Amid a major power grab by the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) seeking to further empower the global agency, lawmakers and leaders across the United States are stepping up efforts to protect self-government, national sovereignty and the rights of all Americans. In fact, many in Congress and beyond say it is time for the U.S. government to defund and even withdraw from the WHO once again.

Last week, governments from around the world sent delegates to the annual World Health Assembly in Geneva. They will be meeting until May 30. The main objective of this year’s confab is to radically extend the organization’s power over healthcare and citizens under the guise of improving “health” and fighting future disease outbreaks in a coordinated global fashion. Critics say it is a dangerous plan to centralize power in a corrupt agency controlled by Beijing.

There are two primary methods of attack. First, using COVID and possible future pandemics as a pretext, the WHO is pushing for a new “International Pandemic Accord.” The scheme was being called a treaty until it became obvious to all involved it would never get two-thirds support in the U.S. Senate, as required for ratification of all treaties. The WHO hopes to have the details worked out by next year’s World Health Assembly.

The second prong in the attack involves amendments to the so-called International Health Regulations, or IHR. Because these are considered mere changes to an existing treaty, globalists at the WHO and in the Biden administration — not to mention the Communist Party of China lurking behind the scenes — also see this as a vehicle for empowering the global “health” apparatus without pesky interference from Congress.

But critics are working on ways to fight back. The Sovereignty Coalition, formed to fight the WHO assault on self-government, brings together a broad alliance of conservative leaders, organizations, and lawmakers united in the effort to preserve and restore national sovereignty. In fact, the coalition is calling for an American exit from the WHO entirely.

Signatories include hundreds of America’s most prominent conservative leaders as well as doctors and other medical professionals. Leading organizations in the medical freedom movement and the broader conservative movement also signed on including Daily Clout, Eagle Forum, Liberty Counsel Action, Tea Party Patriots Action, Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, ConservativeHQ, Act for America, and more.

Last week around 20 lawmakers and leaders held a press conference outside Capitol Hill calling for an end to the WHO’s scheming. Illinois’ own U.S. Representative Mary Miller, a Republican, was among those speaking out. “Our hard-earned taxpayer dollars should not support a globalist organization that is controlled by China, undermines our national sovereignty, and threatens our rights,” Rep. Miller said, echoing the concerns of many of her colleagues and constituents.

“President Trump made the right decision to cut all funding and participation in this organization, and it is foolish for the Biden Administration to place trust in an institution that repeated China’s deceptive narratives regarding the origins of the pandemic in Wuhan,” she added. “I stand proudly with my colleagues in calling for the United States to withdraw from the corrupt WHO. In Congress, I will always work to protect our nation’s sovereignty, preserve our rights and freedoms, and ensure the responsible use of taxpayer dollars.”

Other lawmakers who spoke at the press conference and denounced the WHO and Biden’s support for the power grab included U.S. Representatives Ralph Norman (SC-05), Ronny Jackson (TX-13), Chris Smith (NJ-04), Harriet Hageman (WY), Tim Burchett (TN-02), Brian Babin (TX-36), Andy Biggs (AZ-05) (sponsor of H.R. 79), Kevin Hern (OK-01), Thomas Tiffany (WI-07), Chip Roy (TX-21), Eli Crane (AZ-02),  Paul Gosar (AZ-09),  Lauren Boebert (CO-03), Eric Burlison (MO-07),  Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) Rep. Dan Bishop (NC-08), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Clay Higgins (LA-03), and more.

Watch the press conference here:

Sovereignty Coalition co-founders Reggie LittleJohn and Frank Gaffney were there, too. In a statement posted on their website, the leaders and the signatories noted that the WHO was effectively under CCP control and was being used to advance a “post-Constitutional-America and ‘global governance’ dominated by the Party.” “The CCP’s hegemonic ambitions have no place for a powerful United States of America, human freedom or personal sovereignty,” the group explained. The WHO is also doing the bidding of Big Pharma and billionaire population-control zealot Bill Gates, one of the outfits top financiers, the coalition said.

Speaking at the start of the WHO’s annual meeting, former communist terrorist and current WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus insisted that the organization needed even more power. “We cannot simply carry on as we did before,” said Ghebreyesus, who was installed with strongarm tactics by the CCP. “The pandemic accord that member states are now negotiating must be a historic agreement to make a paradigm shift in global health security, recognizing that our fates are interwoven.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, former leader of the Socialist International global alliance of communist and socialist political parties, echoed the call for a stronger globalist regime. “I hope the current negotiations on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response result in a strong multilateral approach that saves lives,” said Guterres, who has also been a vocal advocate of the World Economic Forum-led “Great Reset” being opposed by countless millions around the world.

Blasting the WHO’s response to COVID, the Sovereignty Coalition said it was “outrageous” that the Biden administration was scheming to hand over even more power—without even Senate approval. “These accords would effectively repose in Dr. Tedros the authority unilaterally to dictate what constitutes an actual or potential Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and to order how affected nations must respond,” the coalition said in a statement, noting that these authorities would purport to allow America’s enemies to deprive Americans of their rights.

In light of all the problems with the schemes being negotiated as well as the systemic issues plaguing WHO, the Sovereignty Coalition said enough was enough. “The United States must end its membership in, cease funding of and submitting to the World Health Organization before the WHO is granted the authority effectively to compel compliance with the public health dictates of Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus or any other unelected, unaccountable international bureaucrat,” the alliance declared.

At the state level, efforts to stop the WHO are gaining steam as well. A new bill in the South Carolina legislature, H.4246, would nullify the power grab by banning any state or local cooperation with the effort. “This is the rightful remedy,” SC Representative Josiah Magnuson told me, blasting the fact that Biden was not even planning to seek the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate as required by the Constitution of all treaties. “If this does go into effect, we’re going to have the framework here to resist.”

Former President Donald Trump removed the U.S. government from the WHO, but Joe Biden promptly rejoined when taking power. Republicans in the U.S. House, though, have the opportunity to defund the global body in the upcoming budget. With outrage surrounding the WHO and its leadership growing rapidly amid the attempted power grab, it may be tough for elected officials in the United States to continue supporting it. The next year will be critical in that battle.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to encourage them to support legislative actions to withdrawal the U.S. from the The World Health Organization (WHO). This U.N. agency is effectively controlled by Communist Chinese Party and other subversive globalist interests, but it is actively seeking greater, totalitarian control over its member nations. This is a serious threat to our national sovereignty and our individual liberty.

Ask them to co-sponsor H.R. 79, the “WHO Withdrawal Act,” H.R. 343, the “No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act,” and S. 444, the “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act,” to stop the implementation and/or enforcement of the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty.

As a pastor, I feel like every sermon could be turned into two calls to action – make sure you are reading your Bibles and keep praying. These acts of faith in no way help us earn or deserve our salvation, which is all of God’s free grace. However, it is easy to be slack in these two aspects of the Christian life.

Our basic duty in prayer is that we keep on praying and never quit. Pray without ceasing or constantly pray (1 Thess. 5:17). Jesus commanded to His disciples before His greatest moment of testing, “Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation…” (Matthew 26:41) In Scripture, however, we do see special moments of prayer. One of my favorite accounts of prayer is one that is recorded in three different Old Testament books. It is the account of Hezekiah in prayer in the face of an existential crisis that God’s people were facing as a powerful army of Assyria was licking its chops to destroy Jerusalem. (See 2 Kings 18-19; 2 Chronicles 32; Isaiah 36-37).

In the 2 Kings account, the leader of the Assyrian forces relayed a message to Hezekiah after the forces of Assyria were directed to fight against another opponent. Hezekiah was sent a threatening, blasphemous letter to not find comfort in the diversion of the Assyrian forces. Assyria would return, and what could the forces of Judah do in defending against that great power?

This is where the account focuses on how Hezekiah handled such a tremendous test. Hezekiah took the threatening letter with him and went up to the temple. There he spread the letter before the Lord. His prayer is a beautiful testimony of how we also must pray boldly in the face of great opposition.

“O LORD God of Israel, the One who dwells between the cherubim, You are God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. Incline Your ear, O LORD, and hear; open Your eyes, O LORD, and see; and hear the words of Sennacherib, which he has sent to reproach the living God. Truly, LORD, the kings of Assyria have laid waste the nations and their lands, and have cast their gods into the fire; for they were not gods, but the work of men’s hands—wood and stone. Therefore they destroyed them. Now therefore, O LORD our God, I pray, save us from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that You are the LORD God, You alone.” (2 Kings 19:15b-19, NKJV)

Hezekiah’s prayer is a great example of confessing God’s absolute sovereignty, the folly of idols, the threat of the enemy, and the great goal – that all kingdoms may know that there is only one true God.

We might not be facing the same existential threat as Hezekiah and Judah were facing, but truly we are entering into dangerous times.

The LORD has brought powerful storms that have resulted in great destruction and loss of many lives.

A Christian school experienced the horror of a planned attack leading to the loss of 3 precious children and 3 faithful staff members.

Criminal attacks on churches have been on the rise and continue to increase in 2023. According a recently released report by the Family Research Council, there have been 69 attacks on churches from January to March, nearly three times the number carried out against houses of worship during the same period in 2022.

We are witnessing history in our own nation with thirty-four felony charges brought against President Trump by Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg. Now I don’t subscribe at all to the idea that President Trump is like Jesus, but as U.S. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) commented, this is the clearest example of Democrats weaponizing government against their opponents.

Attacks have continued against pregnancy centers across the US, and in Illinois our own government is threating to fine pregnancy centers in the name of “consumer protection.”

Are we surprised when we see God’s judgment on our nation economically and politically when we have forsaken His law and gospel?

Christian, unfurl these “letters” before our great God as you get on your knees in prayer. Above all, we seek not our own good or peace, but the advancement of God’s purposes. How God uses all things for His glory is something we will wait until heaven to fully appreciate, but that should not keep us from praying for it now.

You don’t have to be a climate scientist to know the ringleaders of the “climate change” bandwagon don’t truly believe the narrative they’re selling.

And it’s not just because they jet around the world in private jets to lecture you about your car and your hamburgers.

In fact, if the people at the top bought into the notion that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are really “pollution” producing a “climate crisis,” they would be doing exactly the opposite of what they’re actually doing.

Examining climate policy and communist China proves the point.

Consider the UN Paris Agreement. Negotiated at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris in 2015, the global deal calls on national governments to make their own national pledges about what they force on their populations to combat the alleged “climate crisis.”

Under the deal, the Obama administration unilaterally pledged to slash CO2 emissions in the United States by more than 25 percent by 2025. This was to be imposed on Americans through executive orders and federal regulations to avoid involving Congress. Other Western governments made similar promises.

The Chinese communist regime, by contrast, was already emitting far more CO2 than the United States and now spews more than the entire Western world combined by far—and yet it pledged only to keep increasing its emissions for the next 15 years. Seriously.

In its submission to the UN (pdf), the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) agreed “to achieve the peaking of carbon dioxide emissions around 2030.”

In other words, the regime proudly announced to the world that its CO2 output would continue to grow for at least 15 years, at which point nobody will even remember the Paris pledges.

When I asked members of the Chinese delegation for comment at the UN summit, instead of responding, they sent one of their minions to follow me around the conference and take pictures of me, something I promptly reported to UN security and the French police.

It’s a good thing for the CCP that nobody will remember its promises by 2030, because virtually every analyst who has looked at the regime’s coal-fired power-plant construction binge has acknowledged there’s no way its emissions will “peak” by 2030. Communist promises have never been worth the paper they’re printed on anyway, as history has shown.

The CCP wasn’t kidding about increasing its emissions, though: Beijing is currently bringing more coal-fired power plants online just between now and 2025 than the United States has in total.

According to Global Energy Monitor’s February 2021 briefing (pdf), the CCP built more than three times as much coal-power capacity as the rest of the world combined in 2020. And it already has about half of all the world’s coal power capacity, according to Global Energy Monitor’s “Boom and Bust 2020: Tracking the Global Coal Plant Pipeline.”

Already, China emits more than twice as much CO2 as the United States, according to data from the Global Carbon Project. Its emissions are rising meteorically even as U.S. emissions and emissions from other Western nations continue to plunge.

