whatever else they choose to call these precious human lives, then why is it so offensive to show?

I could go on…and on.

Before directing the film, Loeb was best known for his custody battle over frozen embryos shared with former girlfriend, Sofia Vergara. He was approached by the director/screenwriter of Roe v. Wade who explained that a 1989 made-for-TV movie about Roe v. Wade didn’t really lay out the truth surrounding the case.

When Loeb read the script, he was shocked.

“Everyone in America has heard of Roe v. Wade, but no one really knows the true story of what led up to that,” he explained.

He then went on to read about 40 different books and the bios of others linked to the story, like Norma McCorvey. And he became determined to make the truth known.

For more information about the movie, go to roevwademovie.com by clicking here.

This article originally posted at AFA.net.

 “The guilty charge of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, dethroned ruler of  ‘Gosnell’s House of Horrors’ may spark justice for more women and babies across America,” said Dr. Alveda King, Director of African American Outreach for Gospel of Life Ministries. “Justice is served with this verdict, but injustice will continue unless we end abortion in this country. Gosnell was not the only abortionist who killed mothers and their born babies, he was just the one who got caught. Now we have to turn out attention to charging, trying and convicting others like him.”

Gosnell was convicted of three counts of murder of three babies aborted in his 3801 Lancaster abortion clinic in Philadelphia. He is also convicted of death by involuntary manslaughter of Karnamaya Mongar, who died from drug complications during her abortion procedure in Gosnell’s den.

Tomorrow, King will join host Star Parker of CURE along with Day Gardner of the National Black Prolife Union, Catherine Davis and other African American leaders of the National Black Prolife Coalition in Washington, D. C. for a press conference and briefing. The leaders are asking the question: “Abortion and the impact on Black America…is there a Gosnell in your community?” Like King, the Black Leaders say that Gosnell isn’t an exception, that there are abortion horrors happening in 2013 in abortion facilities all across America. They blame lack of regulations and strong arm lobbying efforts of Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocates for allowing Gosnell and “others like him” to operate and commit horrors that are now being exposed.

King also believes that “once the Cleveland abductions by the Castro brothers are investigated, America will begin to clearly understand that women are often victims of coerced abortion and should be protected from predators. These rescued girls are not the only ones in America who have been forcibly subjected to abortion. Abortion by coercion should be thoroughly investigated and outlawed. For instance, in the Gosnell situation, there is a case of a teenage girl who claims to have been forcibly taken to Gosnell’s clinic and held down by force during a traumatic abortion,” King said, referring to the reports that the abducted girls in Cleveland were hit in the stomach until they aborted babies conceived during their brutal captivity.

“Cases like the Gosnell case and now pending Castro case all go to prove that there is a dehumanization of women and children not just across the globe but here at home that has been swept under the rug for far too long,” King told a group today at a conference on human trafficking held in Atlanta. “Let’s just pray that this Gosnell conviction will spark more justice for women and babies in America as time goes on.”

As a side note, King added: “Charles Ramsey, the ‘hero’ for saving the kidnapped girls in Cleveland is an African American. Finally a black man is noted for doing a good deed. The media just needs to highlight more of these type of human interest reports, not just for African Americans, but for everyone.”