1

When Pro-Abortion Doublespeak Puts Orwell to Shame

In the latest example of pro-abortion doublespeak, U.S. Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) stated that a proposed bill requiring hospital care for babies who survive abortion is “dangerous.”

Seriously?! Mandating hospital care could be dangerous for the baby?

And should we be skeptical of Rep. Nadler’s genuine concern for this baby, since he would have fully supported the mother’s attempt to abort this same child?

To quote Nadler directly,

“The problem with this bill is that it endangers some infants by stating that that infant must immediately be brought to the hospital.” He added, “It directs and mandates certain medical care, which may not be appropriate, which maybe [sic] endanger the life of an infant in certain circumstances.”

Rep. Nadler was referring to the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (H.R. 26) proposed by Rep. Ann Wagner on January 9. As posted on the Congress.gov website, “This bill establishes requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must provide in the case of a child born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion.”

So, in the event that the baby, targeted for termination in the womb, somehow survives the abortion procedure, the health care provider who is present must give that baby the exact same care that would be given “to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

And, assuming that the abortion took place in an abortion clinic rather than a hospital, that health care practitioner must “ensure the child is immediately admitted to a hospital.”

That is the very least that should be done for this little survivor, and one would think that every adult with a beating heart would agree that this bill should become law.

As for how many babies actually survive abortion attempts, according to the Abortion Survivors website, “17,855 babies have survived abortion since 1973.” (Assuming that this number relies on actual reports, this might be a very low number.)

Yet not only did Rep. Nadler, together with all but two of his Democratic colleagues, vote against this bill, he actually branded it “dangerous.” Yes, said Nadler, it is not that this bill adds any protections to this infant (which Nadler has claimed have long been in place). Rather, it is that the bill “endangers” the baby by mandating that the child be brought to a hospital, since this may not be the best medical option.

Seconding this opinion was U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-Chicago) who opined that the bill “could create more harm” for the baby since it “requires immediately taking a struggling baby to a hospital.” That hospital, she explained, “could be hours away and could be detrimental to the life of that baby. This is nothing more than part of the effort to make abortion illegal nationally in this country. I object, and I urge a no vote.”

As for Nadler, he raised the same argument back in 2018 when a similar bill was proposed, claiming that,

“Despite what its supporters would have us believe, this legislation would do nothing to enhance protections, or the quality of health care, if an infant is born after an attempted abortion. What it would do, however, is directly interfere with a doctor’s medical judgement and dictate a medical standard of care that may not be appropriate in all circumstances, which could, in fact, put infants’ lives at greater risk.”

So, Nadler’s big concern as a strong pro-abortion advocate is protecting the well-being of the baby. Really?

He also claimed that,

“It has always been the law that health care providers cannot deliberately harm newborn infants, and that they must exercise reasonable care in their treatment of such infants. . . .

“In opposing this bill, I do not oppose, in any way, proper medical treatment for newborn infants, whatever the circumstances of their birth. But determining the proper treatment is for medical professionals to decide, not politicians in Congress.”

He added,

“When I supported the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2002, my reasoning, and the reasoning of my pro-choice colleagues, was simple: killing an infant who was born alive, either by an act of omission or commission, is infanticide. It was, is, and always should be, against the law, and we saw no harm in reaffirming that fact. That law passed Congress with bipartisan support precisely because it was harmless – even if it was also useless since it did not change the pre-existing law in any way. The bill specifically just reiterated existing law in florid language and did nothing to interfere with doctors’ medical judgment or cause needless harm.” 

But it is not that simple. U.S. Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) stated in 2021 that,

“Current federal law does not adequately protect a born child who survives an abortion. In the 116th Congress, the legislation passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a bipartisan vote of 248 to 177.”

And, in a private communication, pro-life leader Rev. Patrick Mahoney noted that

“there is something called the abortion survivors network in which many children were born alive from late term abortions and doctors didn’t attempt to save their lives.”

He added that the reason the proposed bill requires that the baby be brought to the hospital is that “doctors would leave the children without any emergency medical care and they would die a ‘natural death.’”

Under the current bill, doctors would be required to provide whatever medical care was necessary to try to save the infant’s life.

As for the real possibility of infanticide being practiced, let’s remember that in 2019 Virginia’s Governor Ralph Northam infamously said that in certain cases,

“If a mother is in labor…the infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians & mother.”

So, keep that infant comfortable while the family discusses whether to let it live or not.

No wonder the outcry was so great.

Even the left-leaning Snopes.com could only find the claim that Northam said he would “execute a baby after birth” to be “Mostly False.” That is saying a lot.

Not only so, but recent bills would allow for infanticide, such as Maryland’s Pregnant Person’s Freedom Act (House Bill 626/Senate Bill 669), which was defeated. In California, the ACLJ reported that, “On September 27, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed what amounts to a perinatal infanticide bill, AB 2223 (along with 12 other pro-abortion bills).”

So, for a number of reasons, the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is genuinely needed, and it is unconscionable that anyone would vote against it, especially someone claiming to care for the wellbeing of the infant.

Even more ironic, tragically so, is the fact that Reps. Nadler and Schakowsky and their Democratic colleagues have argued passionately for a mother’s right to kill that same baby in the womb, even if it was at a viable age for birth.

It would be better if they simply stated what we all know (and what others have often stated elsewhere). Those who oppose bills like the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act do so because they believe the bill is designed to undercut a woman’s “right” to abortion, and they will protect that “right” at almost all costs.

Their expressed concern for the wellbeing of the baby who survives an abortion is beyond cynical.

It is doublespeak in the extreme, putting pro-abortion phrases like “reproductive rights” to shame.

Let us expose it loudly and clearly.


This article was originally published at AskDrBrown.org.




Immigration Invasion on the Southern Border

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)





California Panders to “Trans” Cult and Harms Residents

Halloween: the favorite holiday of men who cross-dress, wear woman-face, and like to hang around young children. And in San Diego they did just that. The San Diego Union-Tribune (U-T) reported on the “first-ever Boo Bash,” which included, “candy, a kid’s costume contest,” and, fittingly, “a Disney-villain themed drag queen performance.” Drag queens are villainous—that is, depraved—and Disney is now America’s premier purveyor of depravity to children.

The sorry spectacle was held in San Diego’s homosexual/cross-dressing neighborhood mecca of Hillcrest, inside Pride Square, on—I kid you not—Normal Street, under a “giant, billowing rainbow flag.” The U-T describes the bash as “special” because it “brought together members of the LGBTQ community and allies” to celebrate Halloween in an “inclusive environment.” What’s worse, the event was promoted by the Encinitas Union School District through an all-district email.

To leftists “inclusive” doesn’t mean “all are welcome to attend.” Their version of “inclusivity” requires affirming and celebrating all the feelings, beliefs, and actions of leftists—and only leftists.

Historically, commitments to inclusivity never demanded approval or celebration of all the beliefs, desires, and actions of others—which logically would be impossible.

While we should accept and welcome people, we can disagree with their beliefs, find their desires disordered, and detest some of their volitional acts.

Leftists exclude and even detest anyone who believes differently on sexual matters than they—leftists—do. Members of the “LGBTQ+” community and their ideological allies want to cancel anyone who dares to speak truths leftists hate with as much boldness as sexual libertines speak their “truths.” Sexual libertines want to exclude conservatives from the workplace—from all workplaces. They want conservatives excluded, marginalized, cancelled, stigmatized, and unable to make a living.

San Diego’s demonic Halloween “celebration” was created by TransFamily Support Services and sponsored by an over-21 “gay” bar in San Diego and a San Francisco clinic whose mission is to “align body and mind” by mutilating bodies—for profit, of course.

While the proximate cause of the event may have been TransFamily Support Services, the ultimate cause is the father of lies whose masterworks of cultural dis-integration include dis-integrating children. In a dastardly decades-in-the making move, the father of lies is severing children’s minds and hearts from their bodies.

It’s astonishing that drag—a pitiable, fringe-y, grotesque, and unfunny form of pseudo-art, engaged in by sexual fetishists—would become mainstream for children. If children manage to escape the treacherous waters of the womb, American society will betray them in childhood through indoctrination with pro-homosexual and pro-“trans” beliefs (and practices).

Among those traitors to children at the event were State Senator Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, and County Board of Supervisors Chair Nathan Fletcher who expressed “support for transgender youth and their families,” which means approving of their sexual delusions and whatever damaging medical protocols they choose.

U-T reported that, “In the afternoon, drag queen Mariam T sat on stage in a sparkly purple evening gown to read ‘Red: A Crayon’s Story,’ to the audience. The book is about being true to yourself and following your own path despite obstacles.”

Drag queen “Mariam T” is Remington Scott Kienbusch a 30-year-old homosexual man whose favorite activities are “rhinestoning everything he wears” and going to Disneyland “any chance he gets.”

What if “being true to” oneself means following Christ despite the obstacles the “LGBTQ+” community and their bootlicking leftist government leaders toss in one’s path. Will “trans”-supporters Atkins, Gloria, and Fletcher support Christians as they are true to themselves? Or will they follow Governor Gavin Newsom‘s lead?

Newsom has decided to throw a boulder in the path of conservative people of faith who want to serve their communities as police officers. In September, Newsom signed into law a bill that amends a reasonable existing law which requires police officers to be free from any “emotional or mental condition that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer.”

The unreasonable amendment requires that police officers be evaluated for “bias” based on “sexual orientation.” Christians, Jews, and Muslims who believe homosexual acts are not moral may no longer serve as policewomen and policemen in California.

And now there’s a new bill pending that, if passed, will establish a “Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers.” Further, it “authorizes POST to suspend or revoke the certification of a peace officer if the person has” demonstrated “bias on the basis of … gender identity or expression … [or] sexual orientation.”

The commission “shall develop guidance for local law enforcement departments on performing effective Internet and social media screenings of officer applicants” to root out “potential biases,” either “implicit or explicit.”

Everyone knows what “bias” on the basis of gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation means in the deceitful mouths of leftists. It means moral disapproval of cross-sex impersonation, cross-dressing, and homosexuality—disapproval that for many derives from their religion.