In 2021, Americans released about 5 billion tons of CO2, while China released about 11.5 billion. If current trends continue, the CCP may release more CO2 than the rest of the world combined in the not-too-distant future.

Think about this. If one was truly concerned about CO2 emissions producing “climate hell,” as world leaders claimed at the latest UN “climate” summit in Egypt that I attended, they would be panicking, not celebrating.

Moving Production

Again, all of the production being moved out of the West and into China will result in vastly more CO2 entering the atmosphere than if that production had remained in the United States, Canada, or Europe.

And yet, Western governments, tax-funded climate activists, UN leaders, and their media allies all celebrated and continue to celebrate the Paris Agreement and subsequent follow-ups as a huge success in saving the climate. Perhaps Donald Trump was on to something when, in 2012, he wrote on Twitter,

“The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.”

That’s exactly what happened, of course, as electricity rates got pushed higher and higher over time. In 1975, electricity was averaging around 3 cents per kilowatt hour, helping U.S. industry remain competitive globally. By 2010, thanks in part to Obama’s policies, it had tripled. And by 2021, it was approaching 15 cents.

For perspective, electricity prices in China are about half that.

There are many reasons for the shifting of production from the United States to China—many of them directly related to U.S. policy—but one key factor has been the cost of energy.

Yet higher energy prices were openly touted as a policy objective by Obama. As he made clear in a 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, “under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Later that year, he expressed similar sentiments as gas prices soared to around $4, saying only that he would have “preferred” a “gradual adjustment” instead.

Faced with higher labor costs and a tougher regulatory environment, American companies and entrepreneurs were already struggling to keep production in the United States amid a rigged global trading regime benefiting the CCP at America’s expense.

Soaring energy costs in many cases pushed firms over the edge, forcing them to shift production to China or shut down in the face of Chinese competition.

Again, if you truly believe CO2 is pollution, the worst possible outcome of “climate” negotiations would be to transfer even more production to China, where CO2 emissions per unit of economic production are massively higher.

But this is precisely the result of the much-celebrated UN “climate” process.

The shift into so-called “renewable energy” being engineered by the Biden administration and federal policymakers has been and will continue to be a huge boon to the CCP, too—and not just because it will force prices higher while making the U.S. energy grid more unstable.

Almost 80 percent of solar cells produced in 2019 were made in China, according to Bloomberg data (pdf). The CCP dominates production in the wind sector and battery industries as well. It also controls the supply chain for rare-earth materials needed to produce all of these “green energy” products.

The U.S. government, for its part, is offering massive subsidies to these CCP-dominated industrial sectors while forcing Americans into dependence on them through regulations, mandates, subsidies, and other policies. How this is supposed to help the environment is never made clear.

For some perspective on the economic carnage inflicted on America by Obama’s Paris scheme, which he claimed was an “executive agreement” and thus not subject to Senate ratification as required by the Constitution, the Heritage Foundation crunched the numbers in a 2016 study.

Among other findings, the conservative-leaning think tank said Obama’s Paris pledges would increase electricity costs for a family of four between 13 and 20 percent annually while vaporizing almost half a million jobs, including around 200,000 in manufacturing.

That damage translates to about $20,000 in lost income for American families by 2035 and a reduction in GDP of over $2.5 trillion.

Who Benefits?

Who benefits from all this? Certainly not the “climate.” Again, shipping U.S. industry to China will result in more CO2 in the atmosphere, not less. And in any case, based on the UN’s own debunked “models,” complete elimination of all U.S. CO2 emissions would result in virtually no reduction in global temperatures.

According to a peer-reviewed paper by Dr. Bjorn Lomborg published in the Global Policy Journal, even if all the significant pledges made in Paris were fulfilled, global temperatures would be just 0.05 degrees C (0.086 degrees F) cooler by 2100—a statistically insignificant rounding error.

The big winner, of course, was the CCP, which has been laughing all the way to the bank as it absorbs the factories, jobs, and wealth production that U.S. and other Western authorities are shutting down to “save the climate.”

This appears to be deliberate, as statements by leading officials in the Obama administration and the UN have made clear.

Obama’s “Science Czar” John Holdren openly advocated a de-industrialization of the United States in his 1973 book “Human Ecology.”

“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States,” Holdren and his co-authors wrote. “De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology.”

Then consider seemingly bizarre comments made by then-UN Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Christiana Figueres.

Speaking to Bloomberg a few months after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed his unsettling admiration for the CCP, Figueres claimed that the regime in Beijing—overseeing about one third of global CO2 output—was “doing it right” on climate policy.

In separate comments while pushing for major climate policies, Figueres also suggested the goal of “climate” policy was really economic transformation.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said on Feb. 4, 2015.

Five years before those comments, one of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s top officials, Ottmar Edenhofer, revealed a similar agenda in comments to Germany’s NZZ Online.

“One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” he said. “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”

Wealth redistribution? Changing the economic model of the world? De-developing the United States? And here Americans are being told this is about “saving the climate.”

Remember, too, that when Trump withdrew from the Paris agreement, climate alarmists from around the world declared that Beijing was the new global “leader” of the effort to save the climate—the same regime that oversees the most CO2 emissions, is building coal plants faster than they can be counted, and that promised to keep increasing CO2 emissions until 2030.

If this is really about saving the climate from CO2, how can the CCP be the new leader? It’s beyond absurd.

Despite all this, the Biden administration continues to intensify “cooperation” on “climate action” and the Paris Agreement with Beijing, no doubt causing amusement and joy among members of the CCP’s Politburo.

It’s not just China that benefits. In fact, congressional researchers discovered that state-backed Russian energy interests were funding U.S. “green” groups opposed to U.S. energy via a shell company in Bermuda called Klein Ltd.

The regime in Venezuela, too, is laughing all the way to the bank as the Biden administration sabotages U.S. energy and begs the Maduro dictatorship to send oil to America.

To be clear, I don’t begrudge the CO2 emissions of China or anyone else. In fact, many scientists have told me that more of this “gas of life” would be enormously beneficial for the planet and humanity.

Retired Princeton physics professor Dr. William Happer, who served as Trump’s climate adviser, told me years ago at a climate conference we both spoke at that the planet needed more CO2 and that plants were designed to live in an atmosphere with quite a bit more CO2 than the planet currently has.

Plus, human emissions of CO2 make up a fraction of 1 percent of all the so-called “greenhouse gases” present naturally in the atmosphere.

To summarize, if one truly believes that CO2 is bad for the climate, shipping U.S. production and industry to China is the worst possible way to deal with it. Logically, then, the policymakers behind this must have an ulterior motive.

Of course, the CCP loves the Paris deal: They do nothing but build more coal plants to power the industries and factories fleeing America for China as the U.S. government forces the United States to commit economic suicide.

This isn’t just an economic or “climate” issue, either. As the United States is “de-developed,” the economic destruction produces a major threat to national security. A strong military can’t be funded without a strong economy, obviously.

It’s time for lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives to shut down the administration’s “climate” policies that do nothing but expand CCP CO2 emissions and harm the United States.

What exactly is happening at the southern border? Ever since President Donald Trump’s exit from the White House, the illegal immigration issue has received little interest from President Joe Biden and his administration. And if it doesn’t interest the Biden White House, it doesn’t seem to interest the dominant media. Because of this, many are left in the dark as to what is actually happening at the border.

This past weekend, to the shock of immigration agents, neighboring towns, and state officials, over 1,000 illegal immigrants crossed the Rio Grande River into El Paso, Texas. Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin revealed the following:

This was easily the biggest group we have ever seen during our 19 months of covering this border crisis… a massive caravan of over 1,000 illegal immigrants … local media there reporting it was potentially up to 2,000 people and that it was possibly the biggest mass crossing in the city’s history. 

Melugin reports that border patrol is so overwhelmed that the officers are starting to drop immigrants off in various locations in the city, including mass street releases. The U.S. Border Patrol chief said that “during the last 48 hours, there have been more than 16,000 illegal crossings, averaging out to 8,000 per day.”

According to Just Facts Immigration and Border Crossing statistics, “From 2014 to 2022, U.S. Border Patrol detected 1.9 million “gotaways” at the Southwest Border (migrants observed by surveillance but not apprehended), or an average of 208,000 per year. In 2022, U.S. Border Patrol detected 599,000 gotaways, a record high.”

According to Fox News, at least 73,000 illegal immigrants were spotted crossing into the U.S. but were able to evade Border Patrol agents in November–the highest number recorded at the US-Mexico border.

These statistics are alarmingly high and dangerous, and, unfortunately, they don’t even take into account the number of illegals who have evaded surveillance or apprehension.

Moreover, far-left California Governor Gavin Newsom, who has made California a sanctuary state for illegals, now says his state is “on the breaking point” even before a Trump-era law to expel migrants quickly (due to COVID-19 concerns) ends on December 21st.

Newsom, who has given state IDs and free universal health care to illegals, unbelievably blames Republicans in Congress for this mess.

Both sides of the aisle are now publicly pressuring the administration to take action.

In response to the border crisis, the Biden Administration is requesting that Congress approve an additional $3 billion in spending for the border, which would supposedly include resources for building a “safe, orderly, and humane immigration system.”

According to Fox News State Department Correspondent Rich Edson, “[California] Congressman [Rohit] Khanna says he thinks and expects the president will go to the southern border. The president is expected to travel to Mexico next month as part of the North American Leaders Summit.” However, this visit to the border by the Biden administration is yet to be seen.

What is happening at the southern border is more than a disaster and humanitarian crisis. It is an invasion. Cities in America are being invaded by illegal immigrants, and border patrol officers are overwhelmed. According to a recent CBS article, more than 3,800 illegal aliens have been bussed to Chicago since April. Unlike legally admitted immigrants, illegal aliens undergo no criminal background checks, nor do they receive medical screening to ensure they have no contagious diseases.

In light of this major crisis, many are asking what they can do to help.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your federal lawmakers, including President Biden, about the open border. Demand that they do their jobs by securing our borders, protecting the people of southern border states and communities. We cannot remain silent on this issue, as the devastating effects of this are being seen in far too many cities.

Read more:

Biden Administration Plans for More Illegal Aliens to Be Released Into Communities When Title 42 Ends (NTD)

Biden-Created Border Crisis About to Get Whole Lot Worse (The Daily Signal)

[WATCH] Biden’s border policies are intentional: Jim Jordan (Fox News)

Biden’s border crisis is dangerous enough already, and it may soon get worse.

But his Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandra Mayorkas, paints a rosier picture, “We are preparing for the end of Title 42….We continue to enforce the laws of this country.”

Title 42 from the Trump era stipulates that until potential immigrants are tested and shown to not have the virus, they should remain in Mexico.

Title 42 was scheduled to expire 5/23/22. The Center for Immigration Studies notes, “Title 42 is the only thing standing between the current chaos at the Southwest border, and no border there at all.”

Biden has promised repeatedly to lift this provision, abandoning testing and opening the floodgates for illegal immigrants. But for now, his plan to abolish Title 42 has been blocked by a Trump-appointed judge.

Meanwhile, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) told Maria Bartiromo of Fox News Channel’s Sunday Morning Futures on 5/22/22 that the border crisis is acute. Marshall has visited the border and wants the president to do the same. The senator said:

“Maria, this is a human tragedy here…At nighttime, it looks like a war zone. There’s a sea of humanitarian crises here every evening. And every day, it’s lived out as well.”

The numbers of illegal immigrants swarming in is staggering. Writing in the Washington Examiner (5/19/22), Paul Bedard observed: “Last year’s 1.7 million border encounters is expected to reach 2.1 million, according to Princeton Policy Advisors, an economic analysis outfit that has correctly predicted recent border surges.”

The U.S. Constitution says it exists to “insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty.” Do open borders for any nation help achieve such lofty goals?

On a recent radio segment, I spoke with former Congressman, Allen West, who has seen the border crisis first hand more than ten times. He told me, “Government is supposed to protect people within [our national] borders. That’s their Number 1 duty and responsibility. If we’re not going to follow the rule of law, then what are we supposed to base the Constitutional republic on?”

He added, “America is not just a piece of land in between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and Canada and Mexico. It is a sovereign nation, and it should be regarded and treated as such.” How can a nation remain sovereign if it has no borders?

