Illinoisans might think that state lawmakers elected to fix the mess they created would be drowning in real work with nary a moment to surface for air. Allow me to disabuse you of that quaint, naïve notion.

Our “progressive” lawmakers have found time—actually a fair amount of time—to write, assign to a committee, discuss, and now reassign to another committee a resolution the likes of which I’ve never seen.

“Progressives” have written a partisan resolution specifically to express their self-righteous disapproval of a law passed by citizens in two states halfway across the country. You heard that right. Our “progressive” lawmakers, who by all objective measures have done a disastrous job of running Illinois and can’t figure out how to solve the problems they created, have decided it’s time to take a shot at running other states as well.

Senate Resolution 1752 calls on citizens of Mississippi and North Carolina to repeal their laws requiring restrooms to correspond to objective, immutable biological sex.

On May 3^rd, SR 1752 was assigned to the Illinois Senate State Government and Veterans Affairs Committee for a hearing. The committee has nine members, so five “yes” votes were necessary to pass this self-righteous, presumptuous resolution out of committee.

A few days before the hearing, IFI’s lobbyist Ralph Rivera met with the committee members who would likely vote “no.” During the committee meeting last Thursday, a courageous Illinois mother testified effectively against the resolution. Subsequently the bill’s sponsor, Illinois Senator Emil Jones III (D-Chicago), was informed that he didn’t have the five votes, and he chose not to call the resolution for a vote.

The celebration of this success was short-lived because the very next day, Illinois Senate President John Cullerton’s office took SR 1752 out of the Senate State Government and Veteran Affairs Committee and re-referred (i.e., reassigned) it to the Senate Human Services Committee, a committee which the resolution’s sponsors view as a more, shall we say, sympathetic committee.

While under the Illinois Senate rules this kind of committee-shopping is permitted, it undermines the purpose of the committee process and further undermines the public’s trust in Springfield (is that even possible?).

If SR 1752 has hit the committee jackpot and gets out of committee next week, it still must be approved by the full senate sometime in the next two weeks.

As you write to express your opposition to this resolution, remember that State Representative Tom Morrison’s Pupil Physical Privacy Act, which had more sponsors and bipartisan support in the Illinois House, was sent—not to an education committee where, as an education bill, it belonged—but to the Human Services Committee where it was then assigned to a subcommittee that everyone knew would never even meet.

Perfect illustration of Illinois’ leftist lawmakers: arrogant, deceitful, and manipulative.

This proposal is cosponsored by Senators Heather Steans (D-Chicago), Daniel Biss (D-Skokie), Laura Murphy (D-Park Ridge), Linda Holmes (D-Aurora), David Koehler (D-Peoria), Michael Noland (D-Elgin), and Iris Martinez (D-Chicago).

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your state senator, asking him or her to reject this futile resolution which not only seeks to ridicule duly elected lawmakers in other states, but also to normalize gender deception in our culture.

You can also call the Capitol switchboard at (217) 782-2000 and asked to be transferred to your state senator’s office, where you can leave a comment with his/her legislative aide.

Governor Patrick Quinn is again pushing the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) — a bill that would eliminate gender distinctions and enshrine abortion as a constitutional right.  A committee hearing for this bill is scheduled for Wednesday.

ACTION: Please CLICK HERE to contact your state senator to ask them to vote AGAINST the Equal Rights Amendment, SJRCA 75. The ERA will not help women; instead it will harm women, their families, and our society.

You can also contact your state senator in Springfield by phone by calling the Capitol switchboard at (217) 782-2000.

SJRCA 75 is being sponsored by Illinois State Senators Heather Steans (D-Chicago), Mattie Hunter (D-Chicago), David Koehler (D-Peoria), Iris Martinez (D-Chicago), and Pat McGuire (D-Crest Hill)

History and Problems with the ERA
by Elise Bouc, State Director for Illinois Stop-ERA

The ERA claims to be a simple amendment that gives equal rights to women. In reality, the ERA will actually harm women, their families, and our society. The major problem with the ERA is its wording. It simply states

“Equality of rights under law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.”

In essence, women are not being guaranteed equal rights; rather gender is being removed as a legal characteristic on which to base distinctions. Thus any laws or policies that make a distinction based on gender would be unconstitutional under the ERA.