Therefore, Newsom and his collaborators seek to pass a law that demonstrates bias on the basis of religion, which violates the First Amendment prohibition of the free exercise of religion.

As criminal activity soars, Newsom has decided to reduce the number of good candidates to serve as police officers. Newsom does not care about public safety, public order, or the public good. He cares about pandering to any group that will help him retain power.

These are yet more reasons to hightail it out of California.





Scripture on Abortion Billboards?

Now that the Dobbs decision has shifted the abortion debate to the state-by-state battle, both the pro-life and pro-choice movements have galvanized for this new arena. Pro-life states moved quickly to pass state-level abortion bans (at least thirteen states have done so already), while pro-abortion forces have endeavored to solidify or even expand abortion access in their states.

However, one pro-choice politician is not content to merely ensure that babies can be legally dismembered in his state. California Governor Gavin Newsom has openly invited residents of pro-life states to travel to California to have the dirty deed done—and used Scripture to prove he’s right.

California had already been preparing for the downfall of Roe several months before it finally fell. But now, in the post-Roe world, Newsom and his colleagues have been working tirelessly to ensure that their state is a “sanctuary” for abortion—fighting with money, legislation, and inter-state collaboration.

  • Not only did the state dedicate $200 million toward increasing abortion access, but also prohibited insurance companies from charging co-pays, essentially making abortions free.
  • Having already passed a dozen bills to increase abortion access, the state is now gunning for an amendment to the California constitution that would cement unlimited abortion access into the state constitution itself.
  • The state has also joined with its Pacific neighbors Oregon and Washington in a “Multi-State Commitment to Reproductive Freedom,” proclaiming their joint resolve to “defend access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion and contraceptives.”

However, securing his state as a safe space for slaughter was apparently just Newsom’s first step. Last month, he used $100,000 from his re-election campaign fund to set up billboards in seven pro-life states—Indiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Ohio, Texas, South Carolina, and South Dakota. These billboards chastised the stance of these “anti-freedom” states, with statements like “Texas doesn’t own your body. You do.” They also reassured residents that “California is ready to help,” inviting them to visit the state’s new abortion access website abortion.ca.gov, which provides information on how to find and pay for an abortion in California as well as warnings about the “fake clinics” known as crisis pregnancy centers.

It’s eyebrow-raising enough, why Newsom’s re-election campaign—for the California governorship—is erecting signs in South Carolina. But what’s especially stunning is the message he chose to put on the Mississippi version of his propaganda. “Need an abortion? California is ready to help. Learn more at abortion.ca.gov,” announces the advertisement, in big white and yellow all-caps. This is plastered above a message in smaller italics: “‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no greater commandment than these.’ -Mark 12:31.” Apparently, Newsom thinks that by proliferating abortion, he’s obeying the commandments of God.

No doubt aimed at the conservative Bible-belt culture in Mississippi, Governor Newsom’s reference to Scripture has garnered a visceral reaction from the Christian community.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, expressed her shock at Newsom’s appropriation of Scripture toward such evil ends: “This makes me sick . . . Simply no words for how twisted this is.”

California Pastor John MacArthur (Grace Community Church) issued an open letter to the governor, criticizing his “reprehensible act of gross blasphemy, quoting the very words of Jesus from Mark 12:31 as if you could somehow twist His meaning and arrogate His name in favor of butchering unborn infants.” As MacArthur characterized it, “You used the name and the words of Christ to promote the credo of Molech (Leviticus 20:1–5). It would be hard to imagine a greater sacrilege.”

Fellow California pastor Don Adam (Mid-Cities Baptist Church) concurred, expressing his fear for Governor Newsom—”that he would take the Holy Scripture completely out of context and use it to make people feel good that they can be a ‘neighbor’ to women who want an abortion.” As Adam sees it, “It’s dangerous for him, but also for women who are in crisis mode. When they see the Bible quoted, they may think that this is OK.”

And California Family Council president Jonathan Keller put his thoughts this way: “The idea that you would actually use the words of Jesus as a justification and enticement that abortion is a way of loving your neighbor . . . honestly, it’s something that I don’t think you could be more blasphemous if you were trying.”

The Left usually hates the Word of God, because the Word of God usually refutes their agenda and exposes their motives. This is why the Left has been on a century-long campaign to remove the Bible and biblical teaching from both the public square and private life. However, when the Left can find a way to twist the Word of God to support their agenda, they somehow become fine with playing the Bible-card. It seems that “separation of church and state” magically just doesn’t apply—that is, if the state is butchering the Word of God to justify butchering those made in His image.  





The “Trans”-Cult’s Diabolical Quest for Cultural Hegemony

Recently, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Virginia Children’s Hospital, Boston Children’s Hospital, Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s Transgender Health Clinic, and Akron Children’s Hospital have been under fire for engaging in experimental cross-sex hormone-doping on gender-confused teens—some effects of which are risky and irreversible—and for performing mutilating surgeries on the healthy sexual anatomy of minors. These Mengelesque procedures are beginning to pierce the consciences of Americans. While the growing outrage over what scores of hospitals and gender clinics are doing is a very good thing, it’s troubling that it’s taken this long.

Seven years ago, I wrote about Lurie Children’s Hospital in Chicago performing a double mastectomy on a 17-year-old girl from Grayslake, Illinois, whose birth name is Emily Paschal. How many more healthy breasts of minors have surgeons at Lurie lopped off since 2015?

The doctor who began Emily—now “Emmett”—on a path to affirming her metaphysical confusion via drugs was the infamous and ubiquitous homosexual, Dr. Robert Garofalo, who was profiled in a 2015 article titled “The Change Agent” published in Chicago Magazine. The profile reveals that Lurie’s lurid clinic was the brainchild of activist Garofalo:

Garofalo’s clinic, one of only 25 of its kind in the nation and the first to open in the Midwest, is pushing the boundaries of treatments for the growing population of transgender kids. In the past, patients this young were often redirected through “corrective” therapy to more gender-typical behaviors; Garofalo and his 25-person team take a much different approach: They aid these patients in transitioning.

Garofalo believes he’s “helping” confused children, who often suffer from co-morbidities like autism spectrum disorder, anxiety, and depression, “become their authentic selves.” By “authentic selves,” Garofalo is referring to what adolescents’ confused, troubled minds desire years before their brains are fully developed.

Chicago Magazine writes about one patient of Garofalo, a boy (i.e., an actual boy) who was named David at birth, then became “Jae” in 2013, then became “Diana” in 2015 when Garofalo recommended he start doping estrogen:

It wasn’t until she [sic] was 12 and saw an episode of Oprah about transgender women that she [sic] realized her [sic] situation was more complicated. She [sic] asked her [sic] mom to make an appointment with Garofalo. The doctor immediately put her [sic] on Lupron, a treatment for prostate cancer and fibroid tumors that also happens to suppress puberty.

As with so many adolescents today, David diagnosed himself.

Prior to starting David/Jae/Diana on the estrogen-doping regimen, Garofalo gave him and his mother Lisa Salas the requisite consent form:

“There are a lot of wishy-washy statements here,” Garofalo continues as he hands them the form. “That’s because there haven’t been many studies on the long-term effects of estrogen on young people.” He pauses to look at Diana’s mother. “I wish I could tell you everything that’s going to happen, but I can’t. There’s just so much that we don’t know yet.”

And with that, the diabolical Garofalo proceeded.

Lurie was initially leery of Garofalo’s proposed gender clinic, but J.B. Pritzker’s deep-pocketed, burly, cross-dressing cousin James/ “Jennifer” Pritzker ensured it come to fruition:

Leading the way through this uncharted water is Garofalo, a 49-year-old HIV-positive cancer survivor who readily admits he doesn’t have all the answers. Since he opened the clinic—thanks to a significant grant, matched by Lurie, from a foundation run by Jennifer Pritzker, the billionaire investor and philanthropist who came out as transgender in 2013—Garofalo has emerged as a leader in the adolescent transgender field. He travels the world to speak on the topic, is regularly brought in by medical schools and hospitals to train young pediatricians, and serves as a primary investigator on a National Institutes of Health research grant focusing on transgender people.

For those who don’t know, the Pritzkers are essential members of the cabal to socially construct their deviant beliefs about “transgenderism”–or what investigative journalist Jennifer Bilek more accurately calls “synthetic sex identities,” (SSI)–in every corner of American life.

Chicago Magazine gets nervily close to indicting Garofalo’s disturbing vision for gender-confused youth but ultimately bails by using the passive voice to avoid saying who questions Garofalo’s actions:

Garofalo’s treatments have to be seen as a radical form of medical improvisation, and that scares some folks.

Garofalo has historically been an outlier in the unholy quest to harm children:

Both the Endocrine Society and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health recommend waiting until patients are 16 to begin them on cross-sex hormone treatment. But Garofalo and other doctors at the clinic … will start patients as young as 14 on hormones. … Garofalo has had patients as young as 15 undergo top surgery.

Remember, this was written over seven years ago.

Matt Walsh recently exposed a Vanderbilt University Medical School doctor admitting that disfiguring minors makes big bucks for hospitals, not to mention for counselors, endocrinologists, pediatricians, surgeons, and the maker of Lupron.

Garofalo and his minions at Lurid make sure they squeeze money out of everyone they can to fund their dirty work:

Transgender treatments aren’t cheap—Lupron, for example, costs $8,500 to $18,000 a year—but Garofalo works with his patients, including those on Medicaid, to help get insurance companies to cover the medications. “Nearly every patient who comes through the door gets a denial initially from their insurance,” says Ginny Scheffler, the clinic’s nurse, who spends a good bit of her time writing appeals on behalf of patients. But even those without coverage can get treatment at Lurie thanks to private donations, including one from the Chicago transgender filmmaker Lana Wachowski of The Matrix fame.

Because of the profitability of creating synthetic sex identities for minors, because of the social contagion nature of “trans” identification, because of the terror instilled in parents by profiteers and ideologues, and because of the collaborationist silence of those who know the movement is evil, a low estimate of the number of children ages 6-17 who were diagnosed with gender dysphoria in 2021 is over 42,000. That is 42,000+ children who are being exploited and harmed for profit and for the social and political goals of adults who want to normalize their perverse desires.

