The looming threat of a Republican-led U.S. has sparked a movement among U.S. Senators from both sides of the aisle. Pro-pot federal lawmakers are currently pushing to get two pieces of cannabis banking legislation passed before year-end: the SAFE act and the HOPE act.

Don’t be fooled—this legislation isn’t providing safety or hope to anyone.

A bipartisan coalition, which includes U.S. Senate Banking Chairman Sherrod Brown (D-OH), U.S. Senators Steve Daines (R-MT) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) met with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) last week to discuss passing the SAFE Banking Act (S. 910) during the lame-duck session. The SAFE Act, which would make it easier for cannabis businesses to take out business loans and open bank accounts, has already bounced around in the house a good bit, but has stagnated in the U.S. Senate, unable to satisfy either conservatives or progressives.

The bill, however, may pick up steam, and seems likely to pass. Progressives have opposed the bill, calling the bill hypocritical: they are unwilling to support a bill that would benefit weed businesses while many people are still imprisoned for marijuana-related offenses. Apparently this blatant moral posturing has been compelling, as some Republicans have voiced their support of a companion bill, the HOPE Act.

The HOPE Act (H.R. 6129), introduced by U.S. Representatives David Joyce (R-OH) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), is an expungement bill. The bill offers federal grants to states to offset the administrative and financial burden of expunging cannabis offenses from criminals’ records. These bills come on the heels of a bill proposing the expansion of medical marijuana research, passed in the Senate by unanimous consent just last Wednesday.

It remains to be seen whether the HOPE Act is still a bridge too far for many Republicans (or their constituencies, at least). The SAFE Act does, however, appear to have significant Republican support, though many Democrats are opposed to it, believing that the bill doesn’t go far enough.

We’re all accustomed to this sort of thing from progressive legislators. Their only guiding principle seems to be the introduction of vice into society—weed bills like the SAFE Act and the HOPE Act are what we’ve come to expect from left-wing “Progressives.” However, we really ought to start questioning what the so-called conservatives representing us are really conserving. Since when is it a conservative value to promote business loans to cannabis shops? Since when is it a conservative value to undermine justice by expunging criminal records willy-nilly? And appeals to the virtues of free-market economics aren’t helpful here. Free markets in the promotion of public vice are hardly commendable.

H.L. Mencken said somewhere that electing upstanding citizens to government office is like staffing the brothels with virgins. This plays out before our very eyes time and again: our “conservatives” are elected on the basis of promises to promote family values, fight for law and order, and defend Constitutional rights. And time and again they inevitably are caught up in the promotion of legislation and causes fundamentally opposed to their pretended conservatism.

Of course, this is nothing new—politicians have been disappointing their constituents for as long as there have been governments. God even tells us that it is the nature of political officers to disappoint their people (1 Sam. 8:10-22). Fine, and c’est la vie. But let’s stop pretending that the “conservatives” in our government are actually conserving anything valuable. They’re just as caught up in the game as the progressives and are more than happy to promote vice as long as they think it will get them reelected.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to let your federal lawmakers that you do not want to help the drug cartels with their marijuana sales and businesses. As for the HOPE act, there is a process for expunging federal criminal records which should include the entire criminal record and history. As we know from a Cook County prosecutor, it takes criminal persistence to wind up in prison for violating marijuana laws, saying it “almost always takes at least five arrests for cannabis violations before jail or prison time is considered.

As you read this, remember how many times leftists assured Americans that homosexuals wanted nothing more than to be left alone to do their thing in the privacy of their bedrooms. And remember how they asserted that the legalization of same-sex “marriage” would affect no one, no way, no how.

Two days ago, the Corruption of Marriage Act (COMA)—known euphemistically by leftists as the Respect for Marriage Act—passed the U.S. Senate and will now go back to the U.S. House where it is expected to slither quickly through a U.S. House vote like a snake in the grass.

Recognizing the unconscionable and unconstitutional threat to religious liberty posed by COMA, U.S. Senators Mike Lee, James Lankford, and Marco Rubio proposed amendments that would strengthen religious protections, all of which were rejected. Adding insult to conservatives to injury to the First Amendment, twelve treasonous Republicans voted for COMA.

Why would anyone on the right or left reject amendments that would strengthen religious liberty protections? The amendments failed because Democrats have no respect for religious free exercise protections, especially if they come into conflict with the cultural and political desires of those with deviant erotic predilections.

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz describes the shape of things to come after COMA is signed into law:

The so-called Respect for Marriage Act is going to set the stage for the Biden IRS to target people of faith, and in particular, to deny tax exempt status to churches, charities, universities, and K-12 schools. This bill creates a federal cause of action to sue institutions that believe marriage is the union of one man and one woman. There are going to be hundreds of lawsuits filed all across this country, forcing underfunded defendants to settle and violate their beliefs or close their doors. That’s what the Democrats want. And 12 Republicans went along with it. 

COMA will overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which preserved in federal law the cross-cultural and historical definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. COMA will force the federal government and all state governments to recognize homoerotic, non-conjugal relationships as marriages. In other words, COMA codifies the unconstitutional U.S. Supreme Court Obergefell v. Hodges decision.

Quisling Senator Mitt Romney made a statement both silly and repugnant in support of COMA:

This legislation … signals that Congress — and I — esteem and love all of our fellow Americans equally.

Romney, as a sitting U.S. Senator, has proclaimed that esteem and love for others depend on passing laws that codify that marriage has no connection to sexual differentiation or reproductive potential. In so doing, he has insulted the thousands of people who believe otherwise, including many whose beliefs are central to their identity as Christians. And he has lent Republican weight to the allegations of hatred hurled at conservatives every day from every corner of American life.

