The Leftist mainstream press has been on its heels for months now for its biased and erroneous reporting. The more it’s criticized for biased reporting, the more biased it becomes while declaring itself unbiased. Next time Leftist journalists take (or fake) umbrage over President Donald Trump’s criticism of the mainstream press, pretending they think his criticism of bias is an attack on the foundation of our republic, or when a “progressive” talking head goes all middle-school snotty on a guest for his or her criticism of press bias, remember their responses–if you can–to these comments from Barack Obama and his water-carriers who routinely accused Fox News of being a de facto fake news network and shill for the Republican Party:

Obama:

“We’ve got a tradition in this country of a press that oftentimes is opinionated…. [Y]ou had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition—it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world. But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number-one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”

“If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it.”

“I’ve got one television station entirely devoted to attacking my administration.”

Implying that negative views of him result from the misrepresentation of him on FOX News, Obama said, “They’re responding to a fictional character named Barack Obama who they see on Fox News or who they hear about through Rush Limbaugh.”

“I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls.[T]he way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak!” 

Obama refers to fictional character Uncle Jim to imply that FOX News is inaccurate: “Uncle Jim, who’s been watching Fox News, thinks somehow I raised taxes.” 

“Look if I watched Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me either. You’ve got this screen, this fun-house mirror through which people are receiving information.” 

Again accusing FOX News of disseminating false stories: “…Fed by Fox News, they hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7, and it begins to seep in.”

“There’s a reason fewer Republicans are running around against Obamacare—because while good, affordable health care might still be a fanged threat to the freedom of the American people on Fox News, it turns out it’s working pretty well in the real world.”

“And if all you’re doing is watching Fox News and listening to Rush Limbaugh and reading some of the blogs that are churning out a lot of misinformation on a regular basis, then it’s very hard for you to think that you’re going to vote for somebody who you’ve been told is taking the country in the wrong direction.” 

Obama’s team:

Obama communications director Anita Dunn: “We’re going to treat them the way we would an opponent. As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Anita Dunn also said that FOX News operates “almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.”

White House senior advisor David Axelrod on This Week with George Stephanopoulos in 2009: “It’s really not news—it’s pushing a point of view. And the bigger thing is that other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way, and we’re not going to treat them that way.”

In an interview with ABC News in 2009, White House spokesman Josh Earnest described FOX News as “an ideological outlet,” saying, “We figured Fox would rather show So You Think You Can Dance than broadcast an honest discussion about health insurance reform.”

In CNN’s State of the Union, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel shared Obama’s view of  FOX News: “I suppose the way to look at it and the way…the president looks at it…It’s not a news organization so much as it has a perspective.”

Recently, Sebastion Gorka, military analyst and deputy assistant to Trump, was interviewed by CNN’s smug, disdainful Jake Tapper who was reduced to a mine-is-better-than-yours playground taunt in this exchange:

Gorka: The last 16 years, to be honest—disastrous. The policies that were born in the beltway by people who have never worn a uniform, the people who were in the White House like Ben Rhodes… helped to create the firestorm that is the Middle East, that is ISIS today. So, we are open to new ideas because the last 16 years have failed American national interests and the American taxpayer.

Tapper: There were plenty of people who wore a uniform who advised President Obama and advised President Bush.

Gorka: Not people as influential as Ben Rhodes who had a master’s degree in fictional writing. That is disastrous.

Tapper: Well, I’m sure [Rhodes] would put his graduate degree against yours any day of the week.

Yes, a news anchor actually said that.

In an interview with Anderson Cooper, Gorka called CNN on the carpet for the absence of substantive “reportage.” When Gorka asserted that CNN’s coverage of the White House was corrupted by the desire to increase ratings, a contemptuous Cooper responded, “Okay, I’m just going to ignore the insults because I don’t think it really gets us anywhere.” Apparently, an obtuse Cooper didn’t notice that in his retort he actually did respond to the “insults.”

After the interview, Cooper ridiculed Gorka, referring to him as the “Hungarian Don Rickles.” This from the anchor who in May said to a Trump defender, “If [Trump] took a dump on his desk, you would defend him.”

Cooper better never criticize Trump for lack of decorum.

MSNBC anchor Stephanie Ruhle embarrassed herself as well. In answer to her question about where Trump would be during the August congressional recess, Gorka said, “[I]n the last 25 weeks, you’ve seen [Trump’s] leadership, from the Southern border, to NATO, to Warsaw, to the economy, to the stock market. We’re crushing it, and he can do that from anywhere.” For no apparent reason other than childishness, Ruhle responded, “Alright, well, the White House doesn’t ‘crush’ a stock market, but I do appreciate your time.”

Maybe I’ve forgotten, but I can’t recall hearing Special Report’s Bret Baier ever responding to a  guest like the adolescent Tapper, Cooper, or Ruhle did.

Some will argue that many of Trump’s tweets are inappropriate, distracting, or worse. Some will argue that Gorka’s comments were unnecessarily provocative (that said, it doesn’t take much to provoke self-righteous, brittle, thin-skinned “progressives”). Neither of those issues is my concern here. My concern here is with the hypocrisy, arrogance, and bias that now corrupt the Fourth Estate. Many on both sides of the political aisle believe a free and fair press remains a critical cultural institution. Many, however, also believe the absence of objectivity, neutrality, or impartiality in most mainstream press outlets (as in many other cultural institutions, especially academia) pose a danger to the republic, and that should concern all Americans.

IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-

Recently Ben Shapiro, writing for National Review, exposed a serious failure of lawmakers that partisan debates conceal. Partisan debates conceal that fundamental, first-principle policy arguments about governance are avoided like the proverbial plague by politicians of all political stripes.

Shapiro uses comments about health care from three prominent political figures, President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Governor John Kasich, to illustrate that there is little principled difference between their positions:

President Trump wants to re-enshrine Obamacare’s two central premises: that it is the government’s job to make sure everyone has health insurance, and that health-insurance companies should therefore be forced to cover pre-existing conditions. Sanders wants to spend more money on the same two principles — or do away with the second principle altogether in favor of a direct government program. Kasich expanded Obamacare in his own state, saying that St. Peter would want government health-care spending expanded, and he mirrors both Trump and Obama in his central contention that there is a government-guaranteed “right” to health insurance.

What are these three fighting over? Whether to spend an insane amount of money on Medicaid or simply a crazy amount of money on Medicaid; whether to pay for everyone’s insurance through taxes later or today; whether to force insurance companies to cover services that are unnecessary or allow them to pare such services back to a moderate extent; whether to mandate that healthy people buy health insurance or whether to coax them into gradual single-payer acceptance via back-door fines. All of this matters, of course. But to suggest that this is a cataclysmic conflict over principles is idiotic. Democrats and Republicans apparently agree on health care’s central principles, they just argue over how best to implement them.

In other words, these are tales full of sound and fury signifying almost nothing.

Lawmakers avoid discussions of fundamental policies and principles

Shapiro elucidates what kinds of discussions politicians avoid and why:

[O]ur politicians generally elide the most important policy questions of the day — the ones that would implicate central principles. That’s because so long as they stick to the center of the road and then act as though they’re facing threats for doing so, they don’t have to alienate anyone — and they can rake in money.