Some open borders advocates imply that it’s the “Christian thing to do” to just let everyone in—yet surely these same people lock their doors at night.

Rev. Erwin Lutzer, the author of We Will Not Be Silenced, recently told our D. James Kennedy Ministries television audience: “One of the big mistakes that Christians sometimes make is that they want to apply the ethics of the church to the state. I heard a pastor saying–I’m sure that he was compassionate and meant well–when he said, ‘Of course, we should invite people into America and basically have open borders because after all the gospel is for everyone.’ Yes, of course, the gospel is for everyone, but that’s not the role of the state. The role of the state is to keep order, to punish crime, and to keep its citizens safe. That’s the role of the state.”

Lutzer added, “It is important that the church welcomes everyone. That’s the ministry of the church, but that is not the ministry of the state.”

Meanwhile, critics of Biden’s open border crisis note that known terrorists are sneaking into the country—more than 40 on the terrorist watch list slipped into the U.S. last year alone.

Also, human trafficking is taking place, and drugs are pouring in in record numbers. In fact, Chinese-produced fentanyl and other drugs are being smuggled in through the southern border, and the results are making headlines.

Earlier this year, The New York Times reported (2/13/22), “Drug overdoses now kill more than 100,000 Americans a year—more than vehicle crash and gun deaths combined.” The open borders cause this problem, or at least greatly exacerbate it.

Kerby Anderson, the host of the syndicated radio program “Point of View,” recently told our D. James Kennedy Ministries television audience why he thinks the left pushes for open borders: “I think the hope is that these might be future Democratic voters. And so what we’ll do is we’ll just kind of incrementally allow non-citizens to vote.”

Anderson points to the recent move by New York City to allow 800,000 noncitizens to vote as an example.

Senator Marshall, who said our border is like a “war zone” right now, noted that the public safety department of Texas is trying to hold the line: “All of those people are doing their best, but they’re just simply overwhelmed. This is an unsustainable crisis.”

This article was originally published by JerryNewcombe.com.

When it comes to media reporting today, the saying, “Don’t trust, verify” has never been more relevant. Quite literally, you simply cannot trust what you read or even seen without digging deeper and verifying. All the more does this seem to be the case when it comes to Donald Trump, who is on the front pages again after his interview with Piers Morgan.

As headlined in the UK’s The Sun, “GRUMPY TRUMPY. Dramatic moment Donald Trump storms off explosive Piers Morgan interview raging ‘you’re a DISLOYAL FOOL’.”

Yes, “DONALD Trump stormed out of a world exclusive interview with Piers Morgan in a blazing row over the ‘stolen’ U.S. presidential election.

“The ex-President reached boiling point after Piers blamed Trump’s refusal to admit defeat in the 2020 vote for last year’s deadly riots at the Capitol.”

If you didn’t believe the article, you could simply watch the video highlights. Trump was guilty as charged.

Only it appears that he wasn’t – at least, when it comes to him storming out of the interview in a rage. As other news outlets have reported,

“Audio provided by former President Donald Trump’s team to Breitbart News of the end of Trump’s interview with Piers Morgan proves that Morgan and his team deceptively edited the interview to make it appear as though it was a contentious ending when it was not.

“A 30-second promotional clip that Morgan released on Wednesday afternoon seemed to show Trump flying off the handle and walking out mid-interview as a righteous Morgan asked him tough questions about his views on the 2020 election. But the full story seems to indicate that Morgan’s team deceptively edited the clips together to make it as nasty as possible for Trump—and to drive up the ratings for Morgan’s new show.”

Specifically,

“Trump spent more than an hour with Morgan, and the way the promo clip cuts together what it calls ‘Morgan Versus Trump’ moments to promote the interview which will air on this coming Monday night is particularly deceptive. Most of those moments had nothing to do with the election issue at all, and the full audio of the last bit of the interview shows that Trump standing up and walking away and saying ‘turn the camera off’ came after Morgan ended the interview and thanked Trump for a “great interview.”

The audio recording of the last 7+ minutes of the interview, provided by Trump’s team, seems to confirm this scenario, reminding us again of the need to verify before trusting.

But that’s just the beginning of the apparent misreporting and deception.

The Sun claimed that, “Trump screamed that his interviewer was ‘dishonest’, ‘a FOOL’ and barked at the shocked TV crew: ‘TURN THE CAMERAS OFF!’”

And, we are told, “Piers tells how the President stared at him with ‘undisguised fury’ and was ‘almost foaming at the mouth’.”

But when you listen to the audio of the interview, you hear something very different.

Trump certainly did have some harsh words for Morgan, but they were spoken very calmly, in typical Trump demeanor. And he did not “scream” that Morgan was dishonest nor did he “bark” at the camera crew. Listen to the audio for yourself, linked in the article here.

Based on the audio tape, Morgan wanted to ask Trump one more question before they were done, wanting him to tell the story about getting a hole in one while golfing recently with former great Ernie Els.

After recounting the story, Trump and Morgan laughed together and Morgan thanked him for a great interview. Then, with everything done, Trump said to the crew, “Turn the cameras off.”

That’s it. Nothing explosive. Nothing out of control. Noting spoken in a fit of rage.

Just some laughing together about the golf story, some mutual appreciation for the interview, and a simple, “We’re done” (as in, “Turn the cameras off”).

So, in this case, what you saw (the video) and what you read (the article) was terribly misleading.

Do not trust, but verify!

It could be that Trump said some stupid things in the interview. It could be that he made himself look bad with some of his comments. And he certainly had some harsh things to say about Morgan.

But the way things were presented in major news headlines and the way the video was edited gave a very false impression.

Unfortunately, this happens every day of the week, as alleged news reporting puts a dramatic spin on things, shaping the way you will hear and see them.

How many articles have you read about “the internet exploding” after a certain event or comment, only to find out that several people on Twitter had something to say?

Or how many times have you seen headlines about an embarrassing moment for a politician, only to learn that the embarrassment was primarily in the eyes of the beholder?

A few years ago, I was asked to film an interview for a major cable TV channel about a controversial cultural issue. I agreed to come on if the interview was aired live, but they told me it would be prerecorded.

I then requested that my ministry would be allowed to video tape the entire interview for our own archives, not to air publicly (we would put this in writing) unless they deceptively edited the interview.

Not surprisingly, they declined, because of which I declined the invitation.

I had seen what happened to some of my colleagues where the deceptive editing was completely over the top. (I’m talking about showing the person smiling laughing after being asked about something like the Holocaust or slavery in America, whereas they had spliced in the laughter from a different segment.) I was not going to let that happen to me.

But it is not just this particular channel that was guilty of deceptive editing (or reporting). This misreporting is rampant today, often right in front of our eyes, without us having the slightest clue.

So remember to verify the details carefully before trusting. The deception is only going to get worse.

This article was originally published by AskDrBrown.org.

As we head into the next presidential campaign season, it would serve us well to remember how leftist hatred and the lies they created to serve their hatred have caused ordinary Americans to suffer.

Leftist hatred of former President Trump resulted in the election of the senile mob boss Joe “Bananas” Biden, who has destroyed virtually every good thing Trump did during his four years in the White House. (Ironically, leftists consumed by hatred hurl the epithet “hater” at anyone who holds different moral views than they do.)

With his ill-conceived COVID and economic policies, Bananas Biden destroyed a once- flourishing economy that helped communities of color. Democrats don’t really care about the welfare of those communities. Rather, they exploit those communities for votes. If they did care, they wouldn’t incentivize fatherlessness, celebrate single-sex family structures, and deny families school choice. If Democrats did care about families of color, they wouldn’t defund the police and release criminals who plunder communities already ravaged by crime and poverty.

While Trump presided over the historic Abraham Accords and foreign policies that kept bad actors in check, the feckless Biden emboldened tyrannical regimes.

Biden’s fear of the hysterical AOC and other climate Chicken Littles rendered the energy-rich United States oil-dependent again, thereby contributing to gas prices that influence-peddlers can afford, but ordinary Americans cannot.

Biden’s enthusiastic support for racist academic theories half-baked in Ivory Towers intensified racial division in America. Judge people by the color of their skin and their genitalia—especially if that genitalia is fake—say Biden and his collaborators. Normalizing racism and “trans” nonsense sits squarely at the top of Biden’s list of unprincipled convictions.

The anti-woman Biden embraced science-denying “trans” cultic beliefs, thereby robbing all citizens of their intrinsic right to privacy in shared private spaces, jeopardizing the safety of girls and women, and destroying women’s sports.

Biden opened wide the Southern border floodgates to law-breakers whom Bananas ships around the country under cover of darkness after giving them smart phones.

While Trump presided over the development and delivery of the COVID vaccine at lightning speed, Biden left his slimy, sluggish mark on the delivery of COVID-testing kits.

Worst of all, Biden the fake Catholic, dismantles every policy that protects preborn humans and supports any law that enables women to order the killing of their living offspring up until birth.

All of this harms ordinary citizens of every color, while the wealthy, powerful, and well-connected remain immune from the consequences of their corrosive decisions.

The achievements during Trump’s brief tenure were all the more remarkable in that he had to contend with Democrats in Congress who were determined to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to promote what they knew to be lies in order to unseat a duly elected president. That, in leftist la-la land is an ethically defensible way to refuse to accept the results of an election. Manufacturing a Russian collusion hoax involving FBI agents, wasting taxpayer money, and lying to judges to unseat a sitting president is the modus operandi of the proudly non-insurrectionist Democrat party

At the same time, Trump had to contend with relentless assaults by a shockingly partisan and hostile press more skilled at licking the muck boots of the DNC than at journalism. They will attack Republicans with a viciousness that only ethics-free bullies would engage in. This was a press so full of hatred and so petty that no women’s magazine invited the most beautiful First Lady in history to appear on its cover. Some might call that micro-aggressive.

Many on the left and a fair number of people on the right argue that Trump is a flawed man. No argument there. Who among us isn’t? Liar extraordinaire Adam Schiff? Nancy let-them-eat-cake- while-I-get-my-hair-done Pelosi? Hillary Clinton, whose list of ethical violations—including attacking the victims of her husband’s sexual predations—is too long to enumerate? Yet no mention of their corruption from the haters and liars on the left who concocted wild conspiracy theories and a web of lies involving powerful government agencies to—dare I say it—rig the election.

There are many ways to rig elections, at least three of which were at play in 2020:

First, the cognitively fading Joe Biden was largely concealed from the public eye, and the bootlicking press found nothing troubling with his cellar dwelling. Had any Republican, let alone Trump, engaged in such obvious campaign avoidance, he or she would have been savaged. Even a woman of color—if Republican—would have been savaged.

Second, social media superhero Meta-Man, aka Mark Zuckerberg, and his wife poured millions—$419 million—of their own money, laundered through two non-profits to ensure Biden’s win. In other words, they surreptitiously plopped down their bars of gold onto the scales of equity.

And third, another social media mogul, the pixilated Jack Dorsey, banned from Twitter a major story about the laptop of the second-in-command of the Biden crime family, Hunter Biden. Other press outlets followed suit, thereby keeping information from voters about a real influence-peddling/collusion scheme involving the Bidens, Ukraine, and China.

So, as we enter the presidential campaign season, let’s not be deceived by lies, nor distracted by a quixotic quest for a perfect candidate. There will be none. Support candidates whose policies will result in conditions that allow free speech, religious liberty, and human life to flourish. Reject candidates whose party seeks to constrain speech; undermine religious liberty; indoctrinate children; kill humans in the womb; foment racism; endanger the safety of girls and women; subordinate human needs to the desires of climate hysterics; facilitate border lawlessness and criminality in our cites; and render America less safe from enemies foreign and domestic.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Hatred-Animates-the-Left.mp3

“They hate him who reproves in the gate,
And they abhor him who speaks with integrity.”
~Amos 5:10

We have all seen and heard many shocking stories relating to public schools, such as the Zoom video where a teacher gets offended by a 10-year-old student for saying that he admires Donald Trump, or the insane Critical Race Theory or LGBTQIA indoctrination that students are constantly fed. This following story, however, is on a whole new level of demented, even for public schools.