Because 18 states have passed state ERA’s, we have been able to see the damage that would be caused by a national ERA. This same wording in state ERA’s has been interpreted by courts to remove the critical protection of wife and child support, mandate state funding of elective abortions (as only women receive abortions, refusal to provide funding for abortions is seen as a form of sex discrimination), and legalize same-sex marriage.

Given the legal precedents, the passage of the federal ERA will lead to a loss of such protections as alimony, child custody, social security benefits (for women who choose to stay home with their children), exemption from the military draft registration, and exemption from front-line combat duty. A loss of such protections would harm women and their children.

Furthermore, the ERA would also transfer enormous power from state legislatures to the Federal government since it empowers Congress to enforce it. Such a transfer would create an imbalance of power between the states and the federal government and place sensitive issues under the rule of a national government that is far less responsive to individuals than the state legislatures. In addition, the ERA would empower the federal courts to determine the meaning of “equality of rights” and “sex.” In essence, we would be handing the state’s legislative power to Congress and the unelected judges of our federal courts.

Many legislators who are new to this amendment do not understand the reality of this amendment’s language and are easily led to believe that the ERA is a nice thing to do for women. It’s important that we help them understand the problems with this amendment. In addition, they need to know that women will not gain any additional benefits from the ERA. The laws that provide women with equal rights already exist. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution has been interpreted by the courts to prohibit gender-based discrimination. Other existing laws that provide women with equal rights cover virtually all areas of American life – education, employment, credit eligibility, housing, and public accommodations. Thus, the ERA will only harm women and not benefit them.

Supporters of the ERA have been attempting to pass various versions of this legislation since the 1920’s. The movement gained momentum in 1972 after the U.S. Senate and U.S. House passed the ERA and sent it to the states for ratification with a deadline that it must be passed by 38 states by 1979. Thirty-five states have since ratified the amendment (with 4 of those original states later rescinding their support for the ERA after they understood the true problems with the amendment, and a 5th state declaring that their ratification would not extend beyond 1979. Whether these states will be allowed to rescind their vote is unclear). In 1979, Congress extended the deadline to 1982 (although the vote to extend the deadline did not receive a 2/3 majority vote as should be required for a Constitutional amendment). The ERA failed to gain passage by any more states by 1982 and was subsequently declared a moot issue by the U.S. Supreme Court during consideration of a court case that challenged the extension of the time deadline.

Since then, the supporters of the ERA have developed a legal strategy in which they claim that if 3 more states will pass the ERA, then Congress can retroactively extend the time deadline and make the ERA a legally binding Constitutional Amendment. A resolution in support of this action is filed in Congress each session. As a result, we have seen renewed pressure on Illinois to pass the ERA (Illinois received a great deal of pressure to pass the ERA in the 1970’s and early 80’s but wisely never passed the amendment). There are many who believe that passage by Illinois will give the ERA the momentum needed to gain the other 2 necessary states. As a result, it’s imperative that we not allow Illinois to pass the ERA.

Tell Others!
Please inform your friends and family so that they can help in contacting our state legislators. And, most importantly, please contact your state representative as soon as possible and ask them to vote against the ERA.  If you have a new state representative, please take some time to educate them on the problems with the ERA. Many of them don’t know much about this amendment and are often told by those who support the ERA that “this is just a nice thing to do for women.” We need to help the legislators understand the realities of the ERA.

With our combined efforts and prayers, we were able to stop the ERA in years past, and I know that we can do so again.

Written by David E. Smith and Laurie Higgins

Our state lawmakers are returning to Springfield this week and are expected to debate the controversial proposal to redefine marriage, a change that would prove destructive to children, family, society, and religious liberty in Illinois.

Proponents of marriage re-definition are pulling out all the stops to get what they want during the lame duck session of the General Assembly (January 2-9). Despite the national budget crisis and the looming “fiscal cliff,” they have even pulled President Barack Obama into the debate hoping that his recent statements in favor of same-sex “marriage” will sway a few votes in Springfield.  You may remember that Obama’s views on marriage “evolved” just seven months ago. It is worth noting that President Obama has also issued multiple Mother’s Day and Father’s Day proclamations in which he extolled the critical value of both mothers and fathers in the lives of children, something denied by the legalization of same-sex “marriage.”

It is vital that your voices be heard by your state senators and representatives even if you believe they already support the historical definition of natural marriage. They are hearing from our opponents. They need to hear from you.