Signaling esteem and love for all Americans equally does not require Congress, Mitt Romney, or any other citizen to affirm any particular beliefs about marriage. Presumably, Romney esteems and loves his fellow Americans who would like to marry their four poly partners. Does he seek to legalize plural marriage in order to signal his virtuous love and esteem?

What about adult women who want to marry their fathers or men who want to marry their brothers or young adult nephews? Does Romney want to signal to them how much he and Congress esteem and love them?

Such juvenile foolishness was bipartisan. U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer, who has a “married” lesbian daughter, emoted,

By passing this bill, the Senate is sending a message that every American needs to hear: No matter who you are or who you love, you, too, deserve dignity and equal treatment under the law.

Schumer claims to believe that dignity and equal treatment under the law require the law to recognize any union constituted by “love.” That will be very good news to Minor-Attracted Persons. All they have to do now is grow their lobby and change the definition of consent.

But the core question regarding marriage has nothing to do equality, dignity, love, or esteem. The core question is, “What is marriage.”

Romney’s foolish ideas about the role of government echo former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion in Obergefell:

The nature of marriage is that … two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality. This is true for all persons, whatever their sexual orientation. … There is dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry. … [Same-sex couples’] hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.

At least Kennedy acknowledged that marriage has a nature. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to know what that nature is or why the government is involved with marriage.

He doesn’t explain why marriage is composed of two people. He doesn’t explain what criteria he used to determine that “there is dignity” in the erotic/romantic bond between two people of the same sex. He doesn’t explain why not being able to marry someone of the same sex dooms homosexual couples to “live in loneliness.” And where oh where does Kennedy find a right to dignity in the U.S. Constitution? If such a right lurks somewhere in the penumbra and emanations of the U.S. Constitution, how is it granted to those whose beliefs about marriage are attacked as hateful by members of Congress?

Here’s yet another remarkable statement from Kennedy on the dignity-dispensing role of government:

I thought [dignity-bestowing] was the whole purpose of marriage. It bestows dignity on both man and woman in a traditional marriage. It’s dignity-bestowing, and these parties say they want to have that, that same ennoblement.

The “whole purpose of marriage” is to bestow dignity on sexually differentiated marital unions? Really? Many Americans thought the inclusion of sexual differentiation in the legal definition of marriage was a recognition of the intrinsic nature of marriage and served to unite mothers and fathers to each other and to any children that may result from their sexual union, which in turn serves to protect the inherent needs and rights of children, which in turn serves the public good. The job of the government is not to affirm love or confer dignity on any type of union—conjugal and reproductive or erotic and sterile.

Always two or two dozen steps ahead of conservatives, leftists are anticipating the day when Obergefell will be overturned, and states will once again be free either to recognize in law what marriage in reality is or redefine marriage to help homoerotically attracted persons pretend their relationships are marital. Leftists want to ensure that states in which citizens vote to recognize true marriage are forced to recognize legal same-sex faux-marriages performed in other states.

COMA’s sponsors also cynically included interracial marriage in the bill, which strikes many as bizarre. Is there a movement afoot that no one has heard of to ban interracial marriage? Of course not. Including a reference to interracial marriage serves two pernicious purposes of leftists.

First, it is an implicit way to reinforce their nonsensical comparison of skin color to homoerotic desires.

Second, it enables leftists to cast aspersions on Republicans who oppose COMA. Unprincipled Democrats can now say in voices trembling with faux-umbrage, “Republican Senator (fill in the blank) voted against a bill to protect interracial marriage” as they wag their crooked fingers.

The GOP needs an overhaul. We need a Republican National Committee chair not named Ronna Romney McDaniel. We need men and women with working moral compasses and spines of steel. And we need to give fools and quislings like the dirty dozen in Congress a big joyous heave ho.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has identified a true major crisis in America, and then suggested the most absurd solution. In a recent speech, Schumer said:

“Now more than ever we’re short of workers.”

This statement is true. Why is that?

First, we need to consider that Progressives have cultivated in Generation Z (youth born from approximately 1997-2012) an entitlement mentality. Gen Z is more likely than any previous generation to believe it is the responsibility of government to take care of them and meet their needs from cradle to grave. They have had access to many socialist-leaning policies that have de-incentivized them to work. Others have found ways to develop a lifestyle as a perpetual student, thus delaying getting an actual job. Many have found they make more money from the government by not working rather than working.

But there is another problem Schumer also correctly identified:

“We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to.”

Schumer’s Solution? (Imagine All the People)

“The only way we’re going to have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants—the DREAMers and all of them—because our ultimate goal is to help the DREAMers—but get a path to citizenship for all 11 million, or however many undocumented, there are here.”

Who Are the DREAMers?

Allow me to give a quick definition of “DREAMers.” “The DREAM Act” was a bill presented in 2001 by U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL). It never gained traction, even though it popped up in Congress several times (never being approved). The goal was to create a law that allowed anyone who arrived in America under the age of sixteen (and had been a resident for five years or more as well as a few other criteria), to obtain legal citizenship. The bill went nowhere until Barack Obama created an executive order, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals act (DACA), making the concepts contained in The DREAM Act an informal policy in 2012. Many have argued that this executive order was unconstitutional.

The Crisis of Declining Birth

In a previous article for IFI in 2018, I wrote about the “New Demographic Winter,” coming economically to America. I discussed the history of the over-population myth and the perils that occur when a national fertility rate dips below 2.1 births per (hopefully married!) woman. According to the World Economic Forum in 2021: “The United States has seen a 50% decline in birth rates between 1950 and 2021, from 25 births per 1,000 people to 12.” More specifically, in May of 2021, America reached a record low of 55.8 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age.

Why Fewer Babies?