Then Shapiro reveals the central conflict facing our republic now and the one from which our lawmakers flee with all due haste:

[O]n the hot-button issue of whether religious Americans ought to be protected from government intervention when they operate their businesses according to religious dictates — the single most important cultural issue in America today — politicians have been largely silent. What’s Trump’s perspective on the issue? We have no idea. Bernie Sanders doesn’t spend a good deal of time talking about it either. And John Kasich couldn’t be more vague. When politicians do have to sound off on such issues, they often run from the fray.

The next revolution

I would add another hot-button issue which implicates first principles and on which politicians remain largely silent: That is the Left’s reality-denying attack on the public’s recognition of and respect for sexual differentiation.

Never in the history of the world has there been a sustained attack on a proper understanding and recognition of sexual differentiation. What we are witnessing now is a cultural revolution the likes of which no society in history has encountered.

Because of the obsession lawmakers have with raking in money in the service of securing their re-elections, because of their cowardice, because of their intellectual incuriosity, and because of their ignorance, they are failing to address this radical and destructive revolution. And for all these reasons, our political leaders have no sense of the end game.

What is the end game of “trans” cultists? It is nothing less than the eradication of public recognition of sex differences everywhere for everyone.

While Leftists pursue their end game via strategic incrementalism, naïve, ignorant, and cowardly Americans incrementally capitulate. Some conservatives argue that if men who pretend to be women have been castrated, it’s okay if they invade women’s restrooms and locker rooms. It’s as if these conservatives believe that an elaborate disguise effaces the meaning of sex. Or that being unaware that an objectively male person is present where girls and women are undressing legitimizes their presence.

If that’s the case, then these same women should be comfortable with peeping Toms peeping as long as women are unaware of the peeping. Don’t misunderstand, I’m not suggesting those who experience the disordered desire to be the opposite sex are voyeurs. Rather, I’m suggesting that if being deceived about the presence of men in private spaces legitimizes their presence, then surely being deceived about the presence of peepers should legitimize peeping.

No efforts to masquerade—not surgical, chemical, or sartorial—can change the sex of humans. So, no matter how convincing a gender-pretender’s disguise, he or she should not be permitted in opposite-sex private spaces.

Our politicians need to know what the “trans” cult end game is and once they understand that, they need to have the courage to address it. If they are stubbornly committed either to ignorance or cowardice, then they have no business serving the people in elected office.

“Trans” cult beliefs

So, here’s what our politicians and the people they serve need to know about the “trans” ideology:

• “Trans” cultists do not believe surgery, cross-sex hormone-doping, cross-dressing, a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or even the experience of gender dysphoria is necessary to “identify” as “trans” or to access opposite-sex locker rooms, restrooms, dressing rooms, showers, shelters, semi-private hospital rooms, nursing home rooms, or any other historically sex-segregated spaces.

• They believe all that’s required to “identify” as “trans” and to access opposite-sex private facilities is their word.

• They believe that one’s “gender identity” can change day to day.

• They believe that genitalia have no connection to maleness or femaleness.

• They believe that those who care about the genitalia of their romantic/sexual partners are “transphobic.” That is to say, any man who wants his sexual partner to be an objectively female person with female anatomy is “transphobic.” And any homosexual man who wants his sexual partner to be objectively male with male anatomy is “transphobic.” (This is getting “trans” cultists in hot water with the homosexual community.)

• They believe that sex-segregated private spaces are intrinsically and unjustly discriminatory. They believe that they should have unrestricted access to opposite-sex private facilities. In their view, requiring them to use privacy stalls is unjust and discriminatory.

• They believe spaces in which undressing and bodily functions are engaged in should not be permitted to “discriminate” based on either sex or “gender identity.”

If lawmakers don’t believe me, maybe they could scrounge up 30 minutes to watch this video of a young man who “identifies” as a “transwoman.” He spells it all out:

“Trans” cult end game

So, now that we’re clearer about what the “trans” cult believes, let’s see what their peculiar and doctrinaire beliefs will look like in practice. In other words, here’s a glimpse into their desired gender-free, co-ed-everything, dystopian world:

• The sexual integration of private spaces will not be restricted to “trans”-identified persons: 1.) Schools and all other places of public accommodation—including places like Disney World and health clubs—that permit one objectively male “trans” person access to women’s facilities will have no rational grounds to prohibit other objectively male persons (i.e., normal men) from accessing women’s facilities because that would constitute discrimination based on “gender identity.” 2.) If genitalia are as irrelevant to physical privacy as say, hair color, then sex-segregated restrooms and locker rooms no longer make sense. 3.) There’s no rational reason for women to be more comfortable undressing in front of men who wish they were women than undressing in front of men who are content being men.

• Men who claim to be “transwomen” but choose not to be castrated will have unrestricted access to all previously women-only private spaces. And if women are permitted to walk naked in a locker room, so too will men with penises who claim to be women. So too will men with penises who have had breast implants.

• Women who claim to be men and who have birth certificates that identify them as male but have forgone “top surgery” will be exempt from laws and ordinances that prohibit women from going topless in public. These pretend-men with congenital breasts will be able to play topless frisbee in the park along with breastless, topless actual men.

• Objectively male persons with falsified birth certificates identifying them as women will be assigned semi-private hospital rooms with actual women.

• When entering a nursing home, elderly men who pretend to be women will be assigned rooms with actual women. Bill SB 219 is pending in California right now that if passed will require that long-term care facilities must assign “transgender” residents rooms in accordance with their “gender identity” rather than their sex. Further, it would make it illegal to reassign “transgender” residents to a new room if their roommates complain about their “gender identity.”

• Women’s athletics are doomed.

Despite the dire portents that no one should be able to miss, lawmakers who claim to want to lead and serve say virtually nothing and probably know less.

IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-

The shooting of GOP House Whip Steve Scalise and several other Republicans during an early morning baseball practice this month is as unsurprising as it was dreadful. Some of our deepest expectations were realized in that moment, as the furious rhetoric being churned out by the Left finally expressed itself in the ultimate form of contempt: an attempt to assassinate political leaders.

It wasn’t hard to predict where our national discourse was taking us. For years in the halls of Congress and in the courts, we’ve been engaged in a civil war. There’s been a marked increase in the use of the term “civil war” by those who spend their days opining on culture. It’s all been there but the shooting, and now we can check that box.

Until that happened, we all hoped that what was left of the original American spirit—the rule of law, respect for human dignity, a sense of honor, and love of country—would hold back the baser instincts of human nature. But we could all feel the rope fraying.

Even a cursory look at the last few years reveals a surprising amount of unfiltered and increasingly hostile rhetoric coming from politicians, entertainers, professors, scientists, philosophers, and other public figures.

It started with words

• Words from Barack Obama: “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them” and “I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.”

• Words from Donald Trump: “Anybody who hits me, we’re gonna hit them ten times harder” and “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”

• Words from Hillary Clinton: “You could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.… Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America” and “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

• Words from DNC Chairman Tom Perez: “[Trump] doesn’t give a s— about health care;” U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY): “Has [Trump] kept his promises? No. F— no;” U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA): “[Trump is a] disgusting, poor excuse of a man;” and former Clinton running mate Tim Kaine (D-VA): “What we’ve got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box.”

• Words from Fresno State University lecturer Lars Maischak: “Justice = the execution of two Republicans for each deported immigrant;” “To save American democracy, Trump must hang. The sooner and the higher, the better”; and “#TheResistance Has anyone started soliciting money and design drafts for a monument honoring the Trump assassin, yet?”