And now we have public elementary schools reading picture books to little ones that affirm leftist beliefs about cross-sex impersonation. We have public libraries dragging in drag queens to read stories to toddlers. We have policies that enable teachers to keep secrets from parents about their children’s cross-sex impersonation at school. We have an organization committed to finding “trans”-complicit adults to appropriate wayward confused children from their parents. And perhaps the most alarming recent development is a bill sponsored by deviant California State Senator Scott Wiener and signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom that empowers “California courts to strip parents [from other states] of custody if a [non-parent] person takes the parents’ child to California and arranges for the child to receive gender transition procedures.”

“Trans”-cultism did not emerge on the cultural scene suddenly in the last two years. It didn’t emerge suddenly in 2015 after the disastrous Obergefell U.S. Supreme Court decision. “Trans”-cultism has been metastasizing for decades, destroying the hearts, minds, and bodies of children and teens; corrupting schools; shattering families; undermining First Amendment rights; and sexually integrating private spaces and sports.

Illinois Family Institute (IFI) has been warning about it for almost fifteen years, and so we have been watching with mixed feelings the long-anticipated, desired, and prayed-for anti-“trans”-cult movement grow.

We are thankful that at last parents and others on both sides of the political aisle are speaking out against the evil of “trans”-cultism. We are also sad and frustrated that it has taken so long for Americans in large numbers to speak out against this evil, resulting in untold numbers of children being grievously and irreparably harmed.

One of my first articles after being hired by IFI in the fall of 2008 was about lesbian Laurel Dykstra who had written a how-to article on ideologically grooming preschoolers into the “trans” cult. Her article, titled “Trans-Friendly Preschool,” was published in 2005.

My article, titled “Soulless Teaching,” summarizes Dykstra’s suggestions for indoctrinating preschoolers. Here are some of the claims and recommendations Dykstra, now a pastor, made 17 years ago. See if anything sounds familiar:

  • She said that the “gender binary system…. is harmful to everyone.”
  • She moralized that “It is not enough for classrooms, teachers, and schools to be ‘open’ or ‘non-judgmental’; they need to be actively trans-positive.”
  • Dykstra recommended that when talking to preschoolers, teachers should say things like “‘Well, most men have penises, but some don’t,’” and “‘Some girls grow up to be men.’”
  • She urged teachers to “Encourage kids to question their assumptions. ‘How do you know that that person is a woman? Could a man wear a dress?’”
  • She instructed teachers to “Call children by the name and the pronouns they choose.”
  • She recommended accessorizing classrooms with a “Tranny Teddy. Have a non-gendered toy/doll/puppet…. Do not use pronouns and give this creature a variety of gendered clothing, such as a skirt and tie. If asked, say ‘Oh, Binker isn’t a boy or a girl.’”
  • She suggested having a “Butch/Femme Day. Why not teach kids language like butch/femme, as an alternative to boy/girl or male/female? You could have dress-up days to play deliberately with gender, like ‘Fabulous and Fearless Day’ or ‘Capable and Campy.’”
  • She encouraged teachers to “Invite a drag performer or transsexual person who would be willing to share their story and a photo album.”
  • When reading picture books to preschoolers, Dykstra recommended “switching pronouns, avoiding them altogether, or using alternative pronouns.”
  • Dykstra rationalized using deceit in the face of parental opposition: “For ‘stealth practitioners’ (i.e., teachers in a transphobic setting), these classroom suggestions can be implemented without fanfare to create a more just and welcoming classroom.”

I reiterated her recommendations again in a 2018 article titled “Queering Government Schools: Just Say No.”

In 2017, when leftists everywhere were promoting the specious claim that the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) supports the social, chemical, and surgical “transitioning” of minor children and teens, I wrote an article exposing the disturbing way the AAP developed its position on the treatment of gender-dysphoric children. That article, titled “Do 66,000 Pediatricians Really Support the AAP’s Trans-Affirmative Policy,” outlines the secret process by which the AAP ensured its policy would reflect only leftist views.

The following year, 2018, I wrote an article titled “55 Members of the American Academy of Pediatrics Devise Destructive ‘Trans’ Policy,” exposing in greater detail the position of the AAP select-committee on harming children through profitable-but-medically-unsubstantiated protocols.

By the way, Lurid’s creepy Dr. Robert Garofalo has been instrumental in the social construction and imposition of the AAP’s non-science-based “trans” affirming policy.

In 2017, I wrote an article titled, “Things You Don’t Hear About Gender Dysphoria,” which lists 13 bulleted facts about gender dysphoria in minors and the health risks and grotesque nature of the “treatments” from which hospitals are profiting handsomely.

And still the medical cultists march on, surgical weapons unsheathed.

There are steps churches, parents, and other concerned citizens can take to begin to undo the damage done by synthetic sex identitarians and their apostles. In addition to removing your children from schools that affirm synthetic sex identities, watch and discuss these three documentaries with your children and in church youth groups:

Dysconnected: The Real Story Behind the Transgender Explosion 

Whose Children Are They? 

What is a Woman?





Blasphemy on Billboards

California Governor Gavin Newsom recently rented billboards in several pro-life states and slathered them with pro-abortion messages inviting pregnant women to get their abortions in California. One billboard in particular, however, stood out, because Newsom ended his pro-abortion message with the words of Jesus in Mark 12:31: “The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Christians were outraged, and rightly so. It’s wrong to promote baby murder, and it’s doubly wrong to twist the words of Christ to promote it. Pastor John MacArthur wrote a letter (which you can find HERE) to Newsom, in which he not only boldly and clearly told the governor that this misuse of Scripture was blasphemy, he pleaded with the governor to consider the eternality of his soul.

The Bible has a lot to say about leaders, good and evil, and the power of God’s Word. Isaiah 10:1-2 says, “Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey!”

Note the inference that what makes the decrees iniquitous and writings oppressive is the effects that they have – they turn the needy aside from justice, they rob the poor of their right, and on top of that, they prey on widows and the fatherless.

The abortion lobby does just those things. Their message is aimed at poor, young, husbandless women. Many are fatherless, and for those with fathers, the abortion industry passes laws (like the Parental Notice of Abortion Act), so that parents will never hear of it. Not to mention the boatload of stories where Planned Parenthood has aided and abetted traffickers. Unfortunately, all you have to do is go to a website called Live Action and search ‘traffickers’ to know this.

Isaiah 5:20 says, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” Twisting Scripture to call abortion loving is the very fulfillment of this verse. The Bible tells us that God created men and women in His own image (Genesis 1:27), treats the unborn as human and precious (Psalm 139:13-16, Exodus 1:22-25, Luke 1:40-44, etc.), and takes the murder of an image-bearer very seriously (Genesis 9:6). Life is sacred because we are made in the image of God. That’s why the devil is always seeking to destroy it. So much of what’s going on in our culture right now is the result of the age-old spiritual battle. We are not fighting against flesh and blood (Ephesians 6:12), and this fight for the unborn is really just one more battle in a war that’s lasted since Genesis 3.

A final thought  

Ironically, the mere use of Scripture on the billboard proclaims a reality abortion advocates don’t want to face. The verse they used says ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’. But Newsom and his campaign intentionally left off the whole Scripture quote:  “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” God, the Creator of morality, determines what love is. It’s not something for us to decide based off of what’s culturally cool or our own whims and ideas.

Loving God is why we love our neighbor, and He shows us how in His Word when Christ laid His life down for us. Love involves giving life. Not taking it.

In Isaiah 55:11, the Lord says, “So shall my Word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” God’s Word is powerful, even when it’s misused. And we know how this battle ends. Fortunately, God wins.






Oren Jacobson: Another Foolish Illinois Activist

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jacobson continues with his dissembling and evasion:

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

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

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

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

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

And to quote Jacobson,

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

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

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

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





The Schemes of Fallen Humans to Destroy Life

Following the unprecedented leak of the entire U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion on the controversial abortion case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, morally and emotionally unhinged, pro-human slaughter women and their collaborators became apoplectic. Next, U.S. Senate leftists terrified at the possibility that diverse citizens in diverse states will pass diverse laws to protect prenatal humans began clamoring for the elimination of the filibuster, so they—Senate leftists—can codify human slaughter in federal law. So much for diversity and federalism.

The self-identifying Catholic Joe Biden said, “If the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose [to have her offspring offed]. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice [i.e., pro-human slaughter] officials this November.” And yet, Biden is unwilling to wait to see who voters choose or what state levels of government will do. Leftists like Biden don’t care what the great unwashed masses want. Nor do they care what the Constitution says. Leftists want to impose their will, ideology, and desires by any unethical and unconstitutional means they can dream up.

Biden is justified in fearing that states may pass laws to protect incipient lives. In contrast to the leftist claim that most Americans support Roe v. Wade, recent Rasmussen polling shows that most Americans would like to see it overturned:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters would approve of a Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade …. Forty-five percent (45%) would disapprove of overturning Roe v. Wade ….

In his draft opinion, Justice Alito declared that the Roe v. Wade decision “was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences.” Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters agree with Justice Alito’s statement…. Forty-six percent (46%) disagree with Alito.

Biden and his U.S. Senate co-conspirators want to rob citizens and states of the right to decide whether humans in the womb can be killed by more powerful humans (i.e., oppressors). According to the website “Equal Access to Abortion Everywhere,” the federal law Biden frantically seeks to pass before Dobbs is decided and before Americans can exercise their right to govern themselves would,

eliminate all existing state restrictions including “six-week bans, 20-week bans, mandatory ultrasounds … counseling, waiting periods, and requirements that providers obtain admitting privileges at local hospitals.

Abortion without restrictions would be legal in every state throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy for any or no reason if the Women’s Health Protection Act is passed.