There are many reasons for this phenomenon.

First, having children is strongly discouraged in our culture as women are told they are “wasting their education” if they do have children. More women than ever are obtaining college degrees, and they are taught that having children means they are throwing away everything they invested their time and money in achieving.

Second, in 1950 women were having babies at 20 years of age. Today, many women are delaying marriage, and thus childbearing, until their early 30s (shortening their birthing years).

Third, contraceptives have been nearly universally utilized, for even married women, making it easier for them to avoid pregnancy.

Fourth, government-created inflation has created a scenario where many couples feel they simply can’t afford to have children (especially considering the massive college debt many bring into their marriage). Parents are told by the media that a family will spend on average $233,610 per child before they are 18 years old. This scares many off from the idea of having more than one or two children.

Fifth, Progressives have championed the growth of homosexual relationships that, of course, cannot produce children.

There are other factors, of course, but the one that is completely ignored by Schumer and the media is the most troubling.

Mass Genocide of the Unborn

Since Roe v. Wade in 1973, over 60,000,000 babies have been brutally murdered in their mothers’ wombs.  Most of these babies, had they lived, would be working in today’s economy. Whose party has been the champion of this horrendous policy? Schumer’s democratic party of course. They created the very problem they now lament. However, rather than turning to the natural solution of encouraging men and women to marry and have their own children, Schumer has turned to a “solution” that is also fraught with problems that we will experience down the road.

Mass Amnesty

Schumer wants to make 11,000,000 illegal immigrants (or however many there are) naturalized citizens. America has always been a nation that welcomes immigrants. Both Republicans and Democrats want there to be legal pathways for people from other countries to come to America and create a new home.

Even the Trump administration suggested policies that would find a pathway of citizenship for those who were brought to America by their parents as children. No one is advocating for being unsympathetic to the plight of young children, or to those who were moved here through no choice of their own. The Democrats like to highlight undocumented children, because we are all sympathetic to their plight, but they are only a small fraction of the millions Schumer is suggesting we admit to citizenship.

If a child is deported along with his or her parents, the Democrats say we are uncaring. But let’s suppose we allow the DREAMer children to stay in the country, but deport their illegal parents. What kind of life is that for a child? What child wants to be separated from his or her parents? That’s way more cruel than deporting the entire family. Not to mention children left alone in this country will likely be raise by the government, costing tax-payers billions of dollars for their care. So Democrats say we should just let the whole family stay.

The problem is, mass amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, coupled with no strategic border control, will only entice millions more to flood across the border illegally, using resources that should belong to American citizens.

A mass integration of millions of undocumented aliens does not allow for the careful analysis and background checks necessary to ensure that we are not white-listing millions of people with criminal records from other countries who have been hiding here within our borders. We know many have come to America smuggling drugs, contraband or even participating in human trafficking. These are not the kinds of citizens America needs.

At a time when our health care system and many government agencies are already overwhelmed, and when current housing is in short supply, documenting that many illegal immigrants will make the cost of living for current citizens skyrocket, and will make resources scarcer. This isn’t true with babies because they aren’t all born on the same day. For current citizens who have been trying to find work, this will make their search more difficult.

It is generally agreed that the primary goal of Democrats in promoting this kind of legislation is to buy votes from these illegals who will feel obligated to vote for the party who welcomed them in, even though they didn’t go through proper legal channels. This is part of the Democrats’ strategy, along with election redistricting, relaxing voting requirements and other such initiatives to wrest future national elections away from the Republican party for good.

Immigration Reform

In the end, we definitely need a much more efficient immigration process that allows for a faster legal documentation for law-abiding applicants to become a part of our American way of life. Our current bureaucracy is terribly inefficient (as is the process of parents seeking to adopt needy children through foreign and domestic adoption). We can achieve our goals of a safe and diverse population through a balanced, common-sense approach to both reasonable immigration and encouraging domestic birth.

The one thing we should not continue to do is to kill off our own offspring and try to compensate for it by throwing our borders open to any criminal who wants to invade our country without going through proper screening and vetting.

Why has Illinois become a stinking bog of degradation, violence, and fiscal collapse? It’s because we have scores of “leaders,” and activists who are as unable to distinguish right from wrong as they are unable to distinguish men from women. One of those activists is Oren Jacobson, devoted advocate for the slaughter of preborn humans, founder of Men4Choice, board member of pro-human slaughter Personal PAC, self-identifying “thought leader,” and self-promoter extraordinaire who recently said,

Everything we’re doing is focused on getting what are really millions of men—who in theory are pro-choice but are completely passive when it comes to their voice and their energy and their time in the fight for abortion rights and abortion access—to get off the sidelines and step in the fight as allies.

And here I thought men were supposed to shut up about abortion.

In an interview on MSNBC with Zerlina Maxwell after the U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito was leaked, Jacobson emoted,

I want to say one thing to … all the women watching, everybody who can get pregnant, how deeply sorry I am that we’re in this moment. I’m feeling very emotional about that.

He had to add that last statement in case everybody who can get pregnant didn’t notice his phony voice-cracking indicating he was about to fake-cry. Jacobson wants everybody who can get pregnant to know he has Deep Feelings about the possibility that pregnant women—and men—may not be legally allowed to slaughter their offspring. Nuttin’ means nuttin’ without Deep Feelings.

And boy, oh, boy does the emotive Jacobson have Deep Feelings—deep feelings and a vivid imagination. The mere thought of women not being free to slaughter their unborn leads Jacobson to imagine a horrific dystopian handmaid’s tale where rapists roam free and women’s very humanity is denied:

If this is, in fact, the ruling that the Court will hand down, that in at least 13 states right away and most likely in 25 0r 26 states pretty quickly, a rapist will have more rights than a woman in those states. And it is beyond horrifying to imagine a future in which your humanity, your dignity, your ability to control your life is valued less than a rapist.