• Words from Trinity College (CT) professor Johnny Eric Williams: “I’m fed the f— up with self-identified ‘white’s’ daily violence directed at immigrants, Muslims, and sexual and racially oppressed people. The time is now to confront these inhuman a–holes and end this now.”

• Words from Art Institute of Washington professor John Griffin: “[Republicans] should be lined up and shot. That’s not hyperbole; blood is on their hands.”

• Words from former Rutgers adjunct professor Kevin Allred: “Will the Second Amendment be as cool when I buy a gun and start shooting at random white people or no?”

• Words from former CNN personality Reza Aslan: “This piece of s— is not just an embarrassment to America and a stain on the presidency. He’s an embarrassment to humankind.”

• Words from pop diva Madonna: “Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House;” actress Lea DeLaria: “[O]r pick up a baseball bat and take out every f—ing republican and independent I see. #f—trump, #f—theGOP, #f—straightwhiteamerica, “f—yourprivilege;” comedienne Sarah Silverstein: “Once the military is w us fascists get overthrown;” and actor Johnny Depp: “When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?”

While the words broke an unspoken decorum, they weren’t much without action. Mobs gathered and marched with signs that read, “Become ungovernable” and “This is war” and “The only good fascist is a dead one.” Violent protests shut down presentations deemed hate speech on college campuses: Dr. Charles Murray at Middlebury College, Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley.

From there it was only a few steps to acting out murder fantasies in the form of “art”: comedienne Kathy Griffin decapitating Donald Trump; rapper Snoop Dogg shooting Donald Trump in a “music” video; and a Shakespeare play featuring the murder of “Julius” Trump.

And finally, someone put these sentiments into action, unleashing a hailstorm of bullets on unsuspecting Republican congressmen practicing for a charitable baseball game.

As much as I regret making the distinction, the animus is almost wholly on the Left of the political spectrum. It is the Left that has become hostile to historical, traditional American values. It is the Left that has mocked Christianity and rejected our Judeo-Christian heritage. It is the Left that has labeled the rest of America homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, and misogynistic. It is the Left that accuses white people of having privilege that needs to be checked. It is the Left that has championed the principles of “tolerance,” “diversity,” and “inclusion” as the new American values. It is the Left that has embraced democratic socialism. It is the Left that has twisted American history and alters textbooks, traditions, and monuments.

John Adams once warned in a letter to the Massachusetts Militia:

Should the People of America, once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another and towards foreign nations, which assumes the Language of Justice and moderation while it is practicing Iniquity and Extravagance; and displays in the most captivating manner the charming Pictures of Candour frankness & sincerity while it is rioting in rapine and Insolence: this Country will be the most miserable Habitation in the World. Because We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion. Avarice, Ambition, Revenge or Galantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

In other words, our society was organized on the assumption that our “moral and religious people” would govern themselves under the auspices of godly conduct and that if they didn’t, our country would become a hellhole. Does anyone doubt the truth of his statement?

He wasn’t the first to recognize that laws can’t keep people from wickedness. “When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild,” wrote the wise man, “but whoever obeys the law is joyful” (Proverbs 29:18).

James T. Hodgkinson didn’t pull the trigger in a vacuum. He did what many of our fellow citizens seem to be calling for. Now that the barrier has been broken, is it only a matter of time before others unbridled by morality and religion step through the breach?”

IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-

As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men,
especially unto them who are of the household of faith. ~Galatians 6:10

Donald Trump was elected President of the United States on November 8, 2016. He won the election for many reasons, not the least of which were promises to secure America’s borders and deport illegal aliens, prioritizing any known criminals (for crimes in addition to breaking national immigration laws).

Since inauguration day, January 20, 2017, President Trump has worked diligently to keep that promise, and to stop the flow of refugees and unvettable persons from countries that harbor and/or endorse Islamic jihad.

Both of those efforts to protect U.S. citizens should be lauded and supported.

But there’s one significant issue which must be addressed and remedied quickly. Among the “refugees” from Iraq are an estimated 100+ Christians who were truly endangered by remaining in Iraq, and they are among those detained in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (I.C.E.) raids and, therefore, scheduled for deportation.

These Chaldean Christians most likely would qualify for asylum in the U.S. according to the necessary requirements:

1. An asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution in their home country.
2. An applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group.
3. An applicant must establish that the government is either involved in the persecution, or unable to control the conduct of private actors.

Evangelist Franklin Graham has weighed in on the distressing situation. Sarah Pulliam Bailey writes at the Washington Post:

Prominent evangelist Franklin Graham says he finds it “very disturbing” that immigration authorities have arrested many Iraqi Christians for possible deportation. President Trump promised earlier this year he would prioritize persecuted Christians, but many international religious freedom advocates say deporting these Christians back to Iraq could put them in serious danger.

Graham, who has been supportive of Trump and his travel ban, urged the president to have someone investigate the cases where dozens of Iraqi nationals were swept up in immigration raids in Michigan and Tennessee.

The arrests came after a deal the United States made with Iraq, which sought to be removed from Trump’s travel ban, as originally proposed, on seven Muslim-majority countries and agreed to accept deported Iraqis. Immigration authorities said all of the Iraqi nationals who were arrested had criminal convictions.

“I understand a policy of deporting people who are here illegally and have broken the law,” Graham wrote on Facebook on Friday. “I don’t know all of the details, but I would encourage our president to give great consideration to the threat to lives of Christians in countries like Iraq.”

In a strange turn of events, the ACLU — hardly an entity known for their love of Christians — filed a habeus corpus petition in the U.S. District Court in Michigan and U.S. District Court Judge Mark A. Goldsmith has issued a two week stay.

As reported at Fox News:

A Detroit federal judge issued a two-week stay Thursday halting the planned deportation of more than 100 Iraqi Christians back to their country of origin.

U.S. District Court Judge Mark A. Goldsmith responded to a habeus corpus petition filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of 114 immigrants by staying the deportation orders until he decides whether he has jurisdiction to hear the case.

The Justice Department said the detainees must go to immigration court to try to remain in the U.S., not U.S. District Court. But the ACLU said they might be deported before an immigration judge can consider their requests to stay.

Goldsmith, who heard arguments Wednesday, said he needs more time to consider complex legal issues.

Potential physical harm “far outweighs any conceivable interest the government might have in the immediate enforcement of the removal orders before this court can clarify whether it has jurisdiction to grant relief to petitioners on the merits of their claims,” Goldsmith said.

The danger to these Iraqi Christians is real and ominous. Remember the genocide of Yazidis and other Christians in Iraq by ISIS (also ISIL or Islamic State)?

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, calling itself Islamic State) is recognized by the UN as the perpetrator of a genocide of Yazidis in Iraq.The genocide has led to the expulsion, flight and effective exile of the Yazidis from their ancestral lands in Northern Iraq. The genocide led to the abduction of Yazidi women and massacres that killed thousands of Yazidi civilians during what has been called a “forced conversion campaign” being carried out in Northern Iraq by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), starting in 2014.