In attempting to rationalize the censorship of conservative ideas, “diversity”- and “tolerance”-loving leftists have claimed society has no obligation to tolerate conservative speech on topics related to sexuality because such speech may lead to violence. This raises a thorny question for leftists: Should society tolerate bloodthirsty banshees shrieking in the streets about their right to destroy the bodies of their offspring and threatening the lives of those who oppose human slaughter? Might such banshee speech lead to violence?

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, and Neil Gorsuch have had their homes and lives targeted.

Lacie Wooten-Holway, an unneighborly neighbor of Brett Kavanaugh revealed his home address and organized a protest in front of his home, declaring that “We’re about to get doomsday … so I’m not going to be civil to that man at all.”

A Molotov cocktail set ablaze the office of a conservative public policy organization in Wisconsin and graffitied it with the threat, “If abortions aren’t safe, then neither are you.” Sounds like a threat of violence to me.

A Catholic church in Fort Collins, Colorado was spraypainted with the words “My body my choice” and the symbol for anarchism.

Three churches in Texas were vandalized.

In an interview with Salon magazine, an anonymous representative of the anti-life group Ruth Sent Us said “that some members of the network have privately discussed not just disrupting Mass but burning the Eucharist.” Might that lead to violence?

Clearly banshee speech may lead to violence, and yet as of this writing, neither the Biden administration nor the DOJ has condemned the doxing of six U.S. Supreme Court Justices, the illegal efforts to influence the decision of these justices, the torching of conservative non-profit organizations, or the protests in front of Supreme Court Justices private homes.

Instead (and as usual), Biden finds this a good time to blame the “Maga crowd”:

What are the next things that are going to be attacked? Because this Maga crowd is really the most extreme political organization that exists in American history.

This is about a lot more than abortion… What happens if you have a state change the law, saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children? Is that legit?

Biden’s claim is either a bizarre non sequitur or a wildly fallacious slippery slope argument with no causal or logical link between a U.S. Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of the Dobbs case and an absurd hypothetical state law banning “LGBTQ” students from the classroom.

Is the “Maga crowd” an organization? Who’s in it? Everyone who voted for Trump? Are all the Americans who voted for Trump members of a political organization more extreme than BLM, Antifa, the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army, Black Panthers, or eco-terrorist organizations?

Perhaps the cognitively impaired Biden isn’t aware that many liberal legal scholars who support abortion argue that nowhere in the text or history of the Constitution can a right to abortion be found, and hence, Roe v. Wade was an atrocious decision.

U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) made an equally bizarre statement:

This is 50 years of rights in a leaked opinion where Justice Alito is literally not just taking us back to the 1950s, he’s taking us back to 1850s. He actually cites the fact that abortion was criminalized back when the 14th Amendment was adopted.

If Klobuchar thinks 49 years imparts immunity from being overturned to a lousy U.S. Supreme Court decision, then she must still be enraged about the de facto overturning of Plessy v. Ferguson, which stood legally unmolested for 58 years.

Klobuchar’s disdain for Alito “taking us back to the 1850s” is perplexing. One would expect a member of the U.S. Senate to have deep respect for much that was written in the 1800s and even the 1700s.

California Governor Gavin Newsom tripped all over leftist “logic” when talking about the draft opinion:

If men could get pregnant, this wouldn’t even be a conversation.

That’s both embarrassingly cliché and politically un-woke. Surely, the good leftist Newsom has heard the news from the world of pseudo-science: Men can get pregnant. Or maybe he has heard the news, but he’s caught in the sticky, tangled web of ideological mayhem that leftists have woven to deceive.

For decades, unhinged women committed to child sacrifice have tried to claim that humans in the womb were just clumps of cells or tumor-like masses. When that nonsensical claim failed, they admitted that, sure, the product of conception between two humans is a human but it’s not fully developed, or it’s imperfect, or it will suffer, or it’s parasitic, or it’s father is a criminal, or it’s mother is poor, or it’s mother doesn’t want it, or it’s mother is not ready to care for it. If those arguments were applied consistently to all humans, we would have a murderous society unsafe for every human.

So, then came the next lie: Morally unhinged women proclaimed that sure, womb-dwellers are human, but they’re not persons. But why, inquiring minds wanted to know, are these humans with human DNA, many of whose human body parts are sold to scientists to find cures for human diseases, not persons?

Philosopher Francis Beckwith offers a definition of personhood that abortion cheerleaders will definitely not like:

[W]hat is crucial morally is the being of a person, not his or her functioning. A human person does not come into existence when human function arises, but rather, a human person is an entity who has the natural inherent capacity to give rise to human functions, whether or not those functions are ever attained. And since the unborn human being has this natural inherent capacity from the moment it comes into existence, she is a person as long as she exists.

A human person who lacks the ability to think rationally (either because she is too young or she suffers from a disability) is still a human person because of her nature. Consequently, it makes sense to speak of a human being’s lack if and only if she is an actual person.

Questions of personhood and unalienable rights are metaphysical questions on which there will never be agreement. Rational, reasonable, compassionate people argue that if we can’t agree on something as momentous as when life begins or when a human becomes a person deserving of the right not to be murdered, the prudent and ethical response would be to err on the side of not killing humans that may, indeed, be persons.

But liberals are not concerned about the injustice of killing human fetuses. Liberal concerns are directed toward the self.

Nathanael Blake, Postdoctoral Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, illuminates the self-serving political philosophy of the secular left:

The liberal project seeks to provide, to the extent possible, freedom from unchosen constraints, duties, and loyalties in life.

This is why liberalism naturally favors a broad welfare state. The purpose of this welfare state is both to protect those who are dependent, and to protect those who do not want to be depended on.

Thus, liberalism professionalizes care from childhood to old age. The animating vision is a society in which everyone is taken care of, but no one has a private obligation to care for anyone else; no one has to sacrifice ambition, career, or personal freedom to care for children or parents or a sick relative.

But this liberal ideal is unrealizable with children, especially those in utero. …

This is why liberals are complaining about “forced birth” — they really are horrified at the idea of an unchosen obligation to care for another person. … Liberalism cannot tolerate that sort of involuntary duty, and so it requires the opt-out of abortion on demand.

Thus, a political philosophy that begins by claiming to protect the weak and dependent, and to liberate us from the unfairness of the givenness of life, ends by asserting an absolute right to take the lives of the weak and dependent — precisely because they are dependent.

Human life developing in the womb can offer nothing but need; to respond to that need with violence is to assail human dependence in its purest form. This bloodshed lays bare how liberalism has become a revolt against our humanity.

It’s also a revolt against God, which explains why leftists who want the freedom to sacrifice their children target Christianity. Jesus teaches us to deny ourselves and take up our crosses daily. He teaches that “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.” He teaches that God is the Author of life who creates the inmost being of children in their mothers’ wombs. And he teaches that every life unjustly snuffed out by fallen humans was fearfully and wonderfully made by God.

Take ACTION: Sponsored by left-wing U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal [D-CT], the Women’s Health Protection Act (S. 4132) would nullify any existing state pro-life laws protecting the life of the unborn, if signed into law. Both U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth are co-sponsors of this radical bill which would also force doctors and healthcare workers to violate their consciences. Click HERE to let them know that this legislation is absolutely unacceptable and offensive to you. Urge them to protect innocent pre-born human life.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Schemes-of-Fallen-Humans-to-Destroy-Life.mp3

Read more:

Fact Sheet by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

Democrats’ National Abortion Bill Replaces Word ‘Woman’ With ‘Person’ (The Daily Signal)





How The Federal Government Used Evangelical Leaders To Spread COVID Propaganda To Churches

Written by Megan Basham

In September, Wheaton College dean Ed Stetzer interviewed National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins on his podcast, “Church Leadership” about why Christians who want to obey Christ’s command to love their neighbors should get the Covid vaccine and avoid indulging in misinformation.

For those not familiar with Stetzer, he’s not just a religious liberal arts professor and this wasn’t just another dime-a-dozen pastorly podcast. To name just a few of his past and present titles in the evangelical world, Stetzer is also the executive director of the Billy Graham Center and the editor-in-chief of Outreach media group. He was previously an editor at Christianity Today and an executive director at LifeWay, one of the largest religious publishers in the world. That’s to say nothing of the dozen-plus books on missions and church planting he’s authored.

In short, when it comes to leveraging high evangelical offices to influence everyday Christians, arguably no one is better positioned than Ed Stetzer. You may not know his name, but if you’re a church-going Protestant, it’s almost guaranteed your pastor does.

Which is why, when Stetzer joined a line of renowned pastors and ministry leaders lending their platforms to Obama-appointee Collins, the collaboration was noteworthy.

During their discussion, Collins and Stetzer were hardly shy about the fact that they were asking ministers to act as the administration’s go-between with their congregants. “I want to exhort pastors once again to try to use your credibility with your flock to put forward the public health measures that we know can work,” Collins said. Stetzer replied that he sometimes hears from ministers who don’t feel comfortable preaching about Covid vaccines, and he advises them, in those cases, to simply promote the jab through social media.

“I just tell them, when you get vaccinated, post a picture and say, ‘So thankful I was able to get vaccinated,’” Stetzer said. “People need to see that it is the reasonable view.”

Their conversation also turned to the subject of masking children at school, with Collins noting that Christians, in particular, have been resistant to it. His view was firm—kids should be masked if they want to be in the classroom. To do anything else is to turn schools into super spreaders. Stetzer offered no pushback or follow-up questions based on views from other medical experts. He simply agreed.

The most crucial question Stetzer never asked Collins however, was why convincing church members to get vaccinated or disseminating certain administration talking points should be the business of pastors at all.

Christians and Conspiracy Theories

Stetzer’s efforts to help further the NIH’s preferred coronavirus narratives went beyond simply giving Collins a softball venue to rally pastors to his cause. He ended the podcast by announcing that the Billy Graham Center would be formally partnering with the Biden administration. Together with the NIH and the CDC it would launch a website, coronavirusandthechurch.com, to provide clergy Covid resources they could then convey to their congregations.