The silence and complacency demonstrated by far too many Illinoisans on issues related to homosexuality and children, including marriage, should be shocking. The tragedy is that it’s not. While the Left pushes their unholy agenda with tenacity and religious fervor, conservatives say and do virtually nothing out of fear and a woefully misguided notion of compassion. It’s long past time for conservatives to be as bold and tenacious in defense of marriage as the other side is in destroying it. Please take a few minutes today or tomorrow to send a message to Springfield:

Take ACTION:  1. Click HERE to email your state lawmakers today, urging them to uphold natural marriage and not to cave to the politically correct and culturally destructive groups that are intent on altering society’s definition and understanding of marriage. 

2. Pray that God would give wisdom to our state lawmakers.  Pray that God would convict the hearts of our lawmakers.  Pray that God would give courage to our lawmakers to do the right thing in the face of tremendous pressure to do otherwise. Pray that God would have mercy on the families of Illinois.

3. Write a Letter to the Editor of your local daily and weekly paper and their websites. These need to be written and submitted without delay from all corners of Illinois. Messages should be concise, no more than 150-250 words, but shorter is better. For help locating the contact information for a publication in your area, click HERE.

4. Ask your pastor to share this bulletin insert with the congregation. 

5. Share this message with family, friends and on social media.  Forward this email to like-minded contacts.  Ask them to also send emails and make calls.

Here are some talking points that may be helpful in crafting letters or talking to friends:

• Make the letter personal about you, your family, your children or someone important in your life who have been negatively affected by homosexuality.
• Those who identify as homosexual have the freedom to make lifetime commitments to whomever they wish. They have no right to redefine the institution of marriage for everyone else.
• Governments recognize the sexually complementary institution of marriage in order to protect the inherent rights and needs of children, which assures the continued health and stability of the country.
• Children have an inherent, inviolate right to know and be raised whenever possible by their biological parents, a right that is further undermined by homosexual marriage.
• If the government severs marriage from gender, sexual complementarity and procreative potential, there is no rational reason to prohibit plural marriage or incestuous marriage.
• Although subjective feelings of love are important to those choosing to marry, they are irrelevant to the government’s reasons for being involved in recognizing, regulating and promoting marriage.  The government is involved in marriage centrally to protect the rights and needs of children by securing the connection of children to their biological parents.
• Despite assurances of religious protections, people of faith will lose religious rights if same-sex “marriage” is legalized.
• The freedom to decide what our children and grandchildren are taught in schools will come under attack. Proponents of the normalization of homosexuality will vigorously push for even elementary school children to be taught about homosexuality via the topic of “diverse family structures” and “family diversity.”
• Despite what “progressives” say, legal prohibitions of same-sex “marriage” are not equivalent to bans on interracial marriage. First, homosexuality is not analogous to race.  Second, bans on interracial marriage introduced a criteria that was not essential to marriage: race. One’s race has nothing to do with the central defining feature of marriage: procreative potential. 
• Society does not create marriage; society merely recognizes a type of relationship that exists and predates the state.

Please don’t be deceived by the Left’s lie that homosexuals have the right to unilaterally jettison the central defining feature of marriage (i.e. sexual complementarity), or their lie that jettisoning sexual complementarity will not affect heterosexual marriage, or that redefining marriage will not harm children, or that being allowed to marry will make homosexual relationships more stable or sexually faithful.

There is no more significant legislative battle than the one over marriage. We must send a message to our legislators that some societal conventions and institutions embody timeless, immutable, objective truths. Sexually complementary marriage is one such institution, and it is the essential building block of every healthy society. We must  do everything within our power to protect and preserve it. Thank you!

Please forward this article to your family and friends in Illinois.

Over the Christmas weekend, you may have seen or heard the reports from the media  extolling the news that 260 clergy — mostly from the Chicago area — signed a petition in support of redefining marriage.  In response to this story, IFI’s Laurie Higgins had some very good quotes in a New York Times article, while I had a short quote in the WGN-TV report that aired four days ago.

It is important that we keep this “news” in perspective.  In the state of Illinois, there are over a thousand Roman Catholic churches, over a thousand Southern Baptist churches, more than 500 Missouri Synod Lutheran churches, and there are thousands of other churches of various denominations — including Reformed, EV Free, Nazarene, Assemblies of God, COGIC, Charismatic, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Seven Day Adventists, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Independent — all of whom officially and publicly acknowledge that God ordained marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and that sexual activity outside the bonds of natural marriage is sinful.