What precisely are the “rights” rapists will have that women will not in states that acknowledge the humanity of unborn humans? And how are the humanity and dignity of women diminished by recognizing the humanity and dignity of their offspring and protecting their right not to be exterminated?

I’m not exactly sure what the self-identifying “thought leader” Jacobson means when he says that restricting or banning human slaughter means women’s humanity, dignity, and ability to control their lives are “valued less than a rapist.” Rape is illegal, and if caught, rapists are arrested and punished.

Maybe he’s referring to opposition to abortion in cases of rape. Many people who believe in the sanctity, humanity, and dignity of all human life believe that humans created through criminal acts should not be punished for the crimes of their fathers. Such a belief does not constitute either a devaluation of women or an elevated valuation of rapists.

Rather than feeling horrified that 64 million humans have been slaughtered since 1973 because they were imperfect, inconvenient, or unwanted by their mothers, Jacobson is horrified that the killings may stop.

Jacobson sidestepped an awkward question from interviewer Maxwell who said the quiet part out loud, tacitly admitting that men and women use human slaughter as a means of contraception:

One of the things I think we need to talk about … is how men benefit from abortion. … There are men who would not be CEOs but for access to contraception. Tell us how men benefit.

Jacobson was politically canny and cunning enough to avoid responding to that question. Instead, he launched into an autonomy answer that—again—ignores the person with the most at stake and no voice whatsoever:

I want every pro-choice male to step into this out of an obligation to stand up for the freedoms to those most directly impacted. … You deserve the right, within the context of a healthy relationship, to make decisions with your partner that are in the best interest of your family. … In my own personal life, when we have had moments in planning our family … at no point did I give a rip what Ted Cruz, Greg Abbott, Ron DeSantis, Donald Trump, Mike Pence, or any other of these anti-abortion men with power across the country thought about what my wife and I should do. And that is why, to me … this isn’t just a woman’s issue.

When considering whether the “product” of conception between two humans is a human; whether that “product” has humanity, dignity, and value; whether the “product’s” body is her mother’s body; and whether a more developed human should be able to kill the “product,” I don’t give a rip what Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, J.B. Pritzker, Jared Polis, Jan Schakowsky, Gavin Newsom, Oren Jacobson, or any other pro-human slaughter men and women with power who refuse to recognize that abortion involves two human bodies thinks.

And that’s why this isn’t just a woman’s issue.

Jacobson continues with his dissembling and evasion:

The simple reality is that the men in America who oppose abortion, who are using their privilege and their power, are not shy, and they are not quiet. So, the question isn’t why shouldn’t men get loud. It’s why haven’t we been getting louder sooner.

Surely, Jacobson knows that men who support the legal right of women to off their offspring have been “using their privilege and power” to rob the unborn of their right to live. In fact, it was seven men, six of whom were white, who in a raw exercise of their power and privilege denied the humanity, dignity, and right to life of preborn humans in Roe v. Wade.

And surely, Jacobson knows why men haven’t “been getting louder sooner.” The reason is that feminist harpies have been shrieking for years that men have no right to speak on abortion—despite the fact that the babies killed have fathers too.

But I agree with Jacobson. Men should get involved. Men should donate to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers and advocacy organizations.

Men, who should be the protectors of and providers for women and children, should march shoulder-to-shoulder with women in pro-life marches. Men should listen to the voices of women who were pressured to have their sons and daughters killed, who live with bone-deep grief and regret, and who are angry that their country tolerates the slaughter of thousands of babies every year.

And to quote Jacobson,

Men, your job is to carry the voices of those women to your peers and buddies, to call them, text them, post on social media about this, to start lifting up those voices and owning this conversation amongst your friends.

The very lives of humans depend on the voices of men and women who know truth.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Jacobson-Another-Foolish-Illinois-Activist.mp3

The big news of the week has been confirmed by Chief Justice John Roberts. The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade in the very near future, possibly by the end of June. In a news release from the High Court, however, they were careful to point out that, although the leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito is authentic, “it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.” In other words, the ruling is not official yet.

If it becomes official, it will be an enormous victory for the sanctity of human life in America. Repealing Roe is what pro-lifers have marched, prayed, worked, and voted for since 1973.

We are relieved to know that many states will restrict or completely outlaw abortion, thereby saving untold number of women and unborn babies from becoming victims. Yet, it’s sobering to realize that states like Illinois, New York, Maryland and California will become abortion destination points for those who are determined to kill their pre-born babies. And seeing women come out in droves screaming about the possibility of losing their right to kill their children is a grave reminder that we are in a spiritual battle.

The work before us continues, especially in Illinois. Our ongoing mission is to educate family members, friends and neighbors on the evils of abortion. We’ll need to continue working to change hearts and minds regarding “bodily autonomy,” the science of when life begins, and, most important, the fact that we are all created in the image and likeness of our Creator.  As such, every human has an intrinsic and inestimable dignity and worth. (Genesis 1:27)

Our culture has drifted away from God and no longer loves or values the things of God. We see proof of that in a birth rate which is disastrously low and abortion rates disastrously high. This disregard for life is also evidenced in the gang violence in our cities and by the skyrocketing suicide and overdose rates plaguing communities throughout the nation.

In response, followers of Jesus Christ must be diligent in praying for the courage, strength, and wisdom to engage the culture forthrightly on the abortion issue. Ironically, this morning, in response to the leaked opinion, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke dishonestly from the chamber floor to decry the pending decision, claiming that tens of millions of women will lose “bodily autonomy.”