Much earlier in the pandemic, as an editor at evangelicalism’s flagship publication, Christianity Today (CT), Stetzer had also penned essays parroting Collins’ arguments on conspiracy theories. Among those he lambasted other believers for entertaining, the hypothesis that the coronavirus had leaked from a Wuhan lab. In a now deleted essay, preserved by Web Archive, Stetzer chided, “If you want to believe that some secret lab created this as a biological weapon, and now everyone is covering that up, I can’t stop you.”

It may seem strange, given the evidence now emerging of NIH-funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan, to hear a church leader instruct Christians to “repent” for the sin of discussing the plausible supposition that the virus had escaped from a Chinese laboratory. This is especially true as it doesn’t take any great level of spiritual discernment — just plain common sense — to look at the fact that Covid first emerged in a city with a virology institute that specializes in novel coronaviruses and realize it wasn’t an explanation that should be set aside too easily. But it appears Stetzer was simply following Collins’ lead.

Only two days before Stetzer published his essay, Collins participated in a livestream event, co-hosted by CT. The outlet introduced him as a “follower of Jesus, who affirms the sanctity of human life” despite the fact that Collins is on record stating he does not definitively believe, as most pro-lifers do, that life begins at conception, and his tenure at NIH has been marked by extreme anti-life, pro-LGBT policies. (More on this later).

But the pro-life Christian framing was sure to win Collins a hearing among an audience with deep religious convictions about the evil of abortion. Many likely felt reassured to hear that a likeminded medical expert was representing them in the administration.

During the panel interview, Collins continued to insist that the lab leak theory wasn’t just unlikely but qualified for the dreaded misinformation label. “If you were trying to design a more dangerous coronavirus,” he said, “you would never have designed this one … So I think one can say with great confidence that in this case the bioterrorist was nature … Humans did not make this one. Nature did.”

It was the same message his subordinate, Dr. Anthony Fauci, had been giving to secular news outlets, but Collins was specifically tapped to carry the message to the faithful. As Time Magazine reported in Feb. 2021, “While Fauci has been medicine’s public face, Collins has been hitting the faith-based circuit…and preaching science to believers.”

The editors, writers, and reporters at Christian organizations didn’t question Collins any more than their mainstream counterparts questioned Fauci.

Certainly The Gospel Coalition, a publication largely written for and by pastors, didn’t probe beyond the “facts” Collins’ offered or consider any conflicts of interest the NIH director might have had before publishing several essays that cited him as almost their lone source of information. As with CT, one article by Gospel Coalition editor Joe Carter linked the reasonable hypothesis that the virus might have been human-made with wilder QAnon fantasies. It then lectured readers that spreading such ideas would damage the church’s witness in the world.

Of course, Stetzer and The Gospel Coalition had no way of knowing at that point that Collins and Fauci had already heard from leading U.S. and British scientists who believed the virus had indeed escaped from a Chinese lab. Or that they believed it might be the product of gain-of-function engineering, possibly with funding from the NIH itself. Nor could they have predicted that emails between Collins and Fauci would later show the pair had a habit of turning to friendly media contacts (including, it seems, Christian media contacts) to discredit and suppress opinions they didn’t like, such as questioning Covid’s origins and the wisdom of masks and lockdowns.

What Stetzer and others did know was that one of the most powerful bureaucrats in the world was calling on evangelical leaders to be “ambassadors for truth.” And they were happy to answer that call.

The question was, just how truthful was Collins’ truth?

Evangelicals of a Feather

Stetzer, CT, and The Gospel Coalition were hardly alone in uncritically lending their sway over rank-and-file evangelicals to Collins. The list of Christian leaders who passed the NIH director their mics to preach messages about getting jabs, wearing masks, and accepting the official line on Covid is as long as it is esteemed.

One of the most noteworthy was the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), an organization funded by churches in the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S.

While a webinar featuring Collins and then-ERLC-head Russell Moore largely centered, again, on the importance of pastors convincing church members to get vaccinated, the discussion also moved on to the topic of masks. With Moore nodding along, Collins held up a basic, over-the-counter cloth square, “This is not a political statement,” he asserted. “This is not an invasion of your personal freedom…This is a life-saving medical device.”

Even in late 2020, the claim was highly debatable among medical experts. As hematologist-oncologist Vinay Prasad wrote in City Journal this month, public health officials like Collins have had a truth problem over the entire course of Covid, but especially when it comes to masks. “The only published cluster randomized trial of community cloth masking during Covid-19,” Prasad reported, “found that…cloth masks were no better than no masks at all.” [emphasis mine].

At this point, even the CDC is backing away from claims that cloth masks are worth much of anything.

Yet none of the Christian leaders platforming Collins evidently felt it was worth exploring a second opinion. And the list of pastors who were willing to take a bureaucrat’s word that matters that could have been left to Christian liberty were instead tests of one’s love for Jesus goes on.

Former megachurch pastor Tim Keller’s joint interview with Collins included a digression where the pair agreed that churches like John MacArthur’s, which continued to meet in-person despite Covid lockdowns, represented the “bad and ugly” of good, bad, and ugly Christian responses to the virus.

During Saddleback Pastor Rick Warren’s special broadcast with Collins on behalf of Health and Human Services, he mentioned that he and Collins first met when both were speakers for the billionaires and heads of state who gather annually in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. They reconnected recently, Warren revealed, at an “off-the-record” meeting between Collins and “key faith leaders.” Warren did not say, but one can make an educated guess as to who convened that meeting and for what purpose, given the striking similarity of Collins’ appearances alongside all these leading Christian lights.

Once again, Warren and Collins spent their interview jointly lamenting the unlovingness of Christians who question the efficacy of masks, specifically framing it as a matter of obedience to Jesus. “Wearing a mask is the great commandment: love your neighbor as yourself,” the best-selling author of “The Purpose-Driven Life” declared, before going on to specifically argue that religious leaders have an obligation to convince religious people to accept the government’s narratives about Covid.

“Let me just say a word to the priests and pastors and rabbis and other faith leaders,” he said. “This is our job, to deal with these conspiracy issues and things like that…One of the responsibilities of faith leaders is to tell people to…trust the science. They’re not going to put out a vaccine that’s going to hurt people.”

Leaving aside for a moment the fact that government does have a record of putting out vaccines that “hurt people,” is it truly the pastor’s job to tell church members to “trust the science?” Is it a pastor’s job to slyly insult other pastors who chose to handle shutdowns differently, as Warren did when he quipped that his “ego doesn’t require” him to “have a live audience to speak to.”

And still the list goes on.

The same week MacArthur’s church was in the news for resisting California Governor Gavin Newsom orders to keep houses of worship closed, Collins participated in an interview with celebrated theologian N.T. Wright.

During a discussion where the NIH director once again trumpeted the efficacy of cloth masks, the pair warned against conspiracies, mocking “disturbing examples” of churches that continued meeting because they thought “the devil can’t get into my church” or “Jesus is my vaccine.” Lest anyone wonder whether Wright experienced some pause over lending his reputation as a deep Christian thinker to Caesar’s agent, the friends finished with a guitar duet.

Even hipster Christian publications like Relevant, whose readers have likely never heard of Collins, still looked to him as the foundation of their Covid reporting.

Throughout all of it, Collins brought the message to the faithful through their preachers and leaders: “God is calling [Christians] to do the right thing.”

And none of those leaders thought to question whether Collins’ “right thing” and God’s “right thing” must necessarily be the same thing.

Why not? As Warren said of Collins during their interview: “He’s a man you can trust.”

A Man You Can Trust

Perhaps the evangelical elites’ willingness to unhesitatingly credit Collins with unimpeachable honesty has something to do with his rather Mr. Rogers-like appearance and gentle demeanor. The establishment media has compared him to “The Simpson’s” character Ned Flanders, noting that he has a tendency to punctuate his soft speech with exclamations of “oh boy!” and “by golly!”

Going by his concrete record, however, he seems like a strange ambassador to spread the government’s Covid messaging to theologically conservative congregations. Other than his proclamations that he is, himself, a believer, the NIH director espouses nearly no public positions that would mark him out as any different from any extreme Left-wing bureaucrat.

He has not only defended experimentation on fetuses obtained by abortion, he has also directed record-level spending toward it. Among the priorities the NIH has funded under Collins — a University of Pittsburgh experiment that involved grafting infant scalps onto lab rats, as well as projects that relied on the harvested organs of aborted, full-term babies. Some doctors have even charged Collins with giving money to research that required extracting kidneys, ureters, and bladders from living infants.

He further has endorsed unrestricted funding of embryonic stem cell research, personally attending President Obama’s signing of an Executive Order to reverse a previous ban on such expenditures. When Nature magazine asked him about the Trump administration’s decision to shut down fetal cell research, Collins made it clear he disagreed, saying, “I think it’s widely known that the NIH tried to protect the continued use of human fetal tissue. But ultimately, the White House decided otherwise. And we had no choice but to stand down.”

Even when directly asked about how genetic testing has led to the increased killing of Down Syndrome babies in the womb, Collins deflected, telling Beliefnet, “I’m troubled [by] the applications of genetics that are currently possible are oftentimes in the prenatal arena…But, of course, in our current society, people are in a circumstance of being able to take advantage of those technologies.”

When it comes to pushing an agenda of racial quotas and partiality based on skin color, Collins is a member of the Left in good standing, speaking fluently of “structural racism” and “equity” rather than equality. He’s put his money (or, rather, taxpayer money) where his mouth is, implementing new policies that require scientists seeking NIH grants to pass diversity, equity, and inclusion tests in order to qualify.

To the most holy of progressive sacred cows — LGBTQ orthodoxy — Collins has been happy to genuflect. Having declared himself an “ally” of the gay and trans movements, he went on to say he “[applauds] the courage and resilience it takes for [LGBTQ] individuals to live openly and authentically” and is “committed to listening, respecting, and supporting [them]” as an “advocate.”

These are not just the empty words of a hapless Christian official saying what he must to survive in a hostile political atmosphere. Collins’ declaration of allyship is deeply reflected in his leadership.

Under his watch, the NIH launched a new initiative to specifically direct funding to “sexual and gender minorities.” On the ground, this has translated to awarding millions in grants to experimental transgender research on minors, like giving opposite-sex hormones to children as young as eight and mastectomies to girls as young as 13. Another project, awarded $8 million in grants, included recruiting teen boys to track their homosexual activities like “condomless anal sex” on an app without their parents’ consent.