ISIL’s persecution of the Yazidis gained international attention and it directly led to the American-led intervention in Iraq, which started with United States airstrikes against ISIL. Additionally, the US, UK, and Australia made emergency airdrops to Yazidis who had fled to a mountain range and provided weapons to the Kurdish Peshmerga defending them alongside PKK and YPG forces. ISIL’s actions against the Yazidi population resulted in approximately 500,000 refugees and several thousand killed and kidnapped.

Christians in the Middle East live in peril, and according to Open Doors USA, Iraq is number 7 out of 50 on the World Watch List of countries!

Thus, we know as believers we are called to pray for and help our brothers and sisters in Christ. We also know that over 100 of the immigrants which I.C.E. has rounded up for deportation back to Iraq may be Christians. And we know that, if they are Christians and if they are sent back to Iraq, there is a very high probability these Iraqi Christians will be tortured and killed.

We must not only pray, petitioning God Almighty to intervene on behalf of these Christian refugees, we must also ACT now by contacting our representatives in the U.S. Congress and President Trump.

Proverbs 21:1 tells us:

The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turns it wherever He wishes.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to President Trump and to your U.S. Representative to urge them to intervene in this somber situation.  Ask them to protect these persecuted Iraqi Christian refugees by allowing them to stay in the United States as permanent residents.  Deporting Christians back to Iraq will put their lives at serious risk.

God can certainly turn President Trump’s heart, as well as the hearts of those in Congress. Please take action and then join us in praying for a good resolution to this situation!

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

It’s a sad tale of two cities.

The news out of Washington, D.C. this spring is that President Donald Trump and the Republican majorities in Congress plan on cutting taxes. The unsurprising news out of Springfield, Illinois is that General Assembly Democrats are planning to raise taxes.

Also not surprising is that there is a hot debate about whether the GOP tax cut efforts in D.C. can succeed. There is no debate, however, about Illinois Democrats’ accomplishing their mission. Especially when Republicans, including Governor Bruce Rauner, appear poised to help the Democrats.

What is also not debatable is whether raising taxes in Illinois will be enough to make ends meet in a state where spending continues to be out of control. It won’t be.

Sometimes a trip to dictionary.com is helpful even when we all know the definitions. The first word for today is “insatiable”:

• incapable of being satisfied or appeased
• not able to be satisfied or satiated; greedy or unappeasable

As in an insatiable hunger for more of your tax dollars.

Here are three synonyms:

• voracious, unquenchable, bottomless

No one will ever provide the liberal Democrats in Illinois enough money to make them happy. I offer as proof the Illinois government employee pension systems. If Republicans would just use some of that Bruce Rauner/Ken Griffin money to get the word out about how corrupt those systems are, maybe Republicans would start to win more elections here.

Here is the title of an article from the Illinois News Network earlier this week: Study: Illinois’ public pensions are worse off than state claims. From the article (and notice the use of the word “bottomless“):

Illinois has on hand only 29 percent of the funds needed to meet the promises made to current and future retirees. That’s the worst record of any state, and [Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Joshua] Rauh concludes that for the state to stop sinking further into debt, it would have to contribute more than twice what it contributes now.

Illinois now devotes nearly 25 percent of its state budget to the state worker pensions, so doubling that figure means close to half of the state’s revenues would have to go to pensions to avoid accumulating further debt.

“I think people increasingly understand that they’re throwing tax dollars into a bottomless pit,” Mark Glennon, the founder of the WirePoints website and a former venture capitalist and financial adviser, told Illinois News Network.

Putting more money in the current system is futile, according to Glennon.

“The smart ones already know the current situation, but they’re not honest enough to talk about it in public,” he said.

A dozen years ago pension expert Bill Zettler began talking about it — and both political parties ignored his warnings. Bill regularly pointed out the simple truth that if something is impossible — it won’t happen.

That’s our second word for the day: impossible.

In that same Illinois News Network article, Mark Glennon merely confirmed what Bill Zettler had to say many years ago:

The promises that have been made to retirees in Illinois eventually will have to be broken, and the pensions won’t be made in full, according to Glennon.

“Ultimately, I think that’s unavoidable …” he said. “The numbers are far beyond insurmountable already.”

Getting back to the word “impossible” — as I wrote nine years ago, we have two competing impossibilities. Right now there isn’t support to make the needed changes, and yet there isn’t enough money to meet the obligations.

How do we get to a solution? Until public support is rallied — solving the pension problem in Illinois is “incapable of being done, undertaken, or experienced.” It is “incapable of occurring or happening.”

The credit rating agencies understand the situation in Illinois clearly. Note this headline from Crain’s Chicago Business: “Illinois’ credit rating slashed to a cut above junk.” Need I define the word “junk”?

IFI depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

-and, please-

Many years ago, I witnessed what happens when people who prevent others from speaking are not dealt with promptly.

During a “Firing Line” taping with William F. Buckley at Bard College in New York State on the topic of “Resolved: The ACLU is full of baloney” (the short answer is “yes”), two female activists stood up and started chanting “women of color have no voice.”

The moderator, a well-known liberal (well, okay, it was Michael Kinsley, who did an otherwise fine job), asked them politely to stop so the debate could continue, but the protesters refused.  At this point, he could have motioned to the campus cops to remove them, but instead let them go on ad nauseum.  I leaned over and whispered to then-ACLU President Nadine Strossen, “Nadine, do something. They’re your children.”  I meant her ideological offspring, of course.  And she did try to reason with them, to no avail.

Unlike some recent incidents, the debate finally went on after Mr. Kinsley gave in to the protesters’ tantrum, let them read a list of nonsensical leftwing ultimatums, and Bard’s president agreed to leave the team he was on in the debate.

I’m not sure how much of this made the eventual PBS broadcast, but it showed the folly of giving in to the heckler’s veto.  That’s when, in the name of free speech, someone silences someone else.  Courts have made it clear that the heckler’s veto is not protected speech under the First Amendment, no more than falsely yelling “fire” in a crowded theater.

Since President Trump’s election, the Left has been in full heckler’s veto mode, egged on by the same progressives who cheered the violent Occupy mobs in 2011 and 2012 and the goons disrupting the Trump rallies last year.

[Recently], protesters threated violence against Republican Party participants in the 82^nd Avenue of Roses Parade in Portland, Oregon, and managed to get the event canceled.   An anonymous email promised that “two hundred or more people” would “rush into the parade into the middle and drag and push those people out…. police cannot stop us from shutting down roads so please consider your decision wisely.”

Then, amid threats of violence, conservative author Ann Coulter was forced to cancel her speech at the University of California, Berkeley.  In February, the campus had suffered $100,000 in property damage when black-clad leftist rioters stopped iconoclast Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking.

In March, political scientist Charles Murray was forced to change venues at Middlebury College in Vermont during a mob attack in which a female professor was injured.  Middlebury itself may be failing to teach about constitutional rights, if a letter signed by 450 alumni prior to Murray’s appearance is any indication:  “This is not an issue of freedom of speech.  In this case we find the principle does not apply.”

Well, okay then. Disagree with us and you lose your rights.

In early April, hundreds of activists blocked an auditorium at Claremont McKenna College in California to prevent author Heather MacDonald from speaking.  Ms. MacDonald’s analysis of crime statistics blows away the media narrative about racist cops spun by the Black Lives Matter movement.  No wonder they wanted her silenced.

For the Left, the issues themselves matter less than a show of force.  As author Angelo M. Codevilla has observed, “The point of PC [political correctness] is not and has never been merely about any of the items that it imposes, but about the imposition itself.”