Overturning Roe v. Wade does not constitute the loss of women’s “bodily autonomy” because abortions don’t destroy the bodies of mothers. Abortions destroy the bodies of women’s children. Abortion robs the unborn of bodily autonomy, body integrity, and life.

May God forgive us.

PRAYER ALERT

We cannot stress the urgency of your fervent prayers this month as our culture once again descends into a season of acrimony. Add to this the fact that we are in an election cycle in which dozens of federal and state legislative seats are in play. There are a number of God-fearing candidates running for office, and our prayers are vitally important.

Appeal to God for His Mercy

• Pray that God would forgive us for allowing the innocent blood of preborn children to be spilled for decades in America.

• Pray for forgiveness for using tax dollars to pay for abortions in Illinois and to sustain this wicked industry.

• Pray for the courage and strength to expose and refute lies and to offer hope to those who are stumbling towards death.

• Pray for a flood of new volunteers who will commit to prayer and sidewalk counseling at abortion clinics and at pregnancy centers to help turn individual hearts away from the slaughter of the most innocent.

• Pray that church leaders would speak boldly on this issue and offer hope to post-abortive women who need love, care, and assurance of God’s forgiveness. Pray that Christians will share the love of Christ with post-abortive women, and that these women would find healing through a church group and/or Bible study.

Abortion

• Pray that every leader in our nation would come to realize that “fetuses” are real humans in the womb who deserve protection.

• Pray that the agenda of Satan and his wicked disciples to kill pre-born babies in the womb and encourage immoral sexual activities to innocent young children in government schools would be exposed and stopped.

• Pray that Christians of every age would develop a biblical perspective on abortion, on caring for those who face unplanned pregnancies, and on our obligation to respond to sin with grace and compassion in addition to truth.

• Pray that we can be used to communicate effectively how God wants to redeem the lost.

For Those in Authority

For the next several weeks, please pray for the political leaders listed below. Pray that they would seek God’s wisdom when they make decisions that affect the people for whom they work. Pray that God would turn their hearts to Himself. (Proverbs 21:1)

This includes praying for Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, J.B. Pritzker, and Julia Stratton and those who serve in these administrations. Pray also for our two U.S. Senators: Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth.

Please pray for the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court: John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. (Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will take her seat on the Court when Justice Breyer steps down in late June or early July.)

In addition, please pray for the following officials:

• • U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D-Arizona)
  • U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-Alabama)
  • U.S. Representative Robin Kelly (D-Illinois)
  • U.S. Representative John Yarmuth (D-Kentucky)
  • U.S. Representative Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado)
  • State Senator Melinda Bush (D-Grayslake)
  • State Senator John Curran (R-Lemont)
  • State Representative Deb Conroy (D-Villa Park)
  • State Representative Andrew Chesney (R-Freeport)
  • YOUR local City/Village/Township Officials

Have you heard? Abortion cheerleaders were at it again! Earlier this week they attempted to overturn state legislative abortion restrictions. Their weapon? The so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act” (H.R. 3755) – led by U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and U.S. Representative Judy Chu (D-CA). The proposal passed the U.S. House by a vote of 218-211 on September 24, 2021. It was taken up by the U.S. Senate on Monday, February 28, 2022 where cloture was opposed by all Republicans and one Democrat: U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV). The motion failed by a vote of 46-48.

In spite of progress we have made since 2019 to reverse abortion on demand with the passage of heartbeat bills in Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, Alabama, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Texas (the Guttmacher Institute predicts up to 25 more states may ban abortions if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade), this bill had the potential to quash it all. It’s dastardly features included overturning:

• Waiting periods before an abortion
• Limits that abortions be performed by licensed physicians
• Requirements to provide information about their unborn child to those seeking an abortion
• Requirement to provide alternative to abortion to those seeking abortion
• Federal limits on taxpayer funding of abortion

And while all of the above are heartbreaking, there’s more! It would also have banned:

• Laws allowing medical professionals to opt-out of providing abortions (Conscience protection)
• Laws that prohibit abortion after 20 weeks when an unborn child is capable of feeling pain
• Laws that prohibit using abortion as a method of sex selection and abortions done based on a diagnosis of Down’s Syndrome
• Parental consent or notification for minors seeking an abortion

And the power of this bill can hardly be overstated. It carried with it the potential to make all elective abortions inevitable and protected by federal law. Stomping all over the 10th Amendment, it would have become the weapon against which individual states became powerless to establish their own true protection for the mother and the unborn. True protection for a woman’s health, or anyone’s for that matter, assumes a respect for life and help in a time of need.

A blessing in disguise of the states’ right to prohibit abortion is the inconvenience inherent in this right for those seeking abortion. In some cases, this inconvenience can work in the mother and her baby’s favor. Finding out about an unplanned pregnancy can, admittedly, be unsettling causing some to rush to a solution that is not a solution at all. When an abortion is not easily and immediately obtained, the time to reflect can allow the mother to realize the actual blessings associated with the pregnancy. The blessings of not only carrying a life but allowing those in your family and community the opportunity to come alongside and support you.

However, not all can see the blessing of states’ ban on abortion. The CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, Adrienne Mansanares, recently bemoaned this in an interview with the Las Vegas Sun. She finds the “inconvenience” of having to travel to another state, facing fatigue from such travel, and finding childcare for other children while the “procedure” is performed a “heavy burden”. She also considers it a heavy burden on the states where the abortions are sought, “So that really puts a burden on the public health system of those states where reproductive health care is accessible and legal” as these states pick up the slack.

Which brings our thoughts to the irony of this bill’s name- -Women’s Health Protection. Not only is there nothing protective, for the mother or the baby, in assisting a woman to murder her unborn child. Neither is it healthcare.