Other than his assertions of his personal Christian faith, there is almost no public stance Collins has taken that would mark him out as someone of like mind with the everyday believers to whom he was appealing.

How did Collins overcome all this baggage to become the go-to expert for millions of Christians? With a little help from his friends, who were happy to stand as his character witnesses.

Keller, Warren, Wright, and Stetzer all publicly lauded him as a godly brother.  When presenting Collins to Southern Baptists, Moore gushed over him as the smartest man in a book club he attends that also includes, according to Time Magazine, such luminaries of the “Christiantelligentsia” as The Atlantic’s Pete Wehner and The New York TimesDavid Brooks.

In October, even after Collins’ funding of the University of Pittsburgh research had become widely known, Moore continued to burnish his friend’s reputation, saying, “I admire greatly the wisdom, expertise, and, most of all, the Christian humility and grace of Francis Collins.” That same month, influential evangelical pundit David French deemed Collins a “national treasure” and his service in the NIH “faithful.” Former George W. Bush speechwriter and Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson struck the most poetic tone in his effusive praise, claiming that Collins possesses a “restless genius [that] is other-centered” and is a “truth-seeker in the best sense.”

Except, apparently, when those others are aborted infants or gender-confused children and when that truth pertains to lab leaks or gain-of-function funding.

Since news began breaking months ago that Collins and Fauci intentionally used their media connections to conspire to suppress the lab-leak theory, none of the individuals or organizations in this story has corrected their records or asked Collins publicly about his previous statements. Nor have they circled back with him to inquire on record about revelations the NIH funded gain-of-function coronavirus research in Wuhan. They also haven’t questioned him on the increasing scientific consensus that cloth masks were never very useful.

The Daily Wire reached out to Stetzer, Keller, Wright, Warren, Moore, and French to ask if they have changed their views on Collins given recent revelations. None responded.

Francis Collins has been an especially successful envoy for the Biden administration, delivering messages to a mostly-Republican Christian populace who would otherwise be reluctant to hear them. In their presentation of Collins’ expertise, these pastors and leaders suggested that questioning his explanations as to the origins of the virus or the efficacy of masks was not simply a point of disagreement but sinful. This was a charge likely to have a great deal of impact on churchgoers who strive to live lives in accordance with godly standards. Perhaps no other argument could’ve been more persuasive to this demographic.

This does not mean these leaders necessarily knew that the information they were conveying to the broader Christian public could be false, but it does highlight the danger religious leaders face when they’re willing to become mouth organs of the government.

What we do know about Collins and his work with Fauci is that they have shown themselves willing to compromise transparency and truth for PR considerations. Thus, everything they have told the public about the vaccines may be accurate and their message a worthy one for Christians. But their credibility no longer carries much weight. It would’ve been better had the evangelical establishment never platformed Collins at all and shipwrecked their own reputations to showcase their lofty connections to him.

While these evangelical leaders were warning about conspiracy theories, Collins was waging a misinformation campaign himself — one these Christian megaphones helped further.

Why they did it is a question only they can answer. Perhaps in their eagerness to promote vaccines, they weren’t willing to offer any pushback to Collins’ other claims. Certainly, the lure of respect in the halls of power has proved too great a siren call for many a man. Or perhaps it was simply that their friend, the NIH director, called on them for a favor. If so, a friend like Collins deserved much, much more scrutiny.

There’s an instructive moment at the end of Warren‘s interview with Collins. The pastor misquotes Proverbs 4, saying, “Get the facts at any price.”

That, of course, is not what the verse says. It says get wisdom at any price. And it was wisdom that was severely lacking when so many pastors and ministry heads recklessly turned over their platforms, influence, and credibility to a government official who had done little to demonstrate he deserved them.


This article was originally published by The Daily Wire, which is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. 




Legendary Hypocrisy and Deceit of Democrats

As Leftists unravel and incinerate the fabric of America, it’s helpful—unpleasant but helpful—to recall some of their now legendary acts of hypocrisy and deceit, including the widespread use of Newspeak. So, let’s start with that.

While claiming to have a corner on compassion and love, Leftists now refer to human beings by the soulless, utilitarian term “human infrastructure”—something to be used, manipulated, repaired, or destroyed and rebuilt in ways that better serve the omniscient and omnipotent among us. I guess we should count ourselves lucky that they are including the word “human’’—for now.

Leftists cheer for the acts alleged by Bob Woodward and Robert Costas in their book Peril to have been committed by General Mark Milley—acts that if true would be seditious and/or treasonous. Meanwhile, Democrats spent millions of taxpayer dollars to “investigate” alleged collusion with Russians by former President Trump even after they knew the story was false.

Leftists want hard-working Americans to pay for the food, housing, education, job-training, and medical expenses of 95,000 Afghan refugees. Meanwhile, the U.S. homeless population is over 580,000, of which 171,000 are in families and 37,000 are military veterans.

Leftists support falsified birth certificates and drivers’ licenses but oppose falsified vaccine passports.

Leftists shriek “our bodies, our choice” when it comes to destroying tiny bodies that are not theirs, while out of the other side of their mouths they hiss, “your body, our choice” when it comes to vaccines that have not been proven risk-free.

The ruling elite—including Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, San Francisco Mayor London Breed, and sexually profligate California Governor Gavin Newsom—infamously imposed restrictions on the deplorables that they themselves had no intention of submitting to.

Leftists said nothing when Kamala Harris proclaimed she would not get the vaccine if Trump said to get one, but they are howling indignantly because rapper Nicki Minaj suggested people should do their own research before getting a COVID-19 vaccination.

Leftists want to force Americans to be vaccinated or regularly tested for COVID-19, and the Biden administration is requiring all foreign nationals who come to the U.S. legally to provide proof of vaccination and a negative COVID-19 test within three days of leaving their country for the U.S. Meanwhile, the Biden administration has been allowing thousands of illegal immigrants to flood the country without proof of vaccination or a negative COVID-19 test.

Leftists support the lawlessness of border criminals who flagrantly violate our immigration laws, and at the same time, they object to the efforts of ICE, the U.S. Border Patrol, and police to enforce laws that protect citizens.

Leftists shrieked about “kids in cages”—cages that the Obama administration built—and said nothing about plastic pods with children of color packed in like sardines.

Leftists claim to love multiculturalism and hate the imposition of “white” ideas on other cultures, but then they spend buckets of taxpayer ducats to impose controversial leftist sexuality dogma that was socially constructed by privileged whites in off-white towers on Middle Eastern and African cultures.

Leftists claim to be the party that cares about women, but then they sexually integrate women’s locker rooms, restrooms, shelters, prisons, and sports, and they support the slaughter of approximately 430,000 girls in the womb.

Leftists call conservatives “fascists,” while they—leftists—eagerly support the efforts of Big Tech, Big Business, and Big Government to ban books, censor speech, compel speech, bury news stories, and prevent journalists from fully informing the public of Biden’s corruption and humanitarian disasters.

Leftists claim to value diversity, tolerance, free speech, and critical thinking and then silence ideas they hate from being studied and discussed in publicly subsidized schools.

Leftists claim to care about persons of color and yet steadfastly deny them the right to choose where their children are educated.

Leftists claim to care about persons of color but continually pass policies and laws that incentivize the destruction of the nuclear family which has resulted in a plague of criminal activity, dysfunctional schools, dangerous neighborhoods, and government dependence among those communities where many persons of color live.

When pressed a few leftists muttered an anemic tut tut about the 630 violent insurrections by BLM and Antifa that caused over a billion dollars of damage to private property, resulted in 2,000 police injuries, and included the destruction of government property, and yet all leftists fake-fume endlessly about the Jan. 6 riot.

Leftists paid to have criminals who were arrested in the 2020 BLM/Antifa insurrections sprung from jail and yet say nothing when those arrested for participating in the Jan. 6 riot languish in jail for months on end.

Leftists couldn’t care less about Hunter Biden’s influence-peddling, his corrupt father’s lies about not knowing a thing about Hunter’s influence-peddling business, or about Eric Swalwell’s sexual dalliance with a Chinese spy, but they fake-fumed tirelessly about a “pee tape.”

Leftists pontificate on the importance of “transparency” while saying nothing when cellar-dweller Biden stayed barricaded in his fortress rather than campaigning and saying nothing when the few press conferences he holds are micro-crafted with precision to conceal his cognitive decline.

Leftists couldn’t care less about Biden’s memory failures and verbal gaffes, but boy, oh, boy did they object to Trump’s inartful rhetoric.

In 2006, just before she became the first female U.S. Speaker of the House of liars, Nancy Pelosi  said,

We’ll turn the most closed and corrupt Congress into the most open and honest Congress. … The only way you can make the change that needs to be made for our country—a new direction where we’re there for the many and not the few—is to drain the swamp.

Pelosi meant none of it.

Throughout Trump’s tenure, America learned just how thick, deep, and fetid the swamp has become. The sewage has leached out into all power centers: all departments of the vast governmental bureaucracy, legacy news media, social media behemoths, academia, and corporate America.

And now, you can’t work in America if you say you oppose the slaughter of humans in the womb. You can’t work in America if you refuse to use transpeak pronouns. You can’t work in America if you say homoerotic acts are immoral and the union of two people of the same sex is not—in reality—a marriage. You can’t work in America if you won’t get a COVID vaccine.

This is no longer America.

To borrow the title of Rod Dreher’s book: Live not by lies.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Legendary-Hypocrisy-and-Deceit-of-Democrats.mp3





Newsom, and Lightfoot, and Brown, Oh My!

By now many Americans have learned what slimy, deceitful hypocrites California governor Gavin Newsom and his wealthy, well-connected friends are. In a stunning act of arrogant “do what I say, not what I do, PEONS,” he and his privileged co-scofflaws dined at an exclusive restaurant in Napa Valley—indoors without masks—in violation of his own rules.