It is no surprise to learn that a tiny fraction of religious leaders would compromise, distort, and misuse the Word of God for the praise of man and/or to achieve a political goal.  Kara Wagner Sherer of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Chicago was quoted in the New York Times article saying, “It doesn’t have to be a faith issue… We understand our Scripture in a different way.”  That statement really says it all.  She is correct, their stand is not a faith issue.  Divorcing God from the equation and dismissing thousands of years of Christian teaching, thought and understanding reveals their motives as distinctly humanistic and political.

Despite the holiday season, our state lawmakers need to hear from us — in person, by phone or by email.  Proponents of marriage redefinition are engaged in a full-court press right now, and they are planning to use the upcoming lame duck session (January 2-8) to accomplish their goal.

This past Saturday morning, I spoke to a state lawmaker — a Democrat — who expressed to me his concern.  He has been receiving more calls and emails in favor of same-sex marriage than he has been receiving against it.  I explained to him that the vast majority of Illinoisans were busy with family, church, shopping, cooking and traveling.  I assured him that after the Christmas weekend, that opposition to redefining marriage would certainly ramp up.  

Please prove me right!

Take ACTION: Click HERE to email your state lawmakers today, urging them to uphold natural marriage and not to cave to the politically correct and culturally destructive groups who are intent on altering society’s understanding of marriage.  Be assured, your calls and emails are important!  Legislators take very seriously the letters and the numbers of calls they receive – particularly letters that are written by their constituents (as opposed to pre-written form letters.) 

THANK YOU!

P.S.  Would you consider helping meet our $20,000 end-of-year matching challenge? It is vital that we raise these critical funds so that we are able to go into next year to fight marriage redefinition and many other anti-family proposals. 

Any donation given or mailed by December 31st will go toward this matching challenge and will be fully tax-deductible, lowering your 2012 tax burden.

Click HERE to support IFI and have your donation doubled!

 To make a credit card donation over the phone, call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.  You can also send a gift to P.O. Box 88848, Carol Stream, IL  60188.

Multiple media sources are cheerfully reporting that supporters of marriage-redefinition may try to pass their same-sex “marriage” bill during the lame duck session of the General Assembly next month (January 3-9).

State Representative Greg Harris (D-Chicago), who identifies as homosexual and is the chief sponsor of this anti-family legislation, used the lame duck session in 2010 to ram through a same-sex “civil unions” bill.  It passed by razor-thin margins in part because many proponents of civil unions dishonestly promised lawmakers that the legalization of “civil unions” was all they wanted. 

The ethically-challenged ACLU lobbied heavily for civil unions in 2010, but then in 2012 filed a lawsuit in Cook County on behalf of homosexual activists, complaining that the very civil union law they lobbied to create is unconstitutional.

The liberal activists who pushed for civil unions, including Representative Harris and State Senator David Koehler (D-Peoria), also promised their colleagues that religious liberty and freedom of conscience would not be affected by the passage of “civil unions.”  We have seen how empty those promises were. 

One month after the act was signed into law, homosexual activists went after the Christian owner of a bed and breakfast in Paxton, Illinois.  The owner, Jim Walder, wanted to operate his business for the glory of the Lord.  Not wanting to violate his conscience, Mr. Walder refused to rent his bed and breakfast to a homosexual couple for their civil union ceremony and reception.  (Read more HERE.)

Then in July of 2011, because Catholic Charities would not violate its religious convictions by placing needy children in the homes of homosexual “civil union” partners, the state of Illinois forced Catholic Charities out of adoption and foster care work, thereby affecting the lives of 2,500 innocent children.

The promises of homosexual activists turned out to be utter deceits, as were the religious liberty “guarantees” that were built into the civil union bill, ironically titled “The Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act.” 

Perhaps thinking Illinoisans can be duped again, Representative Harris has named his marriage-redefinition bill the “Religious Freedom and Marriage Act.”

Take ACTION: Click HERE to email your state lawmakers today, urging them to uphold natural marriage and to support a state constitutional amendment by allowing Illinois voters to permanently define this foundational societal institution.  Be assured, your calls and emails are important!  Legislators take very seriously the letters and the numbers of calls they receive — particularly letters that are written by their constituents (as opposed to pre-written form letters.)

We can stop this destructive policy from moving forward, but we must take up the fight again and be willing to make our voices heard.  And this time, we need every conservative in Illinois to make his and her voice heard. We need you to respond to every action alert we send out as the Left moves forward with this and other pernicious legislation.

Click HERE to support the work and ministry of IFI.