​​According to experts, they are not safer than childbirth and women do not need them to be healthy. Nor do they suffer when they do not have easy access to abortion. Researchers (abortion activities) at the University of California San Francisco found that after 5 years, 96 percent of women who were denied abortions were glad they had not had one. The moral of the story, easy access to abortion, rather than being health care, is a disservice to women.

Praise the Lord! H.R. 3755 was stopped!

How did your U.S. Senator vote? If they opposed the bill, thank them. If they supported the bill, let them know your thoughts. Both U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth voted to end debate on this legislation. Contact your U.S. Senator using this link.

To view a longer analysis via the National Right to Life scorecard use this link.

Read more:

Manchin Sides With GOP to Kill Dems’ Radical Pro-Abortion Bill (AFN)

U.S. Senate Democrats Fail to Federally Enshrine Abortion on Demand Until Birth (FRC)

Let’s join USA Today and Fox News for a short, illuminating stroll down memory lane:

2001: Following the Bush vs. Gore election in 2000, “Members of the Congressional House Black Caucus spent 20 minutes objecting as they sought to block Florida’s 25 electoral votes” from being certified for George Bush.

2005: “In the joint meeting of Congress to certify Bush’s win over Democrat John Kerry, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, received a Senate signature to object to the electoral votes from Ohio. It came from Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. The two Democrats raised concerns about voting irregularities.” (emphasis added)

At that time, Illinois’ corrupt senator Dick Durbin said,

Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate. I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States.

And Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) issued a statement saying,

I believe that Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) have performed a very valuable public service in bringing this debate before the Congress. As Americans, we should all be troubled by reports of voting problems in many parts of the country.

But that was then, and this is now, and now Durbin describes Senator Josh Hawley’s similar effort as “The political equivalent of barking at the moon. This won’t be taken seriously, nor should it be.”

Van Hollen harrumphed faux-indignantly,

Sen. Hawley’s actions are grossly irresponsible. He’s attempting to undermine our democratic process, fuel Trump’s lies about voter fraud, and delay the certification of Biden’s win.

While Van Hollen described the efforts of Boxer and Tubb Jones as a “very valuable public service,” he calls Hawley’s efforts a “reckless stunt.”

Please take special note that Durbin, Van Hollen, and many other leftists and some RINOs are focusing their laser beams of destruction on Hawley even though other Republicans in Congress objected to the vote-certification process. Is that just because Hawley was going to be the central spokesperson articulating the constitutional issue raised by peculiar electoral mischief that took place in Pennsylvania—an issue that mild-mannered, non-insurrectionist Byron York described as “a fundamental issue that is important to all 50 states”?

Or could it have something to do with Hawley’s singular and bold attack on the outrageous Big Tech monopolies and on social media tyrants’ Section 230 protections?  According to CNBC “About 98% of political contributions from internet companies this cycle went to Democrats,” and that 98% constitutes millions of persuasive dollars.

2017: Following the 2016 win by Trump, “Half a dozen Democratic House members raised formal objections to the Electoral College vote count. … The objections were based on Russian election interference, allegations of voter suppression or what Democrats considered to be illegal votes cast by Republican members of the Electoral College.”

Now, when Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz pursue the same constitutional procedure that Democrats have pursued three times, Congress-despots call for their expulsion from Congress, and the House Homeland Security Committee Chair, U.S. Representative Bennie Thompson, suggests they might be placed on the no-fly list once reserved for terrorists.

Democrats who unjustifiably whine that Hawley and Cruz were trying to subvert the electoral process have been weirdly silent about Twitter’s effective effort to subvert the electoral process by censoring the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden/China collusion story. And these hypocritical Democrats say nothing about Facebook’s and Google’s wildly successful algorithmic efforts to subvert the electoral process.

AOC and other leftist members of Congress have been demanding Silicon Valley autocrats get rid of the chief threat to “progressive” political hegemony by cancelling the upstart Parler, which serves as the neutral platform that Twitter and Facebook falsely claim to be.

Leftists in Congress argued that Parler had to be silenced because of the role it played in the Capitol attack. But liberal journalist Glenn Greenwald discovered that Twitter, Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube played a far more significant role in promoting the riot. To date, no member of Congress has demanded they be shut down. Greenwald writes,

The Capitol breach was planned far more on Facebook and YouTube. As Recode reported, while some protesters participated in both Parler and Gab, many of the calls to attend the Capitol were from YouTube videos, while many of the key planners “have continued to use mainstream platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.” …

So why did Democratic politicians and journalists focus on Parler rather than Facebook and YouTube? Why did Amazon, Google and Apple make a flamboyant showing of removing Parler from the internet while leaving much larger platforms with far more extremism and advocacy of violence flowing on a daily basis?

In part it is because these Silicon Valley giants — Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple — donate enormous sums of money to the Democratic Party and their leaders, so of course Democrats will cheer them rather than call for punishment or their removal from the internet. Part of it is because Parler is an upstart, a much easier target to try to destroy than Facebook or Google. And in part it is because the Democrats are about to control the Executive Branch and both houses of Congress, leaving Silicon Valley giants eager to please them by silencing their adversaries.

Smelling the conservative chum in the water, corporate America has joined the congressional and Big Tech lefties’ feeding frenzy, cutting off all donations to any of the 147 Republican Congresspersons who contested the certification of election results. Here’s the list—so far—of the companies with conservative blood dripping from their lips:

Airbnb, Amazon, American Express, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Comcast, Commerce Bank, Dow Chemical, Marriott, Mastercard, and Verizon.

They’re shutting down donations to any Republican who opposed certification—even if those Republicans did what Democrats have done in prior elections and even with no evidence that they supported, endorsed, or incited either violence or an insurrection.