This shocking story is from a Texas middle school. A teacher named Lisa Grimes was caught on camera complaining about how not everyone is properly vaccinated and that she wishes “conservative Christians” would “get COVID and die,” presumably because the stereotype of people who refuse the vaccine is hardcore, conservative Christian. This is crazy, even for a public school. We expect things like Critical Race Theory (CRT), racy or edgy books in the library, nonsensical LGBTQ policies or teachings, or extreme anti-Trump rhetoric from teachers, but this is by far the most bold and blatant a teacher has ever been in expressing their deranged (and hateful) Leftist ideology.

Grimes admitted to hating Christians to the point that she does not even want them to have the right to live. While it is understandably shocking and sickening to hear a teacher say outright that they hate Christians and want Christians to die, it shouldn’t be at this point in time. While I acknowledge that many teachers, both in public and private schools, can be great Christian role models, the system as a whole is clearly fostering an extreme anti-Christian bias that seems to elude many people, even when the schools make it so obvious. Many of the ideas they teach in public schools are not just immoral, but completely contradict and are the antithesis of Christianity.

Public Schools have made their position clear time and time again through their constant Leftist propaganda and insane views on gender. We already know what public schools as a whole think about Christians. While the teacher in the video actually says she hates Christians, most public schools still spread the same message of anti-Christian hatred, but through more subtle means. Students are taught to believe that identifying as LGBTQIA is not only something to not be ashamed of, but rather, it is something to be celebrated. They are taught that anyone who opposes this view is a bigoted piece of garbage. We can see how the hate for Christians naturally follows from these teachings.

Christians are commanded to abstain from sexual immorality, which includes LGBTQIA behavior, so it follows that they are seen as “bigots” or “homophobes” or “intolerant.” Since students are taught to oppose homophobia or anything remotely anti-LGBTQ, they perceive Christians as their number one enemy. The idea of staying sexually pure before marriage and forgoing other immoral acts wasn’t that crazy until recently. But now, unfortunately, this belief is seen as not only kind of weird or different, but as intolerant and horrible.

And who can forget about Critical Race Theory? While this one may not be as painfully obvious, CRT also directly contradicts Christian principles. God has created all of us equal in His eyes, but CRT teaches the exact opposite. Now, students are subtly brainwashed into opposing equality. They are taught to treat people differently purely based off the color of their skin, which is completely opposite to how a Christian should act. Whether we realize it or not, whether it is subtle or blatant, as with the teacher in the video, public schools are in direct contradiction with Christianity, and not only that, they also actively promote hatred of Christians through the ideas they teach. One cannot be an extreme Leftist and a Christian at the same time; it’s just not possible. This is a controversial thing to say, but it is something that we should acknowledge. To say that you embrace both Leftist propaganda AND Christian beliefs is nearly as ludicrous as saying that you are Islamic, but you follow the teachings of the Bible and Jesus Christ. In fact, saying you are a liberal Christian may be even worse since there is absolutely nothing in common with the two ideologies.

While it may pain us to admit this harsh reality, since so many people have been brainwashed into the cult of Leftism, that doesn’t mean that there is nothing we can do about it. The most important thing we can do as everyday citizens is spread the Good News of the Gospel and hope people come to Jesus on their own. This approach will be difficult, especially as many of these Leftists already believe they are Christians. So, if someone spreads the Word to them, they may discount or ignore it, thinking that they are already Christ followers. Hopefully, God will bring about some kind of revival in these hard times, because it is only by Him, working through us, that the minds of so many people can be changed.

While it is sad to think that a whole generation of kids are being brainwashed by the liberal propaganda machine that is the government school system, that doesn’t mean there is no hope left for America. Many parents are starting to realize just how awful the schools actually are through stories such as the sexual assault scandal in Loudon County schools or through the COVID-19 pandemic where so many students were online and parents could hear and see their kids’ classes. Many parents are getting involved by going to school board meetings or even running for a seat on their local school board. But the least, and perhaps the most important thing, we all can do is to stop sending our children to public schools. I realize it can be difficult, or maybe even impossible for some families, but if you are able to enroll your child(ren) in a private school or homeschool them, in the long run it will help all of us to defeat the public school system.

Since public schools have made it so clear that they hate Christianity and everything it stands for, we should do everything in our power to make sure that children do not end up spending all day in a place where they are hated and mocked for their “radical” beliefs. Children should not be told that they are “hateful” or “bigoted” for simply holding traditional Christian beliefs, yet, that seems to be a major goal of public schools. So major in fact, that they call parents who go to school board meetings to defend their children and their beliefs “domestic terrorists.” With language that extreme, many public school teachers and administrators are definitely pushing a truly radical agenda and they won’t stop unless we stop them.

In the aftermath of the events of January 6, 2021, the narrative is becoming more and more fixed. Simply stated, it claims that the vast majority of Americans who voted for Trump were gun-waving, white supremacist, insurrectionist, Christian nationalists, who need to be marginalized, if not purged from society. For many reasons, we need to continue to challenge that narrative. And recent world events involving Russia, China, and Canada provide a perfect opportunity to push back against that misleading and caricatured narrative.

To be clear, having voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, I do not want him to run again in 2024. And I am sympathetic to the argument that, in many ways, did Trump more harm than good, especially in his post-election behavior and in the damage that was done to our Christian witness when he looked to him as some kind of political savior. (I know that strong Trump supporters find this perspective utterly outrageous, but that’s a battle I am not here to fight.)

But the purpose of this article is not to offer a retrospective analysis of the Trump presidency. Rather, it is to respond to those who cannot possibly understand how God-fearing, Bible-loving, morality-espousing people could vote for Trump. We actually had some very good reasons.

Let’s start with the recent events in Canada and Prime Minister’s invoking of the Emergencies Act in an attempt to crush the Freedom Convoy protesters. According to reports, he “invoked the Emergencies Act for the first time in the country’s history to crack down on protests against his vaccine mandate — just days after the Biden administration urged him to use ‘federal powers.’”

How much of this came directly from President Biden? Only those involved know for sure.

But if true, an obvious question arises: Could you imagine the Trump administration encouraging this kind of extreme crackdown against freedom-loving, peaceful protesters? Could you imagine Trump telling Trudeau, “Yeah, you really need to crush this resistance”?

I think not.

Yet, when it came to international policy and America’s role in the world, those of us who voted for Trump felt far more confident in his leadership than the leadership of Biden. Does this make us violent white supremacists? Or, put another way, when it came to the massive implications of our international policies, was there no justifiable reason to vote for Trump?

As for Russia, while Trump’s critics claimed that he was either too friendly with Putin or actually admired him, others saw things quite differently.

Writing for the Jewish Press on July 24, 2018, Daniel Greenfield claimed that, “Trump Stood Up to Putin, Obama Appeased Him.”

He wrote, “The architects of Obama’s appeasement of Putin have been some of the most militant voices denouncing Trump. . . . Instead President Trump has steadily reversed Obama’s tide of concessions to Putin.”

He continued, “The media is outraged over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But when that happened, Ukraine asked for weapons and the only aid that Obama offered their country was MREs. It took months for Obama to come through with boots and tires. Meanwhile Trump has delivered actual weapons.

“Why did Obama refuse to provide Ukraine with weapons? According to senior officials, to avoid antagonizing Moscow. Trump isn’t afraid of Russia. Obama however was shaking in his loafers.

“While Trump approved anti-tank missiles for Ukraine, Obama slow-walked shipments of boots, putting them on trucks instead of planes so that they took months to arrive, so as not to upset the Russians. Meanwhile the Trump administration cut the red tape by dipping into its own European stockpiles.

“In the time it took Obama to ship boots to Ukraine, Trump shipped Javelin missiles.”

And he closed with this: “Unlike Obama, President Trump sold weapons to Ukraine. Unlike Obama, he bombed Assad and took on Russian mercenaries. Unlike Obama, he provided Poland with working Patriot missiles. Unlike Obama, he didn’t base his foreign policy around fearing to offend Moscow. Unlike Obama, he stood up to Russia.”

The fact is that many of us who voted for Trump felt that he would do a better job of standing up to the world’s strongmen than Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden would do. (For a relevant Twitter poll, see here.)

As for China, allow me to share two personal anecdotes. While in Australia in early 2020, shortly before the COVID travel restrictions, I was picked up at the airport by a Chinese national who was now an Australian citizen.

When I asked him for his views on Chinese President Xi, he told me plainly that he thought he was dangerous. When I asked him for his views on President Trump, he said, “He’s a hero.”

In fact, a colleague of mine who has spent almost all his adult life living and working in China, and who is well-connected to the underground Chinese church, told me that every Christian he knew in China was praying fervently for the reelection of Trump. And when Trump lost, many of them wept.

More broadly, a Bing search for the words how Trump stood up to China (not in quotes) yields pages of articles and videos with headlines like this: “It Takes a Trump to Stand Up to China” (The Hill, December 6, 2016); and “Finally, a President Stands Up to China” (Townhall, August 28, 2019).

To be sure, Trump had more than his share of critics when it came to his Chinese policies, with CNN claiming in July 2020 that, “Trump blasts Beijing in public, but privately Trump org imports tons of Chinese goods.”

But the fact remains that America just competed in the Beijing Olympics, with our athletes being urged not to protest and our official diplomatic protest seeming quite tepid, even with its reference to China’s “ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity.”

Really now, if we truly believed that China was guilty of “ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity” shouldn’t we rather boycott the Olympics? Why not put teeth in our words?

Obviously, I cannot imagine the pressures President Biden is under, and the purpose of this article is not to throw stones at him. (How many Biden-bashing articles have I written?) And, to repeat, I do not want to Trump to run again in 2024 for quite a few reasons.

I’m simply reminding those who broad-brush and smear all of us who voted for Trump that international policies were a major consideration for many of us, with those policies potentially affecting hundreds of millions of lives. (And I’ve not said a word here about our policies with Iran.)

That is hardly a matter of white supremacy or dangerous Christian nationalism. This is matter of worldwide humanitarian concern.

This article was originally published at AskDrBrown.org.

A gang of college students at Arizona State University (ASU) committed to “social justice” as redefined by leftists are trying to get Kyle Rittenhouse kicked out of ASU’s online nursing school, calling him a “bloodthirsty murderer” who makes the campus “unsafe.” They want to “abate” the “danger” posed by Rittenhouse’s virtual presence in an online nursing class. In the real world, where many of us still live and move and have our being, this is called cancelling or industrial-strength bullying.

In addition to demanding the administration “withdraw” Rittenhouse from the school, the four oppressive, tyrannical, exclusionary, leftwing organizations—MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán), Students for Socialism, Students for Justice in Palestine, and the Multicultural Solidarity Coalition—are demanding that the school issue a public statement against the “racist murderer Kyle Rittenhouse.”

Rittenhouse is the teen who was recently unanimously acquitted of two homicide charges, one count of attempted homicide, and two counts of reckless endangerment. One count of unlawful possession of a firearm and one count of curfew violation were dismissed by the judge. There was no evidence provided during the trial proving Rittenhouse was guilty of any crime or suggesting he was motivated by racism. In fact, even the prosecution’s witnesses undermined the fantastical tale that Rittenhouse is a racist, bloodthirsty murderer, hell-bent on vigilantism. And yet, the self-identifying “social justice” warriors want Rittenhouse punished.

Their actions are worse than those of vigilantes—of which Rittenhouse is not one. Their libelous attacks against Rittenhouse and their demands that Rittenhouse—who has been found innocent of all charges—be refused entrance to a state university are the actions of vengeful criminals and petty tyrants with big egos and cultural power wielded in support of gross injustice.

The lack of awareness of their own ignorance, hypocrisy, and control-freakish impulses is not a poison affecting only leftist millennials. They’ve drunk deeply from the cup of arsenic prepared for them by leftist boomers who took control of all cultural institutions decades ago and are desperately gripping those institutions as they feel their grubby fingers being pried loose.