His co-scofflaws included Dustin Corcoran, the CEO of the California Medical Association, and Janus Norman, the group’s lobbyist and senior vice president. Apparently, some medical professionals don’t really think dining indoors mask-less with friends puts their lives at risk. Now I’m waiting for all of Hollywood, the Democrat Party, and the faux-journalists at CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, and the Washington Post to explode in paroxysms of sanctimonious rage and primal fear at the prospect of the imminent deaths of all the people these twelve scofflaws will infect.

But don’t worry, Newsom is very very sorry he got caught.

The reality is many—perhaps most—leftists don’t believe the alarmist claims they exploit for political—that is, anti-Trump—purposes. In the midst of the first COVID-19 surge, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot commanded her subjects to forgo haircuts, while she—unmasked—had her hair done because she wanted to look good in front of the cameras and because she cares about her “hygiene”—unlike, presumably, her subjects. After the election, she joined her subjects in the street for a victory celebration and then promptly put the kibosh on their Thanksgiving celebrations saying, “You must cancel the normal Thanksgiving plans, particularly if they include guests that do not live in your immediate household.”

She followed that up with her Thanksgiving “advisory”:

– Stay home unless for essential reasons

– Stop having guests over—including family members you do not live with

– Avoid non-essential travel

– Cancel traditional Thanksgiving plans

Not to be outdone in hypocrisy or authoritarian intrusiveness, Oregon’s “openly bisexual” governor Kate Brown has issued these commands, which, if not followed, can result in  fines up to $1,250 or 30 days in jail:

  • Private Social Events—limited to two households or six individuals in a closed group (including Thanksgiving)
  • Wear a mask in your own home on Thanksgiving, only removing it when eating
  • Don’t leave your home during the two-week shutdown

So much for “our bodies, ourselves.”

While in June Brown said “she believes the use of tear gas against protesters is unacceptable,” she is now working with “state police and local law enforcement” to ensure compliance with her Thanksgiving orders.  Think about that for a minute.

This is the same governor who allowed the creation of the potential super-spreader rebel state of CHAZ/CHOP in six blocks of Portlandia and who allowed mostly violent potential super-spreader protests to ravage the rest of Portlandia. So, does bisexual Brown really believe gatherings of ten are highly likely to be lethal gatherings?

Privileged leftists who dine at uber-swanky, $350 per person ($35-45 per glass of wine) restaurants are utterly cavalier about destroying people’s livelihoods while they do not themselves believe that socializing mask-less puts everyone in mortal danger. Newsom and other privileged Democrats wield their inordinate power recklessly, destroying countless small businesses while sating their gourmet appetites on the finest food the monied can buy.

When I refer to “alarmist claims,” I’m not suggesting that the Wuhan Red Death is not alarming or that the death rate is not tragic. I’m suggesting that the claims of leftists about the virus are alarmist in that they are not balanced by either the inclusion of all relevant statistics or by a modicum of humility about what is known about treatment and prevention.

For example, while leftists blame Wuhan virus spikes on the evil mask-questioners who walk among us purportedly like Grim Reapers, they rarely if ever discuss the worldwide Wuhan spikes in countries with more stringent lockdown and mask mandates.

When areas lock down, virus infections stall. When lockdowns end, virus infections increase. But we can’t afford the social, psychological, physical, and economic consequences of locking down forever.

Rational people understand that a contagion like the Wuhan virus will spread. What is needed are good therapeutics and herd immunity achieved via a combination of infections and vaccines. Social distancing for those most at risk of serious complications and/or death is wise. Social distancing for healthy people under 60, school closures, and business lockdowns are foolhardy at minimum and downright dangerous for many people.

While COVID-infected people should mask if they must go out, evidence that widespread masking of healthy people prevents COVID is scanty. According to the New York Times, a recent, large, randomized study out of Denmark provides evidence for what many have been saying:

The researchers had hoped that masks would cut the infection rate by half among wearers. Instead, 42 people in the mask group, or 1.8 percent, got infected, compared with 53 in the unmasked group, or 2.1 percent. The difference was not statistically significant.

Lead author of the study, Dr. Henning Bundgaard, stated that his study indicated that “not a lot” is gained “from wearing a mask.”

Perhaps it’s past time for political leaders to abandon mask mandates for children and healthy adults under 60. And surely, it’s past time for the mask-obsessed among us to stop verbally attacking those who choose not to mask as irresponsible, ignorant, uncaring, selfish, evil killers.

As the nightmarish 2020 draws to a close, there are reasons for optimism. President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed has  resulted in the development of not one but two highly effective vaccines at warp speed. As of this writing, both Moderna and Pfizer have developed vaccines that are about 95% effective, and evidence suggests that vaccine-induced immunity may last years and be more effective than immunity that develops from contracting COVID-19.

So, we have reasons to believe that in a few months, life will be able to return to normal. In the meantime, school closures must end. There has never been any science suggesting that schools should have closed. If children contract COVID-19, the statistical likelihood that they will survive is 99.99998%.

Annually, about 4,000 children die in car accidents with 630 of those being 12 or younger; 800 children drown; and in the 2019-2020 flu season, 188 children died. So far about 130 children have died from COVID-19. Anytime leftists want to impose a restriction on the freedom of others, they ask, “Isn’t saving the life of even one person worth the sacrifice?” So, are we going to prohibit all children from riding in cars except for essential activities? Are we going to prohibit all children from swimming in pools, ponds, lakes, rivers, and oceans? Are we going to close schools every year during flu season? If not, why not?

Those parents whose children live in homes with at-risk family members can choose to keep their children home. Those teachers who are in an at-risk group can stay home. But all schools should open. Even leftist New York Times writer Nicholas Kristof recently and grudgingly admitted that Trump has long been right on school closures:

Trump has been demanding for months that schools reopen, and on that he seems to have been largely right. Schools, especially elementary schools, do not appear to have been major sources of coronavirus transmission, and remote learning is proving to be a catastrophe for many low-income children. …

Democrats helped preside over school closures that have devastated millions of families and damaged children’s futures. … In both Europe and the United States, schools have not been linked to substantial transmission, and teachers and family members have not been shown to be at extra risk. …  Meanwhile, the evidence has mounted of the human cost of school closures.

Leftists have provided ample evidence of their poor judgment, their Faustian willingness to abandon principles to acquire power, their Machiavellian abuse of power to circumscribe liberty, their hypocrisy, and their elitism. We better hope Americans awaken from their “woke” stupor before it’s too late.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Newsom-and-Lightfoot-and-Brown-Oh-My.mp3


We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

sustaining-partner-logo-516x260

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.




The Ideological Non-Sense and Hypocrisy of Leftists

One of the more grotesque demonstrations of leftist non-sense and hypocrisy was demonstrated a week ago following an episode of the wildly popular Disney show The Mandalorian when “Baby Yoda” eats the unfertilized eggs of a Frog Woman who is transporting her eggs to her husband so he can fertilize them thereby preventing their species’ imminent extinction. Fans of Baby Yoda freaked out, incensed at the lighthearted treatment of what they deemed genocide by the beloved Baby Yoda.

The moral incoherence and hypocrisy should be obvious. In the Upside Down where leftists live, when a human mother hires someone to dismember her own fertilized human egg—aka human fetus/embryo/baby—they demand that society affirm, celebrate, and shout the execution of those tiny humans. In fact, the voluntary dismemberment of fertilized human eggs at any gestational age is so morally innocuous and such an unmitigated public good that leftists think all Americans should pay for the executions of humans in utero.

In the Upside Down, the genocidal killing of all fertilized human eggs with Down Syndrome is at best morally neutral if not morally good, but the fictional devouring of unfertilized Frog Critters’ eggs is morally repugnant. Just wondering, if fertilized human eggs are parasites so devoid of personhood as to render them morally legitimate objects to kill, if it’s okay to dismember them because they’re imperfect non-persons, would there be anything wrong with eating their remains?

Leftists views on the slaughter of fertilized human eggs is just the most grotesque of their many morally incoherent views. Here are a few more:

  • According to leftists, concerns of conservatives about possible 2020 election “irregularities”—including via computer malfeasance and malfunction—are evidence of paranoid conspiracy theories, but when leftists express such concerns, they’re sound, reasonable, and legitimate. In 2019, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden proposed an amendment titled “Protecting American Votes and Elections Act” to the “Help America Vote Act of 2002.” His proposed amendment was signed by 14 co-sponsors—all Democrats—including a who’s who of presidential wannabes: Richard Blumenthal, Edward Markey, Jeff Merkley, Tammy Duckworth, Brian Schatz, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Tammy Baldwin, Bernie Sanders, Maria Cantwell, Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, Michael Bennet, and Patty Murray. Wyden provided a summary of his amendment that includes the following:

Votes cast with paperless voting machines cannot be subjected to a manual recount, and so there is no way to determine the real election results if they are hacked. H.R. 1 …  mandates paper ballots.

In order to detect hacks, this bill requires election bodies to conduct audits of all federal elections, regardless of how close the election, by employing statistically rigorous “risk-limiting audits.”

There are currently no mandatory standards for election cybersecurity, which has resulted in some states operating election infrastructure that is needlessly vulnerable to hacking. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) sets voluntary standards for voting machines, but states can and do ignore these standards. There are no standards at all for voter registration websites or other parts of our election infrastructure.