In “State and Revolution” (1918), Vladimir Lenin wrote:

“The replacement of the bourgeois (middle class) by the proletariat state is impossible without a violent revolution … it is still necessary to suppress the bourgeoisie and crush its resistance.”

Even if none of this involves something you hold dear, the mobs will get around to you if you’re out of step.  A byproduct is the chilling effect it has had on discourse in general.

I recall when liberals and conservatives could agree to disagree during, say, a party, and leave as friends, or at least not as enemies.  But when’s the last time you went to an eclectic gathering and heard genuine views exchanged?  Nobody dares anymore.  The Left’s scorched-earth tactics have poisoned the well.

In Massachusetts, an editorial at The Wellesley News on April 12 openly advocated attacking anyone who fails to bow to leftwing orthodoxy.  Their definition of what will not be allowed includes “racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia or any other type of discriminatory speech.  Shutting down rhetoric that undermines the existence and rights of others is not a violation of free speech; it is hate speech.”

The good little Maoists (who are punctuation-challenged) went on to declare, “if people are given the resources to learn and either continue to speak hate speech or refuse to adapt their beliefs, then hostility may be warranted.” Later, they denied that this meant engaging in violence.

Incidentally, Hillary Clinton’s alma mater charges about $63,300 annually for tuition, room and board.  Apparently, that buys the finest brainwashing against the bourgeoisie that a campus can conjure.

This article was originally posted at Townhall.com

Fulfilling a campaign promise to get rid of the “Johnson Amendment,” President Donald Trump, according to Liberty Counsel, “signed an executive order today that promotes religious liberty throughout the federal agencies in general and in certain specific areas”:

The executive order declares that it is the policy of the Administration to protect and vigorously promote religious liberty, directs the IRS to exercise maximum enforcement of discretion to alleviate the burden of the Johnson Amendment, and provides regulatory relief for religious objectors to Obamacare’s burdensome preventive services mandate.

The Johnson Amendment, named for then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas and enacted into law in 1954, restricts tax-exempt organizations, including churches and religious organizations, from endorsing or opposing candidates for elected office. The executive order will provide some relief by directing the IRS to relax its enforcement of the provision.

For decades, the Johnson Amendment has deterred many church pastors and leaders from speaking about the moral issues of the day due to the fear of having their tax-exempt status revoked. Unfortunately, it was also used as an excuse to avoid controversial matters of morality that, over the years, became dominated by politics.

In an article earlier this year, Dr. Michael Brown wrote that he believes “it is the fear of man that has muzzled us and it is our desire to be affirmed by the world that has silenced us”:

The Johnson Amendment, as wrong as it is, is quite limited in its scope, primarily prohibiting “certain tax-exempt organizations from endorsing and opposing political candidates.”

It does not prohibit pastors from speaking out against political corruption. It does not prohibit pastors from speaking out against LGBT activism. It does not prohibit pastors from speaking out against abortion.

Nevertheless, many pastors and leaders have feared losing church members or offending those who disagreed. Now, with the loss of the excuse of the Johnson Amendment, Christian pastors and leaders can now, in the words of Dr. Brown, get back to the business of helping believers “sort out” cultural matters  “based on Scripture.”

“This is an appropriate way to commemorate the National Day of Prayer,” said Liberty Counsel Chairman Mat Staver, “as our President commits to protect and promote religious freedom.”

To learn more about the Johnson Amendment and what churches can and cannot do, click here.

Please join the Illinois Family Institute in thanking President Trump.

Take ACTION: CLICK HERE to thank President Trump for keeping his promise to protect free speech and religious liberty.

Editor’s Note:  Today’s action is a great first step in restoring First Amendment religious liberty rights, however it doesn’t change some of our nation’s most troubling laws, like the 1954 Johnson Amendment, or state laws that tyrannize Christian business owners.  We must keep in mind that this Executive Order could easily be overturned by the next president…  so we still have much work to do.

Lawmakers in Washington D.C. and Springfield must still follow through in making real changes to defend religious liberty against despotism.

Image credit: Liberty Counsel.

Would you help IFI continue this work?
Would you contribute $25, $50, or $100 today to help us fight for religious liberty?

Today’s fiscal and social conservatives are feeling what the late baseball legend Yogi Berra described as “deja vu all over again.”

The Daily Signal is reporting that “Congressional negotiators agreed late Sunday on a broad spending plan to fund the government through September,” and a vote is expected within days.

The “makeshift spending agreement” is business as usual. We’ve been here before. But there’s a big problem: the GOP-led Congress did not remove funding for Planned Parenthood. That’s $500 million dollars!

The Washington Times reports:

The spending deal congressional negotiators hammered out early Monday morning runs 1,665 pages, and spends $700 million per page — the cost of keeping the basic operations of the government running for a year.

Deja vu, anyone?

After watching the Republicans in Washington, D.C. for the past 100 days, most conservatives of all stripes are coming to grips with the fact that the GOP isn’t quite ready to be a governing party.

President Donald Trump and U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan continue to promise that they will fulfill their promises regarding repealing and replacing Obamacare, enacting tax reform, and starting to build a wall on the southern border.

Governing the United States is a massive job, and healthcare and taxes and a border wall are difficult issues to deal with. Defunding Planned Parenthood is not.

The omnibus spending bill continues to use your tax money to take the lives of the unborn. That, despite the fact that Republicans now hold the White House and majorities in both houses in Congress. Scientific evidence proves those babies feel the pain of abortion. What do our elected Republicans feel?

How is this possible? A clue might be the excuse used for failing to spend money on a border wall. The Daily Signal reported this:

Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate have said they prefer to put off a fight with Democrats over beginning to pay for the wall until the fall, rather than as part of funding the government for the rest of the current fiscal year.

Is that their excuse for failing to defund Planned Parenthood? Preferring to put off a fight with Democrats? Republicans cannot find the intestinal fortitude to stop spending taxpayers money on abortions — not a good sign for the other battles to come.

No doubt many Americans who voted for Republicans have put Congress and the White House on probation, and will for a time, give them the benefit of the doubt. Funding Planned Parenthood through September is another matter.

The abortion industry is rejoicing. U.S. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-New York) is “boasting” about what Democrats were able to accomplish in this GOP-led Congress.

Your U.S. Representative need to hear from you. Tell them to vote against any spending bill that funds Planned Parenthood.

Here is something they should vote for, however:

[U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz,] said he was preparing an amendment to defund Planned Parenthood for inclusion in the omnibus spending bill. He said it mirrors Vice President Mike Pence’s amendment to defund Planned Parenthood that the House passed in 2011, when Pence was a Republican congressman from Indiana.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to urge your U.S. Representative to vote for the Biggs amendment — if it doesn’t pass — then vote no on the spending bill.

Download the IFI App!

Download our apps for your phone or tablet. We offer apps for a variety of devices. You can get our alerts, commentary, video reports and event notification on an Android and Apple devices.

Click HERE for the Android app, or click HERE for the Apple app.

A politically dramatic scene occurred on March 30^th. U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Georgia), recovering from back surgery, and Vice President Mike Pence arrived in the U.S. Senate to cast votes for a bill that reverses an abortion-clinic Obama-era rule. The rule enacted by the previous administration forced all states to allocate Title X money to abortion clinics.