The Walt Disney Corporation, Ben & Jerry’s, Coca Cola, and JP Morgan rightly issued statements of condemnation of the Capitol building assault. I’ve been searching the Internet far and wide, but I can’t find similar statements from corporate America during or following the lawless BLM riots that caused billions of dollars of damage and included destruction of federal property, harassment of members of Congress, direct assaults on police officers and police precincts, and the looting and arson of scores of businesses.

Oh wait, I remember now.  Corporate America issued statements of support for those riots and donated money to BLM.

Well, surely corporate behemoths issued condemnatory statements following these shocking words from Senator Chuck Schumer at a pro-human slaughter protest in October 2018:

I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.

Sounds kind of like trying to subvert a judicial process. Has Hawley ever said anything even close to that?

Did corporate behemoths condemn Democrat U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal, who was arrested in June 2018 along with 630 other protesters at an illegal occupation of the Hart Senate Office Building? Thankfully, this lawlessness was led by women who are generally less likely to commit acts of violence—well, except for female BLM rioters who were recorded beating people up in the street riots of 2020.

Dishonest leftists argue ad nauseum that 1. private companies are entitled to make whatever decisions they want based on their corporate “principles,” 2. that the First Amendment doesn’t protect citizens from the consequences of their speech, and 3. that serfs customers who don’t like their corporate tyranny are “free” to take their business elsewhere.

The first point should be true and uncontroversial, but now the overriding operating principle of our soulless corporate behemoths that are vacuuming up America’s freedoms is a firm commitment to use their vast nearly unchecked power to impose destructive leftist ideologies everywhere.

Moreover, leftists don’t apply the principle of business freedom consistently. Leftists don’t really believe all businesses should be free to make business decisions in line with their principles.  Rather, leftists believe that businesses have the right to conduct business in line with their ethics as long as those ethics are pre-approved by leftists.

So, for example, teeny tiny Christian-owned businesses enjoy considerably less freedom than, say, the colossal Amazon. A Christian calligrapher is not permitted to refuse to make wedding invitations for a same-sex faux wedding based on her belief that homosexual acts and relationships are abhorrent to the God she serves.

The second point regarding consequences is completely true. Speaking freely does not guarantee freedom from consequences, and leftists are making sure those consequences include the inability to work in America or exercise one’s religion freely.

In a society controlled by corporate and Big Tech monopolies, only leftists are free to speak without fear of consequences. Conservatives face dire consequences for saying the very same things “progressives” say without fear of any consequences. Democrats can object to election certification, and they’re celebrated. Republicans object and they are accused of being insurrectionists, threatened with expulsion, and put on no-fly lists. Talk about a banana republic.

The third claim that conservatives are “free to take their business elsewhere” is false or will be soon if Americans don’t rise up in opposition to the tyranny of unelected corporate monopolists and Big Tech Overlords. If all corporate and Big Tech tyrants adopt the same unprincipled policies, conservative Americans will be unable to work, feed their families, exercise their religion, assemble, or speak in the public square.

If you know any honest leftists, ask them if they believe corporate behemoths should be free to fire or refuse to hire Americans who publicly say this election was unfair.

Ask them if they believe corporate behemoths should be free to fire or refuse to hire anyone who has publicly said homosexual acts are immoral and marriage is intrinsically sexually differentiated.

Ask them if they believe corporate behemoths should be free to fire or refuse to hire Americans who have publicly said persons born with healthy and properly functioning male anatomy are not and never can be women and don’t belong in women’s private spaces or sports.

What recourse do conservative, Constitution-respecting Republicans have left for fighting the dangerous collusion of Congress, corporate behemoths, and Big Tech monopolies to eradicate the First Amendment if the right to assemble and speak are in effect cancelled without even a public debate or vote?

See you in Siberia, my dissident friends.

Listen to this article read by Laurie: 

Please consider a gift to the Illinois Family Institute.
As always, your gift to IFI is tax-deductible and greatly appreciated!

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

Written by Ruth Moreno

On November 12,U.S. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) held a joint press conference calling for the passage of the Heroes Act. The U.S. Senate, U.S. House, and White House have been dealing with this far-left bill for months, but Schumer claims that the results from the 2020 election prove the necessity of passing the Heroes Act as a “starting point” on a new round of coronavirus relief legislation. [Recently] on “Washington Watch,” FRC President Tony Perkins spoke with House minority whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) to discuss the Heroes Act and the Democrats’ latest attempt to push it through Congress.

Though formally titled the “Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act,” the $2-$3 trillion Heroes Act is much more than a relief package. It bails out mismanaged Democrat-led cities and states on the taxpayer’s dime, making Americans pay for the incompetence and overreach of Democratic leadership.

Worse, the Heroes Act applies “nondiscrimination” provisions which redefine the term “sex” to include “sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions.” In service of the Left’s radical social agenda, this redefinition undermines both pro-life values and broader pro-family values. It also precludes the exemption of religious organizations and private schools from qualifying for the relief the bill provides.

This, as Whip Scalise pointed out, comes in the midst of a time when many public schools are refusing to even teach students in the classroom.

“If somebody is going to take your money but not educate your child safely in person when other school systems are willing to, then parents ought to be able to go to those places that will safely educate their child while taking the money,” Scalise said.

As he observed, the Heroes Act would also release “untold thousands” of criminals from prison. The number of criminals that would be released is truly unknown, because the bill does not explain exactly to whom it would apply.

Also woven into the Heroes Act is the full text of the Safe Banking Act, which grants the marijuana industry direct access to banking services. Under the Controlled Substances Act, this is currently prohibited.

One must wonder, as Tony asked Whip Scalise, what any of this has to do with the coronavirus.