One of those boomers is the politically immortal harpy Hillary Clinton, who in a recent interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, said this:

[W]hat we’ve seen sadly in the last several years is not new … but it is, unfortunately, turbo-charged by the combination of demagogues, social media that is more interested, frankly, in profitability than the rule of law or unity, that feeds disinformation in a way that strips people to the core of their insecurities and their fears. …

I think we’re really on the precipice … of seeing people, particularly in the Republican Party, but not only there, who truly just want power, power to impose their views, power to exploit financial advantage, power to implement a religious point of view. …

[B]ecause of the way we are getting our information today and because of the lack of gatekeepers and people who have a historic perspective, who can help us understand what we are seeing, there is a real vulnerability in the electorate to the kind of demagoguery and disinformation that, unfortunately, the other side is really good at exploiting.

Who exactly are the “demagogues” who are more interested in “profitability than the rule of law or unity”?

Are these “demagogues” the climate alarmists who profit from frightening children? Are they the race-baiting entrepreneurs who profit from keeping hate and fear alive and then sell their snake oil seminars to government schools and corporate America to end hate and fear?

Who is least interested in the “rule of law”?

Is it those who support election integrity, border security, anti-theft laws, and the Second Amendment or those who seek to make voter fraud, illegal immigration, and looting easier and who want to jettison the Second Amendment?

Is it primarily Republicans who seek power to impose their views?

Who denies Americans the ability to choose how, where, and what their children are taught? Who insists that their sexuality beliefs and theirs alone be taught in our “inclusive” government schools? Who allows teachers to call those who disagree names like “transphobe” and “homophobe”? Who wants to teach all children the racist fiction that all white people are oppressors? Who demands all teachers use incorrect pronouns in the service of the “trans” superstition or be fired? Who is demanding an 18-year-old found innocent in a court of law be punished?

Hillary Clinton doesn’t fear that Republicans seek “power to implement a religious point of view.” She and other leftists fear that theologically orthodox Christians may remain free to exercise their religion. And she and her ideological allies seek to disseminate their divisive, bigoted, anti-Christian, anti-constitutional views all across the nation.

Clinton claims in her own special unifying and non-ironic way that “the other side” is “really good at exploiting demagoguery and disinformation.” Oh, really?

Which side created and promoted the fake Russian Collusion scam and spent $38 million dollars of taxpayer money to promote, “investigate,” and prosecute the scam?

Which side claimed in fake dudgeon that Hunter Biden’s computer was not Hunter Biden’s computer?

Which side had a New York Post story about Biden’s computer with all its unseemly content about sexual perversion and influence-peddling buried until after the 2020 Election?

Which side promoted a fantastical tale about former President Trump watching prostitutes urinate, while burying a true story about Hunter Biden frolicking naked with two prostitutes?

Who wrote endless stories about the Trump children’s legitimate businesses while saying nothing about nouvel artiste Hunter Biden earning millions on the sale of his “art” to anonymous customers?

Which side calls the Jan. 6 riot a violent armed insurrection even though no guns were fired by the “violent armed insurrectionists,” while calling months of rioting, looting, and arson during which government property and police were attacked—which is the definition of “insurrection”—”mostly peaceful protests”?

Clinton’s solution to the problems she outlined? She wants more “gatekeepers” to censor the alleged “demagoguery and disinformation” that “the other side is really good at exploiting” and more people who have a “historic perspective.” Maybe Clinton doesn’t know the difference between “historic” and “historical.” While Nikole Hannah-Jones’s 1619 Project could possibly be deemed “historic” in its inanity and in helping to fan the flames of righteous indignation under the “other side,” it certainly lacks “historical perspective.”

If Clinton wants more people who have a historical perspective, I recommend Victor Davis Hanson.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Rittenhouse-and-Justice-in-a-Leftwing-Dystopia.mp3

After rejoining a number of controversial United Nations agencies and agreements over the last year, the Biden administration and its allies in Congress are quietly trying to figure out how to bypass federal laws to rejoin a UN agency that has been clouded in scandal and allegations of extremism for decades.

Four years ago, the Trump administration and the Israeli government both announced they would be exiting the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Accusations of anti-Semitism and widespread corruption were among the many concerns cited.

But now, despite what critics describe as continued extremism and ongoing corruption issues, as well as significant communist Chinese influence over the UN’s education agency, there are growing signs that the Biden administration and Israeli authorities are getting ready to overlook all that.

At the Biden administration’s request, lawmakers have even quietly introduced legislation that would allow Washington to sidestep U.S. laws prohibiting funds for the controversial UN agency.

The price tag in terms of tax dollars would be enormous. But critics, analysts, and former senior officials warned that even more significant than the financial cost would be legitimizing the agency and even Beijing’s influence within it.

“I don’t think UNESCO is fixable,” explained Kevin Moley, who served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs during the previous administration.

Moley, who also worked as U.S. Ambassador to UN organizations in Geneva during the Bush administration, pointed to overwhelming communist Chinese influence in UNESCO and its long track record of undermining American principles as key reasons for concern.

“In the Trump administration, it was Make America Great Again,” Moley told The Epoch Times in a phone interview. “In the Biden administration, it’s HAA—Humiliate America Again.”

“Re-joining UN institutions that habitually take Israel and America to task for unfounded allegations of human rights abuses while condoning the human rights abuses of UN Human Rights Council members such as Russia, Venezuela, China, and Cuba, is the ultimate manifestation of what the late great Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick called the ‘blame America first’ crowd,” the former assistant secretary of state explained. “This crowd has now taken over the U.S. State Department lock, stock, and barrel.”

At least one UNESCO insider argued that a thorough investigation of the UN agency and its leaders by U.S. authorities would be a more sensible plan than sending more than half a billion tax dollars to pay “arrears” to an organization that he said was dominated by ideologues and plagued by never-ending scandals.

Even powerful voices within the foreign-policy establishment have warned against a return to the agency without at least securing some major concessions and reforms. So far, though, it does not appear that any significant concessions are even being sought.

The Backstory

In October of 2017, following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, the Trump administration gave UNESCO its one-year notification that the U.S. government would be leaving the organization.

Among other concerns, the State Department pointed to the growing amount of taxpayer money supposedly owed to the agency by the United States since the U.S. government stopped paying dues in 2011, as required by statutes passed by Congress and signed by former presidents Bush and Clinton.

The funding was stopped during the Obama administration as a result of federal laws banning U.S. funding for international organizations that accept the “State of Palestine” as a member state prior to a negotiated settlement with Israel.

Current federal law still prohibits U.S. funding for UNESCO. But the Senate Appropriations Committee just introduced legislation that would allow the Biden administration to waive that prohibition if it believes re-joining would promote U.S. interests.

Also behind the U.S. government’s decision to withdraw was what authorities said was the UN agency’s systemic bias against Israel, as well as what the State Department described as the “need for fundamental reform.”

Pointing to murderous dictatorships on the agency’s “human rights” committee and other policies, then-UN Ambassador Nikki Haley at the time said the “extreme politicization” of UNESCO had “become a chronic embarrassment.”

“Just as we said in 1984 when President Reagan withdrew from UNESCO, U.S. taxpayers should no longer be on the hook to pay for policies that are hostile to our values and make a mockery of justice and common sense,” Haley said.

But that was just the tip of the iceberg, insiders and analysts say.

At the time, the UN agency was being led by longtime Communist Party apparatchik Irina Bokova of Bulgaria. Her deep ties to the former Communist regime in Bulgaria, combined with serious allegations of corruption and intrigue during and after her tenure, led to major questions among Western governments about the UN agency’s leadership.

Responding to the U.S. withdrawal, Bokova expressed “profound regret,” calling it a “loss for multilateralism.”

Leading the UN agency alongside Bokova was the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) official Qian Tang, who served as assistant director-general of the agency.

Separately, China’s then-Ambassador to Belgium, Qu Xing, was appointed deputy director-general by Bokova’s successor, French Socialist Party figure Audrey Azoulay.

Their influence over the UN organization—particularly in the field of education—has been immense.

On the heels of the U.S. notice to UNESCO, Israeli authorities followed suit. Blasting UNESCO as “the theater of the absurd,” then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the Trump administration for its “brave and moral decision.”

The Israeli Foreign Ministry announced that government’s withdrawal shortly after Washington, and both governments officially exited at the end of 2018.

With the U.S. and Israeli governments gone, UNESCO continued in its ways under the leadership of French Director General Azoulay, a former culture minister whose tenure at the UN has also been marked by allegations of impropriety.

Diplomats have noticed problems.

Last summer, for example, U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Lodge sent a scathing letter to top UNESCO officials expressing concern over “confirmed financial fraud.” Lodge also highlighted efforts by the agency’s leaders to cover up the fraud and avoid informing member states.

Efforts to Rejoin

A number of sources told The Epoch Times that after the Biden administration re-joined several other UN organizations and instruments such as the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council, and the Paris Agreement on climate, it had its eyes on rejoining UNESCO.

A spokesman for the State Department responded to phone calls and e-mails from The Epoch Times with a brief note: “We don’t have anything to announce on UNESCO at this time.”

However, it appears that there are serious efforts behind the scenes to rejoin and pay arrears, complicated by the federal laws banning U.S. funding for organizations that admit the “State of Palestine.”

A statement released by UNESCO said the agency saw “real hope” for a U.S. return, but “the timing and modalities … have yet to be defined.”

UNESCO chief Azoulay was also reportedly in Washington lobbying Biden’s wife and U.S. lawmakers, according to media reports based on an anonymous diplomatic source.

And officials such as former USAID chief and Clinton-era Undersecretary of State J. Brian Atwood are publicly lobbying for the U.S. government re-join.

“Much has changed under UNESCO’s Director General Audrey Azoulay,” Atwood argued in an opinion piece for The Hill last month. “It is long past time for Congress to recognize that the national interests of the United States are best served by participation in international organizations like UNESCO.”

In Israel, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid asked officials to review the issue. In fact, according to media reports citing Israeli officials, Lapid believes leaving UNESCO and other international organizations made Israeli foreign policy less effective.

But critics have expressed grave concerns over ongoing efforts to rejoin the UN agency.

Speaking to The Epoch Times, former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Moley blasted the Biden administration’s State Department and its efforts to re-engage in what he described as out-of-control UN organs such as UNESCO. In fact, he argued that this behavior undermined U.S. interests.

UNESCO is too far gone and cannot be fixed anyway, he added, pointing to large swaths of its policy-making that “have largely been taken over by the CCP and its allies.” These concerns have existed for decades.

In addition to being bad for America, Ambassador Moley also argued that re-joining the UN agency would be “another slap in the face to our only democratic ally in the Middle East.”

One key problem, he argued, is that the State Department is under the “complete control” of officials whose “first response to virtually anything is to apologize for America instead of standing up for our values, our Constitution, and our people.”

The Biden administration is a representation of this, and is “full of the most anti-American, socialist” forces, he added.

Another one of Moley’s major concerns is the attitude from Obama and Biden on down regarding the threat from the CCP.

Biden has even joked about it recently. “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” he said in May 2019 on the campaign trail, ridiculing the idea that the CCP poses a serious threat to the United States.

Moley’s Obama-era predecessor as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, Bathsheba Crocker, was even quoted in the state-run newspaper China Daily saying she was “particularly pleased” to see China taking more responsibility in the UN.

China’s Influence

As The Epoch Times reported in May of 2020, the CCP now dominates large segments of the UN and its specialized agencies, with the CCP-dominated G77 (Group of 77) Plus China alliance holding a super-majority in the General Assembly.

UNESCO is no exception, and in fact, may be worse, critics say.

CCP agent and Deputy Director General Qu, who was appointed with no public “recruitment process” to speak of as required under the agency’s rules, is now leading the “Strategic Transformation” of UNESCO, according to the agency.

An insider at UNESCO who cannot be named due to the threat of repercussions for speaking frankly told The Epoch Times that Qu is working on the “most sensitive part” of Azoulay’s mandate. This allows the CCP to craft the UN agency in its own mold in a way that will endure for many years to come, the insider said.

“Today UNESCO is a lawless organization, a toxic political arena, with reduced to the minimum activities that should normally be at the heart of its action,” the source told The Epoch Times on condition of anonymity. “Incompetent leaders sold out to China.”

This is not a new phenomenon. During the previous administration of Bokova, who was trained in Moscow during the Soviet era and served as a senior official in the former Communist regime in Bulgaria, the UN agency was also closely connected to Beijing and other communist power centers—even while the U.S. government was a member.