The vote was tied, with 50 United States Senators voting for the bill and 50 against. Vice President Mike Pence broke the tie, and the bill is now going to President Donald Trump. He is expected to sign it.

Once the bill is signed into law, states will once again be able to exclude abortion clinic chains (like Planned Parenthood) from receiving Title X tax dollars. There is, however, another layer to this unfolding drama.

Current law requires Medicaid dollars to be allocated to any qualified healthcare organization, which includes Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion clinic chain in the nation. The pro-life movement wants to take Medicaid dollars–which constitute about 40 percent of Planned Parenthood’s budget–away from them. Such a funding loss would cripple Planned Parenthood.

To change that law requires 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. This recent vote signals strongly that it’s not currently possible to get 60 U.S. Senators to support taking Medicaid dollars away from Planned Parenthood. Therefore, a different strategy is being employed. With these 50 U.S. Senators and the vice president’s tie-breaking vote, Planned Parenthood can be stripped of Medicaid funding for a period of one year by using the reconciliation process in the U.S. Senate.

The vote Thursday signaled that the political will is present in Washington D.C. to defund Planned Parenthood for one year. This is an area where gridlock can be overcome. A budget battle is likely to start in April, and another attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare may also come up soon. These are both political moments where historic pro-life victories are possible.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a fax or an email message to your state representative, urging him/her to vote NO on HB 40. Don’t overlook the need to communicate your opinion about HB 40, which is designed to force Illinois taxpayers to fund thousands of additional abortions year after year. Planned Parenthood is afraid of losing federal tax dollars, and they’re trying to make part of that up by getting more state tax revenue. We need to tell our lawmakers no!

More ACTION: Join the second nationwide #DefundPP rally. The events are happening on April 28^th and 29^th.  The last rally earlier this year received amazing news coverage. Join a rally location at the end of April to tell the nation it’s time to end taxpayer subsidization of Planned Parenthood! Learn more HERE.

>>Text Alerts: Text IFI to 555888 or click HERE to fill in a short form to enlist. You will receive a prompt reply thanking you for subscribing. Of course, you can easily opt out at any time.

We urge you to join today.

As you know, over the past few weeks we have seen a flurry of political activity in both Washington D.C. and Springfield. We expect this whirwind to continue through much of the spring.

With the election of Donald Trump as president, we have seen the agitated Left organize their base of  pro-abortion feminists and Leftist allies. They are highly motivated, looking for any opportunity to push back wherever and whenever they can.

The energy and momentum can be seen and felt in Springfield, where pro-life lawmakers are privately expressing their concerns about the lack of energy from the Illinois pro-life community, especially as it relates to trying to stop HB 40, the bill that will permit tax-funding for abortion under Medicaid and through state government insurance policies. In fact, one conservative lawmaker told us that he has received more calls in favor of this terrible bill than calls in opposition.

Passage of HB 40 would translate into tens of thousands of additional abortions in Illinois every year. As explained in an earlier article, this law would result in a disproportionate number of black and brown babies being killed.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your state representative, urging him/her to vote NO on HB 40. Also, please call your state representative next week to remind him/her that you do not want to have our tax-dollars used to abort innocent pre-born human beings. The Capitol switchboard  is (217) 782-2000.

Former State Representative Cal Skinner correctly points out that “in a year when the budget is in more trouble than at any time in the last fifty years, it is not the time to force state agencies to spend more money than last year.” The state of Illinois is not in a position to pay for new entitlement programs, let alone a new program that denies a pre-born person his or her civil right to live.

Bulletin Insert:  Ask your pastor to share this new bulletin insert with your congregation.  The body of Christ and people of faith must speak out now.

Call to Action Bulletin Insert

More ACTION:  Contact your like-minded family and neighbors and let them know that they should speak out against these radical proposals. Forward this article to them.  Also, post your opinions on Facebook and Twitter.

Please also pray that this bill will not get the support it needs to pass out of the Illinois House of Representatives.

Help us spread the word and activate other pro-lifers
by making a tax-deductible donation to IFI:

The liberal news media, which is ever more resembling a communications arm of the Democratic Party, has been determined to portray President Donald Trump’s immigration Executive Order as over-reach, inhumane, and anti-Muslim.

It is not new that American consumers of the news media should be wary of the daily narrative, but the need for it increases daily as nearly every step taken by the Trump Administration is going to be picked apart and pilloried on a daily basis.

The good news is that new media outlets are growing their reach, and old stalwarts like the National Review Online continue to produce a ton of material correcting the record whenever it is necessary. And since President Trump took office just weeks ago, a lot of correcting has been needed.

There is no better example of a need to correct the record is President Trump’s Executive Order ordering a 90-day halt to immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Why those seven and not the other 44 other Muslim-majority countries and territories? Because they are hotbeds of militant Islam, as even Obama conceded labeling them “countries of concern.”

What is in the Executive Order and why is being portrayed as almost a crime against humanity? We all know the answer to the second question — it is because many Democrats and Leftists and supporters of open borders see any limits as problematic.

What about the first question — what is in the Executive Order? Here is David French writing at National Review:

First, the order temporarily halts refugee admissions for 120 days to improve the vetting process, then caps refugee admissions at 50,000 per year. Outrageous, right? Not so fast. Before 2016, when Obama dramatically rampedup refugee admissions, Trump’s 50,000 stands roughly in between a typical year of refugee admissions in George W. Bush’s two terms and a typical year in Obama’s two terms.

. . .

Second, the order imposes a temporary, 90-day ban on people entering the U.S. from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. These are countries either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.

The ban, French writes, “is in place while the Department of Homeland Security determines the ‘information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.’”

French notes that the ban has an “important exception”:

‘Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.’ In other words, the secretaries can make exceptions — a provision that would, one hopes, fully allow interpreters and other proven allies to enter the U.S. during the 90-day period.

David French, noted for his role as a “Never Trumper,” also writes:

To the extent this ban applies to new immigrant and non-immigrant entry, this temporary halt (with exceptions) is wise. We know that terrorists are trying to infiltrate the ranks of refugees and other visitors.

“Unless we want to simply accept Muslim immigrant terror as a fact of American life,” French adds, “a short-term ban on entry from problematic countries combined with a systematic review of our security procedures is both reasonable and prudent.”

Reasonable and prudent? Seems so when even Syria’s brutal dictator Bashar Assad says that there are “definitely” some terrorists among the refugees.

A final note of interest. Thomas Gallatin writing at Patriot Post in an article titled, “Behind the Immigration Ban Hysterics: Trump’s travel ban on foreigners is not what the Left claims it is,” writes:

[T]he order will seek to revamp the refugee processing in order to prioritize those of minority religious groups fleeing the persecution of radical Islamists. This will specifically help Christians but also other minorities who have suffered from rising persecution over the last few years. This is a significant change from Obama’s policy that did not favor minority religions in the refugee processing.

Here are a few related articles:

First up is Dr. Michael Brown answering the question “”Is Trump’s executive order on the refugees fundamentally unChristian, or is it being misreported by the media?”

Next, for information on the legal challenge to the Executive Order, read Hans von Spakovsky’s article
“Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration Is Both Legal and Constitutional” at the Heritage Foundation website.