“There are bills that would get huge bipartisan votes that would just renew paycheck protection program loans for small businesses,” Scalise said, adding that “There are millions of families that don’t want to be unemployed and their businesses are about to go under. You could save those jobs. That’s where our focus ought to be.”

Instead, Democrats are pushing partisan legislation under the guise that it’s what the American people want. Despite what Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi may say, the still-disputed 2020 elections were not a “mandate” for the passage of the Heroes Act.

According to exit polls reported by the New York Times, 35 percent of American voters said their top political priority was the economy. Twenty percent of voters said it was racial inequality, followed by the coronavirus pandemic at 17 percent.

Seventeen percent is not a mandate. Americans want coronavirus legislation and relief, but it should not come at the expense of other important issues. And though the presidential race and certain Senate races are still lacking a clear winner, Republicans’ 10-seat gain in the House of Representatives proves that Americans are certainly not onboard with the Democrat’s radical agenda being pushed by Pelosi. Democrats spent enormous sums of money trying to flip House seats blue, but in states like Florida and Texas, the electorate came out in defense of common sense and traditional American values. Adding to this, Republicans will most likely hold on to the Senate, and even picked up gains in state legislatures around the country. When races are examined around the country, at all levels, the voters actually delivered a mandate for a conservative agenda — not the Heroes Act!

The 1,800-page long Heroes Act stands against just about every traditional American value imaginable. In addition to legislating bailouts, freed criminals, marijuana banking, and a complete redefinition of the family, the Heroes Act also includes Planned Parenthood loans, taxpayer-funded abortion, cash for illegal immigrants, and even election-altering provisions (the Heroes Act guts voter ID laws and other state measures which protect the integrity of elections). The bill also includes anti-free speech “hate crimes” provisions.

Indeed, after the 2020 elections, Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi should know better than to force upon Americans something as radical as the Heroes Act.

Take ACTION: The Heroes Act has already passed in the U.S. House of Representatives and is pending in the U.S. Senate. Click HERE to send a message to U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth to ask them to vote against this radical $3 trillion dollar boondoggle.

Roll Call: Twelve members of the Illinois Congressional delegation voted in favor of the Heroes Act. They are as follows: Cheri Bustos, Sean Casten, Danny Davis, Bill Foster, Jesus Garcia, Robin Kelly, Raja Krishnamoorthi, Mike Quigley, Bobby Rush, Jan Schakowsky, Brad Schneider and Lauren Underwood.

This article was originally published at FRC.org.

The bloodiest war that the United States ever fought did not take place on a foreign battlefield but raged on American soil, as brother took up arms against brother over the issue of slavery. The war began with the bombardment of Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861, and ended in the Spring of 1865, when Robert E. Lee surrendered the Confederate Army to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse. The modest brick structure standing forlornly in a field in central Virginia belies the magnitude of the human tragedy, with an estimated 620,000 killed—almost as many as in all foreign wars combined.

The war led to the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (Amendment XIII) to the United States Constitution, which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude. But while the facts of this violent conflict are familiar to students of American history, what is less-known is that the practice of slavery continues unabated. According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), every year millions of men, women, and children are the victims of trafficking, which involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to compel an individual against their will to perform some type of labor or commercial sex act.  The DHS estimates that many billions of dollars per year are generated by human trafficking, which is second only to drug trafficking as the most profitable transnational crime.

Traffickers seek those who are susceptible because of psychological or emotional vulnerability, economic hardship, or in many cases children who are unable to protect themselves against predators.  Doctors Without Borders reports that two-thirds of migrants traveling through Mexico to the United States experience violence, including theft, torture, and rape. As the DHS notes, “The trauma caused by the traffickers can be so great that many may not identify themselves as victims or ask for help.”

Responding to the crisis, President Donald Trump has proclaimed January as “National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.” Referring to human trafficking as “a modern form of slavery,” the president pledged to “actively work to prevent and end this barbaric exploitation of innocent victims.”

The president noted that the lack of an impregnable barrier has enabled traffickers to transport their victims into the United States with virtual impunity. Accordingly, “I have made it a top priority to fully secure our Nation’s Southwest border, including through the continued construction of a physical wall, so that we can stop human trafficking and stem the flow of deadly drugs and criminals into our country.”

Trump refuses to sign a spending bill that does not contain funding for a border wall. Seemingly oblivious to the dangers of an unsecured border, Speaker of the U.S. House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) calls a wall “an immorality between countries; it’s an old way of thinking.” U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) agreed, stating: “This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis (and) stoke fear.” Meanwhile, in 2018 almost 400,000 people were apprehended after illegally crossing the border.

The battle is also raging in cyberspace, as human traffickers recruit their victims through websites.  In April 2018, the FBI shut down the nation’s largest child-sex trafficking website, Backpage.com. The FBI alleged that Backpage.com encouraged the posting of ads for prostitution and the human trafficking of minors. As a result, Backpage.com CEO Carl Ferrer was convicted on charges of facilitating prostitution and money laundering.

While the bill signed in April led to the closing of an estimated 87 percent of human trafficking sites, the demand is such that other players in the lucrative online sex-for-hire market have since moved in to fill the void. The software company Marinus Analytics reports that in a one-month period after Backpage.com was shut down, 146,000 online sex ads were posted every day.

The horrors of human trafficking in our day rival the slavery of a bygone era. One can only hope that sufficient numbers of those who possess the determination of an Abraham Lincoln will arise to at long last bring the horrors of human trafficking to an end at a modern-day Appomattox.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to contact U.S. Senators Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth and your own U.S. Reprsenative to ask them to support federal legislation – including a border wall – to help combat this horrific practice of human trafficking into the United States.

Alternatively, you may phone the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. An operator will connect you directly with the legislative office you request.

Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!