The CCP now has the second-highest number of world heritage sites, and it is seeking to move key UNESCO education offices to China.

In 2017, long before the U.S. left, the CCP also signed a “Memorandum of Understanding” with UNESCO agreeing to increase cooperation on Beijing’s controversial “Belt and Road” project. Bokova praised the CCP for its initiatives that have “set good examples for the international community,” CCP media reported.

Under Bokova’s administration, CCP member Qian Ting—a former official with the CCP’s “Education Ministry”—served as assistant director-general for UNESCO.

Qian was even made “officer-in-charge” of the Bureau of Strategic Planning, giving the CCP wide influence in the path charted by the UN agency.

Perhaps even more significantly, Qian also led the UN’s “Education 2030” agenda, a critical component of the UN “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) also known as Agenda 2030.

Top UN officials have described the global agenda as the “master plan for humanity” and even the global “Declaration of Interdependence.”

As she was seeking to become Secretary General of the broader UN, Bokova rewarded Xi Jinping’s wife with the title “Special Envoy” for female education.

“You are an immense role model for millions of young girls in China and beyond,” Bokova declared when giving the CCP dictator’s wife the prestigious title.

On her way out from UNESCO, it was common knowledge among senior officials there that Bokova was hoping Qian would take her place. The CCP member was formally nominated for the top UNESCO post by the CCP, which is hoping to secure the agency’s director-general position when Azoulay’s term ends.

Unlike diplomats from other countries, who promise to work on behalf of international organizations rather than national interests while in UN agencies, CCP leaders have publicly declared that Chinese nationals in the UN must obey party orders. Former Interpol chief Meng Hongwei was even arrested by the CCP for, among other crimes, disobeying party orders while at the helm of the global policing agency.

Countering CCP, or Legitimizing and Funding its Agenda?

A number of influential voices from the foreign-policy establishment have proposed that the U.S. government rejoin UNESCO if only to counter CCP influence, which was well-established in the agency long before the Trump administration’s exit.

Kristen Cordell of the Council on Foreign Relations, an internationalist powerhouse, for example, cited the CCP’s influence in UNESCO as a key reason for Biden to rejoin in exchange for some concessions.

Critics ridiculed the idea, however.

Ambassador Moley, for instance, lambasted the notion that U.S. membership would rein in the CCP there as “wishful thinking.”

“As we have experienced in engaging with UN organizations—people think we have a veto—we are simply one of 193 members,” Moley said. “China has its useful idiots, including among the more than 130 governments in the G77 Plus China who make up most of the UN’s members.”

“As long as bribery, coercion, and blackmail are predominant tools of Chinese foreign policy, it is very unlikely that we can prevail in a UN forum such as UNESCO with our one vote,” he added.

Emphasizing the seriousness of the matter, Moley called the CCP “our enemy” and “the greatest existential threat to our republic since 1860.”

The insider from UNESCO similarly balked at the idea that re-joining the UN agency would give the U.S. government the ability to counter the CCP.

“If President Biden decides to return to UNESCO, it will be a good gesture towards China, which will please Beijing a lot, since it would legitimize its hold on the agency,” the source said. “It will also please all the leftist globalists and will bring nothing but costly nuisance to the U.S. and Israel.”

“In fact, Joe Biden would have more leverage to exert reform pressure at UNESCO by keeping the U.S. out,” the Paris-based diplomatic source added.

The conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation’s International Regulatory Affairs Fellow Brett Schaefer echoed concerns about CCP influence within the UN and its specialized agencies, saying it would be a “mistake” for the U.S. government to rejoin.

“Obviously, everybody should be concerned about Chinese influence in international organizations,” he told The Epoch Times in a phone interview.

“The question I have on this, though, is whether UNESCO is even central to U.S. interests,” Schaefer continued. “The U.S. did not participate and U.S. interests were minimally affected.”

In addition, even when Washington was a member, “UNESCO was pursuing policies that the U.S. did not support and frankly were embarrassments to the organization and its mission and mandate,” added Schaefer.

While countering the CCP is a worthy objective, he also expressed concerns about the large sum American taxpayers would have to hand over to rejoin UNESCO—more than $500 million just in arrears that would then be spent however the agency and its other member states wanted.

Pointing to the United States re-joining under Bush, the Heritage expert said there was already an established precedent for paying arrears in full.

“It’s a windfall that they can use however they want to,” Schaefer said.

That is almost certainly what would happen. “The new administration has made a practice of rejoining organizations such as the World Health Organization and the Human Rights Council without any conditions, so that would be the expectation of other member states, knowing that this administration would like to rejoin,” he added.

UNESCO: Corrupt to the Core?

Aside from the allegations of anti-Semitism and extremism, UNESCO has long been plagued by corruption and politicization scandals at the highest levels.

Leaked minutes from the UNESCO Executive Board revealed that then-U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Sudders slammed Bokova for alleged corruption in appointing cronies to aid her ambitions to rise further in the UN.

“As a U.K. civil servant, I have a duty to report all cases of possible or suspected fraud to our investigations department,” Sudders declared. The comments were reportedly made with the full support of his government, which concluded that a “comprehensive external review” was needed.

More recently, under the current UNESCO administration, U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Lodge demanded to know why member states were being kept in the dark about “confirmed financial fraud,” unsanctioned misappropriation of funds, and more by top UNESCO leadership.

Even more bizarre were news reports suggesting there may be a link between Azoulay’s troubles and an almost unprecedented late-night intrusion into UNESCO headquarters and IT systems by French government agents.

Reports also suggested that international civil servants in UNESCO chief Azoulay’s office were improperly lobbying for the elimination of a second candidate for director-general of the agency.

UNESCO’s Secretariat, which is overseen by Azoulay, did not acknowledge multiple requests for comment.

But in an e-mail to The Epoch Times, UNESCO General Conference President Altay Cengizer said the allegations of financial fraud raised by Western diplomats should be addressed but were beyond his competence.

Cengizer said he had “no idea” whether French authorities “played a part or not, in securing Member States’ silence about the alleged disregard of the Secretariat of financial and accountability regulations since 2017.”

“When allegations persist for such a long time, I think a clarification by the Secretariat, to set things straight, is the best way to deal with questions of financial irregularity,” Cengizer said.

So far there has been no clarification.

Because UNESCO is hosted in France, he said the “somewhat entangled relationship” between Azoulay and French authorities was to be expected.

“In such cases, one hopes that it would not exceed a certain limit and not endanger several other balances that are innate to an international and intergovernmental organization,” he said, noting that there were “strong reactions” to the “Spying Scandal” involving French officials being allowed into UNESCO headquarters at odd hours.

In the e-mail, Cengizer expressed concern—and has publicly in the past—about the “active lobbying by international civil servants for securing support for the re-election of the incumbent Director General.”

The UNESCO General Conference chief said he did not have details surrounding the mysterious elimination of Azoulay’s rival for leadership at the UN agency, a process that critics said was clouded by corruption.

“However, I think that the Member States should have been informed of such a development,” he added.

While supporters of rejoining UNESCO argue that the corruption and extremism have been cleaned up since the U.S. departure, critics and even people closely associated with the agency say that is not the case.

A Difficult Road Ahead

On both sides of the debate about whether the U.S. government should rejoin UNESCO, there is agreement on one point: If it happens, it will be a complex process.

Writing in the New York Daily News this summer, former National Security Advisor and UN Ambassador John Bolton said it was “incomprehensible” why Biden would seek to resurrect the UNESCO issue—especially since Congress will “certainly reject” funding it.

“Biden would face a massive political struggle without the prospect of any substantive accomplishment,” added Bolton.

In any case, any attempt to rejoin UNESCO would be a “significant mistake,” he said.

“UNESCO has long been among the most politicized UN organizations,” continued Bolton, saying it was an “error” to believe the agency was capable of reform.

Throwing fuel on the fire, UNESCO adopted two resolutions in October blasting Israel and calling on the international community to pressure Jerusalem to stop its “illegal” actions.

Pervasive corruption allegations and CCP influence surrounding UNESCO come amid an escalating scandal over Beijing’s subversion at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which further complicates Biden administration efforts to expand multilateralism.

An independent investigation recently found that IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva, also a Bulgarian with links to Bokova, improperly applied “undue pressure” on World Bank officials to manipulate data. The goal was to put the CCP in a good light in its official report on business climate, the probe concluded.

Top Biden officials including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen publicly expressed concern and vowed to “monitor” the organization. But Georgieva, with ties to Communist forces in Bulgaria and beyond like Bokova, remains at the helm of the IMF.

UNESCO did not respond to phone calls and emails seeking comment.

The international agency is best known for its world heritage site designations, but also plays a major role in the UN’s global education, culture, and science policy.

Over the weekend, the Republican National Committee (RNC) announced its newest endeavor called the “RNC Pride Coalition.” The RNC is colluding with Log Cabin Republicans to get Republicans elected. The Log Cabin Republicans is the country’s largest “LGBTQ+,” allegedly Republican group. Make no mistake, the RNC Pride Coalition will seek to get elected their ideological kind of Republican—the kind that believe marriage has no connection to sexual differentiation or reproduction, the kind that believe children have no right to a mother and a father, and the kind that believe celebration of homosexual acts and relationships is necessary for a healthy social order. Log Cabin Republicans and the “RNC Pride Coalition” believe that homosexual acts and relationships are worthy of pride. Such beliefs are neither conservative nor good for America.

The RNC has decided that sacrificing principle for power will build a better America. The RNC, under chairwoman Ronna McDaniel’s leadership, has calculated that the homosexual and cross-dressing communities are more politically valuable to the RNC than are stalwart conservatives who have been fighting for decades to make America a safe place where families, children, and liberty can flourish.

While conservatives are awakening from their slumber, working tenaciously to get critical race theory, the “trans” ideology, and homosexual porn out of their schools, McDaniel is working tenaciously to curry favor with homosexual “Republicans.”

Once the “RNC Pride Coalition” has fundraised and successfully shoved their kind of Republicans into office—and by “their kind,” I mean those who are ignorant of the critical importance of marriage, of the traditional family structure, and of sexual morality—the speed at which conservative principles and policies will be abandoned will accelerate. And the corruption of culture will continue.

Just as Democrats are too spiritually blind to see how their policies are destroying America, so too is the “RNC Pride Coalition” too spiritually blind to see that there is no greater domestic threat to our First Amendment protections, children, families, and education than the sexuality ideology of the “LGBTQ+” communities. Therefore, there is no greater domestic threat to America’s freedoms and future than partnering with Log Cabin Republicans, thereby strengthening their political and social power.

The announcement was made at a swanky event, offensively named “Spirit of Lincoln Gala,” held at former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate where McDaniel gushed,

Conservatives in Log Cabin don’t just share our vision for a free, secure and prosperous America—they enrich it by adding unique perspectives to our party and recruiting even more diverse candidates and supporters to join our cause.

Perhaps McDaniel could be a tad more explicit and transparent. What, pray tell, are the “unique” perspectives that Log Cabin members bring to the GOP? What is the nature of the diversity that the recruited candidates and supporters will bring to “our cause”? How exactly will these “unique” perspectives and unidentified form/s of diversity help the GOP and America?

Homosexual political consultant Richard Grenell, who has worked for George Bush, Mitt Romney, and Donald Trump, made this curious claim at the gala where he was given the “Game Changer Award”:

[T]he thing about gay conservatives is that we have normal lives. … We’re not going to make sexual orientation be the be all, end all center of everything that we do.

Grenell didn’t define “normal,” nor did he explain what he was referring to when he said, “normal lives.” If by normal, he means “adherence to a standard that is associated with well-being” or “functioning in a natural way,” the lives of homosexuals are not “normal.” Engaging in sterile homoerotic acts is not normal or natural. Two people of the same sex legally “marrying” in imitation of true marriage is not normal. Renting wombs and purchasing genetic material to create motherless or fatherless children is not normal, right, or good.

And take note, Grenell didn’t say they wouldn’t make sexual orientation an issue. He said they wouldn’t put it at the “center of everything” they do. In other words, they will be making “sexual orientation” an issue.