For information about “extreme vetting,” here is Middle East expert Daniel Pipes writing at the Middle East Quarterly: “Smoking Out Islamists via Extreme Vetting.”

IFI works diligently to serve the Christian community in Illinois with email alerts, video reports, pastors’ breakfasts, special forums, worldview conferences and cultural commentaries. We do not accept government funds nor do we run those aggravating popup ads to generate funds.  We depend solely on the support of readers like you.

If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI, please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.  It does a difference.

The day after the election, I was scrolling through my Facebook feed and saw two posts back-to-back from friends. One was convinced the world was coming to an end now that Donald Trump was elected president; the other was convinced America’s savior was now in the White House.

I’m sure you’ve seen similar contrasts – maybe even in your own household. There’s a sense of stark disunity in our culture these days, and the polls back that up. A recent Gallup poll found that 77 percentof Americans see the nation as “divided.”

Most of the time when people write about how divided we are, the solution they suggest is typically something like “well, you shouldn’t be so black and white about [insert controversial issue].”

However, you and I know that when it comes to issues like pornography, abortion, marriage, and freedom, there are some clear lines between right and wrong.

A better – and more realistic – way to deal with this division is not by compromising the Truth, but by simply not ascribing the worst motives to people who disagree with us. I know I’m guilty of this all the time – especially when I’m reading posts on social media. It’s too easy in our electronic world to imagine the person behind the other keyboard as the American Darth Vader, whose only goal is to destroy mankind.

However, just because someone’s wrong doesn’t make them ill-intentioned. And I think if we can stop ourselves from picturing the other side as having their finger on the trigger of the Deathstar, we’ll find more common ground.

Don’t miss these stories…

This verse from the Sermon on the Mount got me thinking about this topic.
There’s blessing in not ascribing the worst motives.

World Magazine’s recent cover story is also on this topic.
The divide is also prevalent in the church

The next Executive Order President Trump needs to sign

This Executive Order would be a game changer for religious freedom.
Read the Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderon’s analysis of this Executive Order.

*Caution: Content May Not Be Suitable for Younger Readers*

A blaring, front-page headline in the Chicago Tribune about the women’s march for death and deviant sexuality marred the Sunday morning of many Illinoisans—once again justifying the subterranean position the mainstream press occupies in the view of many Americans.

The Trib reported that an estimated 500,000 mostly women “staged an enormous, raucous rally…to send a potent message of defiance to…President Trump.”

I wonder how the Trib reported the 2013 March for Life in Washington that drew an estimated 650,000. And does anyone believe the coverage would have been less feverish and sycophantic if the numbers for the death and deviance march had been 400,000 or 200,000?

The statements made by protesters yesterday affirming a non-existent moral right of women to have their offspring killed is more abhorrent than any of the abhorrent things Trump has said.

Extolling the legal right to have incipient human life exterminated in the womb is incalculably abhorrent. What we can calculate, however, is how many human lives have been killed in wombs in the U.S. since 1973: 59, 738, 680.

The Trib cited the “show of star power absent from inauguration festivities,” so let’s take a glimpse at what inaugural attendees missed.

Plasticized sexagenarian sex symbol Madonna offered this inspirational stem-winder:

Welcome to the revolution of love, to the rebellion, to our refusal as women to accept this new age of tyranny where not just women are endangered but all marginalized people….It took us this darkness to wake us the f*** up….And to our detractors that insist that this March will never add up to anything, f*** you. F*** you….Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot of blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything….I choose love.  

Let’s not forget these patriotic words from women’s role model Madonna at a public event just a month before the election:

If you vote for Hillary Clinton, I will give you a b***job. OK? I’m really good. I’m not a douche, and I’m not a tool. I take my time, I have a lot of eye contact, and I do swallow.

Pregnant Natalie Portman made this extraordinarily ironic statement:

We need to take inspiration from nature, and remember that we hold the mystery of life, and the seed of every possibility within our bodies….We need to demand freedom from fear over our bodies and control over our own bodies…. [F]rom the bottom of both hearts beating inside my miraculous female body, I want to thank our new president. You just started the revolution.

Cognizant of the beating heart of another human within her womb—the mystery of life, the miraculous body of another whose seed too contains within it possibility—Portman seeks to protect women’s legal right to kill it.

Then the always melodramatic Ashley Judd recited the words of 19-year-old Nina Donovan. Here’s just a taste of her distasteful spoken words:

I am a nasty woman. I’m as nasty as a man who looks like he bathes in Cheetos dust. A man whose words are a distract to America. Electoral college-sanctioned, hate-speech contaminating this national anthem….Blacks are still in shackles and graves, just for being black. Slavery has been reinterpreted as the prison system in front of people who see melanin as animal skin….I didn’t know devils could be resurrected but I feel Hitler in these streets. A mustache traded for a toupee. Nazis renamed the Cabinet Electoral Conversion Therapy, the new gas chambers shaming the gay out of America….I am not as nasty as homophobia, sexual assault, transphobia, white supremacy, misogyny, ignorance, white privilege….Yeah, I’m a nasty woman—a loud, vulgar, proud woman.

…

And our p***ies ain’t for grabbing. Our p***ies are for our pleasure. They are for birthing new generations of filthy, vulgar, nasty, proud, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, you name it, for new generations of nasty women. So if you a nasty woman, or you love one who is, let me hear you say, hell yeah.

Someone needs to tell Ashley Judd that Bill Clinton did a whole lot worse than grabbing “p***ies,” and Hillary defended him while victimizing his victims.

Indulge me in a paraphrase of “nasty woman” Donovan’s words spoken by “nasty woman” Judd:

I’m a grieving woman. I’m grieving that “nasty women” speak in words that distract, delude, and degrade America and destroy American lives. Mainstream press-sanctioned, deplorable-speech and lies contaminating our national anthem….Blacks still in shackles and graves because their fathers abandoned them. Slavery has been reinterpreted as the welfare system by people who see melanin as victimskin….I didn’t know devils could be resurrected but I feel Hitler in our baby abattoirs. The final solution traded for “choice.” Mengele renamed “sex re-assigners,” castrating men out of manhood. I grieve for the victims of gender-obliterators, homofascists, and race-baiters whose lies deny that true identity is found in Christ alone—not in sexual deception or melanin.

I grieve for women who think empowerment is found in the illusions of Hollywood and delusions of actors. I grieve for women who learn about womanhood from “nasty women” like Madonna who made a living by objectifying herself. I grieve for women who are not birthing the life that grew within them and would have called them “mother.”

So, if you are one of these women or love one of these women—whether Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, you name it, know that there are thousands of other women and men who grieve and pray for you.

Amen.

Read more recent articles from Laurie:

New Trier High School Avoids Diversity Like the Plague

Highlights Magazine for Children Affirms Homoeroticism

Cub Scouts Reject Girl Who Wishes She Were a Boy

Join IFI at our Feb. 18th Worldview Conference

We are excited about our third annual Worldview Conference featuring world-renowned theologian Dr. Frank Turek on Sat., Feb. 18, 2017 in Barrington. Dr. Turek is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist”

Join us for a wonderful opportunity to take enhance your biblical worldview and equip you to more effectively engage the culture:

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

We normally send out prayer alerts to the IFI Prayer Team – to those 800 plus people who have opted into this special publication.  But in light of a new presidential administration and new legislative sessions in both Washington D.C. and Springfield, it is important that this message be viewed by as many Christians as possible, as we exhort each reader to prayer – fervent prayer, if I may be so bold. (Learn more about IFI’s Prayer Team HERE.)