If anyone doubts what the goals of the “LGBTQ+” community are for the GOP, here’s Grenell hinting at what he views as progress—and it has nothing to do with religious liberty, speech rights, or children’s needs:

Now … we were at an event where the former president of the United States [Trump] and first lady are welcoming us, and hosting 600 influential gays, lesbians and their straight allies. It is phenomenal for me to look back and see this and to champion an organization like Log Cabin.

Unless conservatives get busy and bold, the GOP will hoist aboard the “LGBTQ+” community and toss overboard conservatives and their pesky principles like so much jetsam.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and other GOP Officials to urge them to uphold the GOP Platform on marriage, family and society (pages 31-32). Conservative Christians expect GOP officials to uphold foundational principles critical to the health and future of America, not undermine them.  You can also call the RNC at (202) 863-8500 during business hours to let them know how bad an idea the “RNC Pride Coalition” is.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/The-GOPs-Shameful-Pride-Coalition-1.mp3

On November 7, 2020, four days after the General Election, a millennial friend who identifies as a Christian and is a devoted disciple of critical race theory and BLM posted this sacrilegious image on her Facebook page:

These were the last words of Christ before he died on the cross. The debt mankind owes to God for our sin and rebellion was finished, that is, paid in full, by Christ’s suffering and death. Jesus provided the means—the only means—for man to be reconciled to God. Satan was defeated. The sinless lamb of God’s self-sacrifice for the sins of man fulfilled all Old Testament prophecies. And this millennial Christian used that biblical allusion to celebrate the defeat of Donald Trump.

In addition to being sacrilegious, it is nonsensical as an analogy. If “it” refers to Trump’s tenure as president, in what precise way or ways is that analogous to Christ’s finished work on the cross? If Trump’s presidency is in no ways akin to Christ’s finished work—which, of course, it wasn’t—why use that allusion? Did she think it was clever? Funny? Unifying?

One thing is clear, this millennial and countless other Never-Trump, pro-Biden evangelicals believed that the country suffered under Trump’s presidency and that Biden would be America’s savior. And with their eyes blinded by rage at Trump and their minds clouded with foolish ideology, they have brought untold suffering to the world.

Cultural regressives who self-identify as “progressives” ripped Trump for his purported foreign policy ineptitude, claiming that he was destroying America’s reputation on the international stage. And here we are now with Western European leaders publicly savaging Biden’s astonishingly inept exit from Afghanistan, the effects of which worsen every day. As of this writing, two ISIS-K bomb blasts at the Kabul airport have left at least 12 U.S. service members dead, 15 injured, and an unknown number of Afghans dead or injured.

Politico has reported that “U.S. officials in Kabul gave the Taliban a list of names of American citizens, green card holders and Afghan allies to grant entry into the militant-controlled outer perimeter” of the Kabul airport. An outraged defense official who described this act as “appalling and shocking,” said, “they just put all those Afghans on a kill list.”

Rebecca Klapper writing in Newsweek Magazine—no friend of conservatism—paints a vivid picture of the dim view European leaders have of bumbling Biden and his gang of accomplices who are too busy planning the forced entrance of men in dresses into women’s locker rooms to plan an exit of soldiers and allies from one of the most dangerous countries in the world:

Markus Soeder, a leading member of German Chancellor Angela Merkel‘s center-right Union bloc, called for accountability from the United States.

Soeder said Washington should provide funding and shelter to people fleeing Afghanistan, since “the United States of America bear the main responsibility for the current situation.”

…

Even in the United Kingdom, which has always prided itself on a its “special relationship” with Washington … barbs were coming from all angles.

Former British Army chief Richard Dannatt said, “the manner and timing of the Afghan collapse is the direct result of President Biden’s decision to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the 20th anniversary of 9/11. At a stroke, he has undermined the patient and painstaking work of the last five, 10, 15 years to build up governance in Afghanistan, develop its economy, transform its civil society and build up its security forces. ” Dannatt said Wednesday in Parliament.

In response to attempts to “absolve” Biden of culpability for the botched exit, Charles Cooke writing for National Review said,

The Biden administration could. … quite obviously have ensured that before our troops were drawn down we had got every American, permanent resident, and eligible Afghan out; we had removed both our weaponry and any sensitive information; and we had consulted properly with our allies. That part … was within Joe Biden’s control. And he completely and utterly screwed it up.

Allies are not angered by just the exit debacle but also by Biden’s unconscionable lies concocted to shift blame, lies that provoked unprecedented bipartisan rebukes by members of Parliament:

Biden putting much of the blame on Afghan forces for not protecting their nation has not gone down well with Western allies, either.

Conservative Parliament member Tom Tugendhat, who fought in Afghanistan, was one of several British lawmakers taking offense.

“To see their commander-in-chief call into question the courage of men I fought with, to claim that they ran, is shameful,” Tugendhat said.

Chris Bryant, from the opposition Labour Party, called Biden’s remarks about Afghan soldiers, “some of the most shameful comments ever from an American president.”

Cranky leftists with their gender-neutral underpants in a twist repeatedly croaked that Trump lied about Stormy Daniels, lied about the weather on his inauguration day, and lied about the number of attendees at his inauguration.

Contrast those lies with Biden’s. Biden lied when he said al Qaeda was gone from Afghanistan. He lied when he said, “we know of no circumstance where American citizens are—carrying an American passport—are trying to get through to the airport.” He lied when he said, “I have seen no question of our credibility from our allies around the world.” And he lied when he said, “The Afghan military gave up, sometimes without trying to fight.”

Add those lies to the mound of whoppers from leftist journalists, members of Congress, Democrat Party operatives, the CIA, and FBI (aided and abetted by the algorithmic mischief of Big Tech) throughout Trump’s presidency and the 2020 campaign—lies which were created to take down a duly elected president and then to prevent his reelection.

They lied when they claimed Trump called all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers. They lied when they said Trump put immigrant children in cages. They lied about Trump and a Russian prostitute. They lied about Russia-collusion. They lied about Hunter Biden and his colorful computer.

And now in addition to the tragic scene of suffering on our southern border created by Biden, China, Russia, Iran, the Taliban, al Qaeda, and ISIS-K are celebrating the humiliation of America. Our relations with our allies have never been worse. Americans are dead or stranded in the hellhole of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. And Afghan women and girls await their fate as sex slaves to barbarians.

I wonder if my millennial friend still thinks the election of Biden signaled the arrival of a savior who will end the suffering caused by former President Trump. It’s hard to know because she hasn’t posted a single thing about Biden since her sacrilegious post.

If anyone wonders why the calls for cameras in government school classrooms are increasing, read on, and as you read, imagine what would have happened if a teacher had delivered a comparable lecture expressing conservative instead of “progressive” opinions in a public school.

Just prior to the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary, Vanessa Connor, a biology teacher at Alan B. Shepard High School in Palos Heights, Illinois, used her taxpayer-subsidized position to spout her “progressive” views on, among other topics, homosexuality, cross-sex impersonation, co-ed restrooms and locker rooms, the Bible—on which she has views that many biblical scholars would dispute—former President Donald Trump, illegal immigration, and the climate.

Connor reserved her most intense condemnation for parents and teachers—including colleagues—who don’t affirm leftist views of homosexuality and cross-sex identification. She clearly had no compunction about secretly undermining even the deepest beliefs of parents who pay her salary.

You can listen to 18 minutes of her presumptuous, unprofessional, unethical diatribe here.

Connor’s views on homosexuality, cross-sex impersonation, the Bible, and family

Connor—who self-identifies as Catholic—took pot shots at theologically orthodox Christians for their beliefs on sexuality without providing anything more than anecdotes as evidence for her controversial claims:

One of my students earlier has a sister who identifies as lesbian and at the recent family party, her aunt took her aside and said, “I’m going to take you to church this weekend and we are going to fix you.” … And she has other brothers and sisters who support their sister. So, [the aunt] is not a safe aunt to any of her nieces and nephews anymore. … [Y]ou live in a world where people are like, “This is a choice.” I’m sorry. Did any of you ever fill out a survey that says, “Please check heterosexual”?

No acknowledgment from Connor that the Bible condemns homosexuality; that the Catholic Church condemns homosexuality; or that for the entire history of the church until the latter part of the 20^th Century, all biblical scholars condemned homosexuality.

Connor is correct in suggesting that people don’t choose to experience homoerotic attraction. What she omits is the important part: They do choose how to respond to those feelings. Is it Connor’s belief—as a Catholic—that any and all powerful, persistent, unchosen feelings are morally legitimate to act upon?

In discussing which issues animate her voting decisions, Connor shared bizarre QAnon-esque stories and bad theology with students:

When billions of dollars are being donated to a Christian Church who gives the money to hate groups, there’s a problem. They believe that teens should go to camp over the summer and get talked out of being gay. Again, no one talked you into being straight, so, you can’t talk somebody out of being gay. And this same group donated billions to another place that believes all transgender people should be sterilized. … Billions, not millions, billions of dollars … to this church so that they can shovel it to these [hate] groups. …

Remember, this is in the name of being Christian. I don’t know about any of you. I’m Catholic … Jesus sat with the people and accepted everybody. I find it very difficult to believe that if there was a gay person, and I’m sure there was at that time, that Jesus would have been like, “Everybody but you. Leper, come on. Gay person, sorry.” … And the auntie who was going to take a girl to church, she goes, “There was Adam and Eve for a reason.” And I’m like, “Well, you need to go home and tell auntie that the story of Adam and Eve isn’t even real.” There is no Adam and Eve. The first five books of the Bible aren’t real. They are stories. They’re made-up stories. You can go ask a religious person, whoever it is. They’re just made-up stories. … Noah and the Ark never flowed anywhere. …

[W]hen you learn and you know better, you can do better. But when we have groups that don’t even want to learn and just continue to spew stuff, it’s bad. It’s really bad.

So many questions raised by Connor’s controversial statements. Enquiring minds want to know the name of the group that is donating “billions of dollars” to a Christian church and “to a place that believes all transgender people should be sterilized”? What is the name of the Christian church? What is the name of the group that allegedly wants all “transgender people” sterilized? What are the names of the “hate groups”? What are the names of the camps that are talking teens out of being gay?

What is Connor’s evidence that some “groups don’t even want to learn”? Is her evidence for an unwillingness to learn the fact that some groups reject leftist beliefs on sexuality? Those groups, of course, would include all theologically orthodox Protestant and Catholic churches. Does it go both ways? Is Connor unwilling to learn because she rejects conservative beliefs?

Connor compared homosexuality—a condition defined by subjective erotic feelings and volitional erotic acts—to leprosy, a disease that has no behavioral implications. Jesus accepts everyone, but his acceptance of sinners into his kingdom is conditional on our repenting of behaviors God tells us are sinful. Leprosy is not one of those conditions. Homosexuality is.

One wonders how many and which Catholic scholars Connor consulted that led to her conclusion that the “first five books of the Bible aren’t real”? My guess is very few. The hubris of a government employee presenting her highly arguable religious beliefs as facts to a captive audience of other people’s minor children makes her unfit for teaching.

Connor explicitly condemned parents, aunts, and uncles who believe homosexual acts are immoral:

[H]ow many of you have some person in your family—your parents … aunts and uncles …  distant relatives— … that … are not supportive of LBGTQ+ … members [of] society? … So, if … a [gay] friend wants to come to your house, then it becomes like an issue for you. And guess what? Lots of us have grown up with people that were either racist or sexist or whatever.

“Supportive” is a euphemism for affirming, and it doesn’t refer to affirming persons as humans created in the image and likeness of God. It means affirming as good ungodly sexual acts and relationships. To leftists like Connor, “supportive” people must love the sin as well as the sinner.

Connor taught other people’s children that being “safe” requires teachers to facilitate cross-sex metaphysical delusions, and that students whose parents oppose name changes can legally change their names without their parents’ consent when they turn 18:

[W]e just had a panel discussion just for teachers that was given by students that go here. One of the students does use the “they/them” pronouns. … And it’s been suggested to us that … a safe teacher … would … try these different pronouns. …[C]ertain teachers will be okay with that. …

We do have students here who have amazing support from their families, who have already gone and legally changed their name. …  But when you’re 18, I think legally you could change your name to whatever you want, and you wouldn’t need your parents’ consent.