Today, Donald J. Trump was sworn in as the 45^th President of the United States.

Last week, state lawmakers were sworn into office in Springfield to begin the 100^th General Assembly (a two year session).

Two weeks before that, on January 3, 2017, our federal lawmakers were sworn in, starting the 115^th Congress (also a two year session).

All of these government officials have a tremendous duty before them to uphold the State and U.S. Constitutions and serve the general welfare of the American people. As Christians, we have an obligation to pray for them because it benefits us, our families, our neighbors, and society as a whole.

“I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.” ~1 Timothy 2:1-2

POTUS

Pray for President Donald J. Trump. Pray that God gives him an abundance of wisdom, discernment and understanding of the issues before him. Pray that god-fearing advisers surround him.  Pray that his administration would do good, seek justice, defend the oppressed and do the hard things to establish sound moral and fiscal policies. Pray for his spiritual and physical safety and well-being.

Pray for Vice President-elect Mike Pence. Pray that God would use him in great ways to advise President Trump. Pray that he will have many great opportunities to share the truth of the Gospel and to disciple those within the administration. Pray that he would continue to seek God in prayer in all things. Pray for his spiritual and physical safety and well-being.

Let’s pray fervently for God’s hand of blessing and direction on Donald Trump over next 100 days!! May he learn to lean on the Holy Spirit in his new capacity.

U.S. Congress

We also urge you to pray regularly for U.S. Senator Richard Durbin and your particular U.S. Representative.  In addition, there are three federal lawmakers elected to new positions this session that we should also lift up in prayer.  They are U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth and U.S. Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi (D- Schaumburg) of the 8^th District and Brad Schneider (D-Deerfield) of the 10^th District.

Illinois General Assembly

Likewise, for our lawmakers at the State Capitol in Springfield, we must pray regularly for Governor Bruce Rauner and your own state senator and state representative. We also have a new Illinois Comptroller, Susan Mendoza. It would be wise to pray for her as she is in charge of the state “checkbook.”

In addition, we have twenty-three new elected officials who are in need of our prayers.  Here is the list:

Illinois State Senate:

Omar Aquino (D-Chicago)

Christina Castro (D-Elgin)

Paul Schimpf (R-Murphysboro)

Dale Fowler (R-Harrisburg)

Illinois State House of Representatives:

Teresa Mah (D-Chicago)

Julia Stratton (D-Chicago)

Melissa Conyears (D-Chicago)

Justin Slaughter (D-Chicago)

Nick Sauer (R-Barrington)

Steve Reick (R-Woodstock)

Tony McCombie (R-Savanna)

Michael Halpin (D-Rock Island)

Ryan Spain (R-Peoria)

Daniel Swanson (R-Woodhull)

David Welter (R-Morris)

Jerry Long (R-Ottawa)

Lindsay Parkhurst (R-Kankakee)

David Olsen (R-Downers Grove)

Brad Halbrook (R-Shelbyville)

Katie Stuart (D-Edwardsville)

LaToya Greenwood (D-East St. Louis)

Dave Severin (R-Marion)

Although we may disagree with the politics and worldview of many of the officials above, Christians have the privilege of going “above their heads” to appeal to an omnipotent God who is able to turn the heart of a king like a stream of water (Proverbs 21:1).

Pray that God would accomplish His purposes through these elected officials for the welfare of our state and nation.

Finally, pray that Congress will move to defund Planned Parenthood quickly, and that our state lawmakers will reject HB 40 — the bill to have our tax-dollars pay for thousands of abortions every year.

May God be pleased to answer our prayers!

Join IFI at our Feb. 18th Worldview Conference

We are excited about our third annual Worldview Conference featuring world-renowned theologian Dr. Frank Turek on Sat., Feb. 18, 2017 in Barrington. Dr. Turek is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist”

Join us for a wonderful opportunity to take enhance your biblical worldview and equip you to more effectively engage the culture:

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

Thousands gathered at Federal Plaza in Chicago on Sunday, January 15, 2017 to stand for LIFE!  Pro-life speakers at the march included Pat McCaskey of the Chicago Bears, three representatives from Congress, an abortion survivor, religious leaders, and pro-life students!  We got news coverage on Chicago’s WGN TV News and local CBS TV News!  More news coverage is likely to follow.

Overcoming Pro-choice Protesters

There was a pro-choice protest of the march, but pro-life marchers FAR outnumbered them!  The march officially started at 2 pm, but the protesters scheduled their protest to start at 1 pm to deceptively make it appear that they had more people. My friends in the pro-life groups LIVE PRO LIFE and Chicago Pro-life Future made sure we had a good presence at 1 pm to offset the small pro-choice protest.  We faced the pro-choice protest with fun pro-life chants and a line of professionally made signs!  Then, we put up a three sided sign that is 12 feet tall and ten feet wide with the same message.  We call it the “triangle.”

Cautiously Optimistic Signs For Future Activism

With the election of Donald Trump and the hope of pro-life changes that will bring, the pro-life movement is watching to see if there will be a change in engagement for pro-life or pro-choice activism.  Will pro-life and/or pro-choice activism get a boost?  March for Life Chicago was the first major test.  So far, it looks like both sides are getting a boost.  Pro-life people are excited that change is possible and we want to be engaged to help push ahead to a brighter future!  The official estimate for the pro-life side is 6,000!  Pro-choice people are upset that the law may be moving away from abortion and towards life.  They want to continue the status quo of a lack of legal protection for unborn humans, resulting in over 1 million humans aborted each year in the US.  We still outnumbered them, but we will need to be diligent in 2017 to keep the activism advantage that has been critical to moving our country in a pro-life direction.

Encouraging & Powerful Speakers

Gianna Jessen survived a saline abortion and was born in an abortion clinic!  She gave a powerful testimony of the power of her faith in living with cerebral palsy which was caused by the attempt on her life by the abortion doctor.  She’s forgiven her birth mother and boldly proclaims her faith and the stands up to the injustice of abortion, proclaiming unashamedly that abortion cannot be a woman’s rights, because her rights were not recognized when the abortion doctor was trying to take her life.

U.S. Representatives Dan Lipinski (D-Chicago), Peter Roskam (R-Wheaton) and Darin LaHood (R-Peoria) were bold and clear in standing up for life, declaring their commitment to defund Planned Parenthood, marching toward overturning Roe, and passing life-affirming legislation!  Pro-life Democrat Dan Lipinski highlighted that abortion should not be treated as a partisan issue and religious views shouldn’t separate people on it either because all humans deserve legal protection.  Instead of allowing abortion to divide people, we should all be united with the shared purpose of defending human life, especially the weak and vulnerable.

Brianna Todd shared her courage in choosing life for her unborn son and finding help at Aid for Women, a pro-life pregnancy resource center.

Fun & Young!

The march was packed full of energetic youth! They danced, they sang, and they jumped for joy!  There was a drum line, there were cheers, and there was the fun laughter and drive that youth brings.  It was a block party for LIFE that invaded the abortion culture that infects too much of Chicago.  It was nothing short of epic.

Pro-life Activists (left to right) Babette Holder, Jan Shaw, Dave Smith and Stephanie Trussell.