So, our [Gay Straight Alliance] is … making like a poster or a picture … to encourage teachers to put [it] in their classrooms so students know it is a safe classroom. We had that for years at Eisenhower. And I brought it up to Mr. Nisavic who runs the GSA, because at Eisenhower …  not every teacher [was] putting them up outside their classroom door.

So, imagine, whether it’s about sexuality or it’s about race or it’s about gender, if there was something that you could identify with and feel like, “Oh, this teacher cares.” And then you walk into your next classroom, and that’s not there. How do you feel about that teacher? How do you feel about being in that room? Okay. So, we have students here who … have … been more open, like, “This is me. Call me this.” And we also have students here who go by names, but teachers are not allowed to refer … by that when they call their parents.

So again, how sad and horrible is that, if you don’t have that great support at home and then you come to school and there isn’t that support … here? We should not be okay with that. And that’s what I brought up. I wasn’t okay with it. That’s horrible.

In Connor’s personal worldview, which she used the classroom to promote, parents who oppose “trans” name changes are unsupportive. And teachers who don’t put up posters affirming homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation are unsafe, uncaring, and “horrible.”

Not only does Connor believe that student “safety” requires teacher-collusion with science-denying “trans”-cultic superstitions, but she also believes safety requires secrecy:

And if someone finds that you are a safe person, please know you don’t have a right to tell anybody else.

The student-recorded portion of Connor’s shocking lecture begins with this announcement;

[T]his idea of gender being fluid is not anything new. Gay people—I’m just encompassing LGBTQ+ community—they’ve been around since humans have been around.

What’s missing from her statement is that all manner of sinful inclinations and acts have been around since humans have been around, something the purportedly Catholic Connor should know.

Connor suggested without stating that the presence of homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation throughout history indicates those conditions are morally neutral or good. Would she be willing to apply that principle consistently to all inclinations and behaviors found among man throughout history?

On sexually integrated restrooms and locker rooms

Connor implied she cares a lot about students’ feelings, but she really seems to care only about the feelings of some students. She condemned the feelings of students who don’t want to undress in the presence of opposite-sex peers:

[I]n second period, I heard someone go, “No. … I couldn’t change in the locker room [with an opposite-sex peer].” And I said, “Well, it’s funny that you brought that up because the biggest places where these people feel the least safe are in locker rooms and in gym classes, because there are so many of you and so few teachers. And in the bathrooms. And we have students here that don’t go to the bathroom during the day, ever.

What about girls who don’t want to use bathrooms with opposite-sex peers? What about the girls and boys in an expensive New York City private school who “started arriving home desperate to get to the bathroom after holding it in all day” because they didn’t want to share restrooms with opposite-sex peers.

Connor manipulated students emotionally by suggesting that opposition to undressing in the presence of opposite-sex peers is equivalent to bullying and will lead to suicide:

[W]e still live in a world where people get beat up, people get killed, and people are committing suicide at a high rate, thinking, “Apparently it’s just better for the world if I’m not here.” There was the 16-year-old young man who was on the autism spectrum, who came out as being gay when he was 12. And due to the bullying, he took his life this week.

It would have been helpful and illuminating for students if Connor had discussed the high post-“transition” suicide rate. She should have discussed the possibility that gender dysphoria, like depression and suicidal ideation, may be a symptom caused by, for example, trauma, abuse, or autism. She should have mentioned detransitioners who experience “sex-change regret.” She should have discussed the astonishing increase in the number of adolescent girls identifying as “trans”—a number that suggests “trans” identification may be a social contagion like cutting and eating disorders. Connor should have mentioned that there is no long-term research on the safety and efficacy of puberty-blockers for the treatment of gender dysphoria.

Illegal Immigration, border security, Wuhan flu

Instead of offering a complete picture of complex and controversial topics, Connor chose to indoctrinate other people’s children by condemning and censoring ideas she abhors. Her goal was not only to change students’ beliefs. Her goal was also to turn her students into activists:

Do you think Shepherd is inclusive or not so much? … Here’s the thing. You guys, young people change the world. You don’t need to wait for adults. And the quickest way you can change the world is coming up really soon when you all get the right to vote. … You’re never going to find a presidential candidate who believes in everything you do, but you have to decide “what are those big sticking points for me?”

One is the world. People are upset about coronavirus. People are buying soap and hand sanitizer as if it’s gold? … But no one cares that we’re killing the earth.

And in an election year, she essentially told students in her biology class who they should vote for:

[W]ith this president [Trump], you keep having this issue with minorities. I mean, do you know how many people are so severely traumatized? Like kids being taken away from their parents.

… [Trump] doesn’t even know that the Corona flu isn’t a thing. He needs to get out of that office. Young people have to help stand up. I mean, at this point in time, if somebody else walks and talks they can do better than he is.

Leftist “educators” who are not experts in even the fields they were hired to teach now believe they’re experts in Critical Race Theory, gender theory, sexuality, morality, and theology. Worse still, while claiming they honor all voices, value diversity, and foster critical thinking, these inexpert, dogmatists call ideas they detest “racist,” “transphobic,” “homophobic,” and “sexist.” Like all propagandists, demagogues, and authoritarians, these “educators” hurl epithets and censor rather than openly debate ideas, which would require logic, reason, and evidence. “Progressive” public school propagandists demand absolute autonomy to impose their moral and political views on their captive audiences because their goal is control—not education.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Bio-Teacher.mp3

A comment from Tish Harrison Warren writing in and for the increasingly disappointing Christianity Today on Jan. 7, 2021 merits revisiting now that the damage Donald Trump voters predicted if Joe Biden were elected is becoming a reality. Warren wrote,

The responsibility of yesterday’s violence must be in part laid at the feet of those evangelical leaders who ushered in and applauded Trump’s presidency. It can also sadly be laid at the feet of the white American church more broadly.

So, should responsibility for the violence in the streets in 2020 and 2021 be laid in part at the feet of evangelical leaders and/or white Christians who support BLM and the teaching of Critical Race Theory in government schools?

Should the violence in Planned Parenthood abattoirs be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who voted for Biden, who supports abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, or who voted for any Democrat in the past 50 years?

Should the use of taxpayer funds for the slaughter of tiny humans be laid at the feet of white Christians who voted for Biden?

Should the catastrophe of overcrowded plastic pods of unaccompanied migrant children be laid at the feet of every evangelical who voted for Biden?

Should the destruction of the black family caused by sixty years of Democrat policies be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who supported those social welfare policies?

Should the sexual integration of women’s and children’s private spaces be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who ushered in and applauded Biden’s presidency?

Should the diminution of speech and religious free exercise protections for theologically orthodox Christians be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who have supported Democrats for the past 20 years?

Should the legal recognition of homoerotic relationships as “marriages,” which robs children of mothers or fathers be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who have supported Democrats?

Should the responsibility for closing Christian adoption agencies that won’t place children in the homes of homosexuals in part be laid at the feet of evangelical leaders and white Christians who voted for Democrats?

Should responsibility for drag Queen story hours and the proselytizing of children into the “trans” cult be laid in part at the feet of evangelical and white Christians who support Democrats?

The answers to my questions are obviously yes. I would add, however, that responsibility for the facilitation of any of these grievous sins that harm our neighbors knows no skin color.

In absolutist terms, Tish Warren criticized Trump for alleged ethical deficiencies:

For more than four years, Trump has shown that he is more than willing to say any lie, ignore any standard of decency, and bring any amount of violence and division to shore up his own power.

Really? Trump would say “any” lie, ignore “any” standard, and bring “any” amount of violence and division to shore up his own power? How would Warren even begin to prove such absolute claims?

What does Warren think about Biden’s willingness to lie, ignore standards of decency, and foment division to shore up his own political power for—not four years—but four decades? Surely, Warren knows about Biden’s repeated plagiarizing, and about the whoppers he told about his college career, law school performance, and fictional arrest in Soweto, South Africa.

What does Warren think about Biden’s infamous divisive and deceitful 2012 claim that a Romney administration would “put y’all back in chains”?

An “insurrection” is “an act of rising in open rebellion against an established government or authority.” Is Warren troubled that Biden condemned the Capitol riot as an “insurrection” but did not condemn attacks by BLM and Antifa on police officers, police precincts, police vehicles, and court houses–which are symbols of established government and authority–as “insurrections”?

What standard of decency did Biden apply when he lied to the American people during the campaign, falsely claiming he knew nothing about his ne’er-do-well son’s sordid influence-peddling business deals with America’s foremost enemy?

What standard of decency did Biden—who professes to be a Christian—apply when he reversed his opposition to federal funding of human slaughter?

What standard of decency did Biden apply when he learned and kept secret that the Russia collusion story was a DNC/Hillary Clinton hoax  concocted to distract the public from revisiting Hillary Clinton’s email server scandal during the 2016 campaign?

What standard of decency did Biden apply when he reneged on his commitment to support President Reagan’s nomination of the extraordinary Robert Bork to the U.S. Supreme Court?

And what standard of decency led Joe Biden to suggest falsely on multiple occasions that the truck driver whose truck hit and killed Biden’s daughter and first wife was drunk when it appears Neilia Biden caused the collision:

[C]overage in the newspapers at the time made clear that fault was not in question. For whatever reason, Neilia Biden, who was holding the baby, ended up in the right of way of Dunn’s truck coming down a long hill.” She had a stop sign and Dunn did not.

There are many Christians for whom Trump was the last choice during the 2015 primary. But when Trump was the last man standing to oppose the morally corrupt  Hillary Clinton whose policies would have wreaked havoc on the unborn, children, women, families, and religious liberty, many Christians chose Trump.

In so doing, not only were better policies passed and better judges appointed but also the depth and breadth of the wickedness of the left in Congress, the press, corporate America, and Big Tech were exposed.

Many Christians voted for Trump in 2016—not because they worshipped him—but because they love God and their neighbors—including the neighbors we will never meet because they will be killed in their mothers’ wombs. Many Christians voted for Trump despite the hatred, scorn, and mockery of the world.

And many voted for Trump in 2020 for the same reasons. Many Christians knew that Biden is not only ethically vacuous but also that he would promote policies that would increase human suffering and diminish fundamental civil liberties.

Many conservatives who dreaded and worked tirelessly to prevent a Biden win are seeing their worst fears realized and then some.

The Biden administration free from commitments to God and truth and led around by nose and leash by an angry horde of racists, anarchists, and sexual revolutionaries free from commitments to God and foundational American principles are destroying America from within.

The Horde has been lurking unmolested for over half a century in Ivory Towers, spreading their brain-eating critical theories into young minds, thereby growing the Horde’s next generation.

Late last spring the younger Horde rampaged through our streets battering, burning, and burgling, while screeching Newspeakian lies about equity and justice.

Horde justice has just been meted out, but a pound of Derek Chauvin’s flesh cannot satisfy the blood and power lust of the fascistic horde.

Justice for the Horde has nothing to do with holding individuals accountable to a fixed legal standard. It’s about mob retribution exacted on anyone who represents the alleged oppressor group for crimes committed by others decades or even centuries ago.

Horde justice is not colorblind, and it’s not just.

BLM activist Kim Brown unabashedly proclaimed her support for Horde justice:

Let me just say for the record, I support … looting the damn Dollar Tree. I support … looting the Advanced Auto Parts. I remember last year they looted Target. I support all that sh*t. Loot all that sh*t. You know why? Because black people, and marginalized and oppressed people could loot every store in this whole f*cking country for 200 f*cking years, and it would not even come close to the debt America owes us.

Which party produces the likes of Kim Brown and the Horde?

Christians like Tish Harrison Warren claim that Christians who voted for Trump undermined their Christian witness. Just curious, does voting for Biden—the titular head of the party that supports the anti-American 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, the family-destroying BLM, taxpayer-funded abortion, same-sex faux marriage, a de facto version of the Chinese social credit system, and erosion of religious liberty and speech rights—undermine one’s Christian witness?

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Christians-Who-Undermine-Their-Christian-Witness.mp3

Please support the work and ministry of IFI.  

Your tax-deductible donation is greatly appreciated!