  • Leftists heartily endorse bodily damage and disfigurement as sound “treatment” protocols for those who experience a mismatch between their internal feelings and their sexual embodiment as male or female, but bodily damage and disfigurement of those who experience a mismatch between their internal feelings and their whole or healthy bodies (i.e., those with Body Integrity Identity Disorder who identify as amputees or paraplegics) are considered barbaric and ethically prohibited.
  • Leftists condemn conservatives as “science-deniers” for disagreeing with them on the degree to which climate change is caused by human action or on how to respond to climate change. At the same time, the purported science-worshippers claim that men can menstruate, become pregnant, and “chestfeed,” and they claim that the product of conception between two persons is not a person. Anyone who refuses to concede to such nonsense is mocked, reviled, de-platformed, and fired. Just ask Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling or Wall Street Journal writer and author of Irreversible Damage, Abigail Shrier.
  • Leftists claim that marriage has no connection to either sexual differentiation or reproductive potential. They vociferously claim that marriage is solely constituted by love, and that “love is love.” And yet most leftists don’t think two brothers in a consensual loving relationship should be able to legally marry.
  • Leftists claim there’s no story behind or within Hunter Biden’s emails and texts that prove Joe Biden straight up lied to the American public, and yet they claimed there was a story of such magnitude and enormity within Christopher Steele’s imaginative “dossier,” that it necessitated 24-hour coverage for years.
  • Leftists claim that eliminating the Electoral College and filibuster and packing the U.S. Supreme Court constitute necessary changes to enhance “democracy,” but implementing legal processes to ensure an election was fair undermines democracy.
  • Every gathering of leftists, including mostly violent protests, a takeover of six city blocks, trips to hair salons (Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi), a post-election street celebration (Lori Lightfoot), a holiday boating excursion (attempted by husband of Michigan Governor Christine Whitmer), restaurant dining (California Governor Gavin Newsom, CNN narcissist Chris Cuomo), a funeral/Democrat campaign event (i.e., John Lewis’ faux-funeral) are COVID-immune and justifiable. But an Orthodox Jewish funeral, an entirely peaceful protest of draconian COVID restrictions, and a march in support of a transparent and fair election are denounced as super-spreader events.
  • Serial killer of senior citizens, Andrew “Quietus” Cuomo, commands citizens to “admit” their “mistakes” and “shortcomings” with regard to how they responded to the Chinese Communist virus even as he refuses to apologize for his policies that killed scores of elderly.
  • To leftists, social science is the god that determines all moral truth, and yet despite social science demonstrating repeatedly that children—especially boys—need fathers, the left refuses to discuss how fatherless families may be contributing to the anti-social behavior that is destroying our cities.
  • Leftists claim to value free speech, religious liberty, inclusivity, diversity, tolerance, and unity while condemning not just the beliefs of those with whom they disagree, but also the persons themselves. Many leftists share an uncharitable, presumptuous, ugly, tyrannical, oppressive, and scary desire that those who believe homosexual acts are immoral, who believe marriage has an ontology, who believe biological sex is immutable and meaningful, and who believe bodily damage and disfigurement are improper treatment protocols for gender dysphoria should be unable to work anywhere in America.

To create the illusion that they’re not hypocrites and to defend their intolerance, exclusion, divisiveness, hatred of persons, book banning, speech suppression, demand for ideological uniformity, and efforts to circumscribe the  exercise of religion—which for Christians extends far outside the church walls—leftists resort to fallacious reasoning. The fallacies they employ are too numerous to list, but two of their faves are the ad hominem fallacy and the fallacy of circular reasoning.

Ad hominem is an informal fallacy in which an irrelevant personal attack replaces a logical argument. It proves nothing about the soundness, truth, or falsity of a claim. Instead it appeals to emotion and silences debate through intimidation.

The fallacy of circular reasoning occurs when the conclusion presumes the premise (i.e., the initial claim) is true without proving it true. So, for example, leftists–ignoring their purported commitment to the First Amendment–argue that homosexual acts are moral acts and, therefore, there is no need to tolerate the expression of dissenting views. But the intolerance they are trying to defend is based on the truth of their premise that homosexual acts are moral—a premise they simply assume without proving is true.

Here’s another: Leftists assert that marriage is constituted solely by subjective romantic and erotic feelings, and, therefore, the government has no reason not to recognize unions between two people of the same sex as marriages, because such couples can experience love and erotic desire. But the premise—i.e., that marriage is constituted solely by subjective romantic and erotic feelings—hasn’t been proved.

And here’s yet another claim about marriage based on circular reasoning: Leftists argue that the reason government is involved in marriage is to grant public legitimacy or provide “dignity” to erotic/romantic unions and, therefore, the government has an obligation to recognize homoerotic unions as marriages. The problem is that those who make this argument fail to prove their claim that the reason government is involved in marriage is to recognize, provide, or impart “dignity” to unions. Those who make this argument just assume their premise is true.

After employing fallacious circular reasoning and hurling ad hominem epithets at their opponents, leftists sanctimoniously wipe the dust off their dirty hands and assert that their hypocrisy isn’t really hypocrisy after all.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Ideological-Non-Sense-and-Hypocrisy-of-Leftists.mp3


We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

sustaining-partner-logo-516x260

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.




Mostly Tyrannical Thanksgiving Orders of California Governor Newsom

Here are a few of California Governor Gavin Newsom’s mostly tyrannical Thanksgiving “Mandatory Requirements for All Gatherings” (emphasis added):

All persons planning to host or participate in a private gathering … must comply with the following requirements. …

Gatherings that include more than 3 households are prohibited. … The host should collect names of all attendees and contact information in case contact tracing is needed later. …

All gatherings must be held outside. Attendees may go inside to use restrooms as long as the restrooms are frequently sanitized. Gatherings may occur in outdoor spaces that are covered by umbrellas, canopies, awnings, roofs, and other shade structures provided that at least three sides of the space (or 75%) are open to the outdoors.

A gathering of no more than three households is permitted in a public park or other outdoor space, even if unrelated gatherings of other groups up to three households are also occurring in the same park or other outdoor space. If multiple such gatherings are occurring, mixing between group gatherings is not allowed.

… multiple gatherings of three households cannot be jointly organized or coordinated to occur in the same public park or other outdoor space at the same time – this would constitute a gathering exceeding the permitted size. …

For any gatherings permitted under this guidance, the space must be large enough so that everyone at a gathering can maintain at least a 6-foot physical distance from others (not including their own household) at all times.

Seating must provide at least 6 feet of distance (in all directions—front-to-back and side-to-side) between different households.

Everyone at a gathering should frequently wash their hands with soap and water, or use hand sanitizer if soap and water are not available. A place to wash hands or hand sanitizer must be available for participants to use.

Shared items should not be used during a gathering. As much as possible, any food or beverages at outdoor gatherings must be in single-serve disposable containers. If providing single-serve containers is not possible, food and beverages must be served by a person who washes or sanitizes their hands frequently, and wears a face covering. Self-serve items from communal containers should not be used. …

When gathering, face coverings must be worn in accordance with the CDPH Guidance on the Use of Face Coverings (PDF), unless an exemption is applicable.

People at gatherings may remove their face coverings briefly to eat or drink as long as they stay at least 6 feet away from everyone outside their own household, and put their face covering back on as soon as they are done with the activity.

Face coverings can also be removed to meet urgent medical needs (for example, to use an asthma inhaler, take medication, or if feeling light-headed).

Gatherings should be two hours or less. …

… singing, chanting, and shouting are strongly discouraged, but if they occur, the following rules and recommendations apply:

All people who are singing or chanting should wear a face covering at all times while singing or chanting, including anyone who is leading a song or chant. … People who are singing, shouting, chanting, or exercising are strongly encouraged to maintain physical distancing beyond 6 feet to further reduce risk.

People who are singing or chanting are strongly encouraged to do so quietly (at or below the volume of a normal speaking voice).

Instrumental music is allowed as long as the musicians maintain at least 6-foot physical distancing. Musicians must be from one of the three households. Playing of wind instruments (any instrument played by the mouth, such as a trumpet or clarinet) is strongly discouraged.

Some brief observations and/or questions and/or suggestions:

AOC wants lists of Trump supporters compiled. The Trump Accountability Project wants a blacklist of Trump supporters compiled. Now Newsom wants Thanksgiving Day guest lists compiled. I think we need a list of all the lists that leftists want compiled and a list of all the leftists who are proposing such lists. And while we’re compiling lists, I think we need a list of every leftist who has called for a conservative to be fired or not be hired in the first place; and of every leftist who has called for a speaker to be cancelled or a book deal to be cancelled; and of every leftist who has defaced, looted, or torched a building or business.

I think we likely all agree—Republicans and Democrats—that it’s a good thing Newsom has given the green light to asthmatics to remove their masks when they have an urgent need to use their inhalers.

Who is going to monitor all the outdoor gatherings to ensure compliance with social distancing and sanitizing mandates? How will Newsom’s minions determine whether guests’ hands or restrooms are sufficiently sanitized? In a two-hour Thanksgiving gathering, how often must guests sanitize their hands? Every hour? Every half-hour? Every fifteen minutes?

Will authorities be equipped with sound meters to measure chanting and singing decibels?

Who will confirm that musicians are related to the households for whom they are playing their instruments? Will unrelated musicians be toted off in paddy wagons? Will their instruments be confiscated?

How long after swallowing must a mask be put back on?

What if while chewing and shouting a toddler spits in the face of someone not in his household? Will he be arrested? Will Obama be enlisted to separate him from his family and put him in one of the cages his administration built?

Do these mandates apply equally to people of all colors or just to colorless oppressors? Isn’t it racist for a colorless oppressor like Newsom to impose those rules on blacks and Native Americans?

Speaking of racism, isn’t it racist cultural appropriation for anyone other than the indigenous people of the Americas to eat cornbread on Thanksgiving or at any other time?

All I can say is Newsom better not defund the police. They’ve got a lot on their plates, and it’s not turkey. I think it’s tripe.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Mostly-Tyrannical-Thanksgiving-Orders-of-California-Governor-Newsom.mp3


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

-and, please-




The Real Reason for the Left’s Double Standard on Hate Speech

Why is it that organizations like the SPLC can designate conservative Christians as hate groups while ignoring radical leftists like Antifa? Why is it that Facebook and Google and YouTube and Twitter appear to punish conservatives disproportionately for alleged violations of community guidelines?

The answer is as disturbing as it is simple. The left believes it is so morally and intellectually superior to the right that it can see nothing wrong with its extreme positions and hostile words. Is it wrong to be intolerant of bigots? Is it wrong to hate (or even punch) a Nazi?

In short, if I’m a member of the KKK, is it wrong for you to disparage and mock me? If I’m a dangerous homophobe, is it wrong for you to vilify and exclude me? If I’m a hate-filled propogandist spreading dangerous lies, is it wrong for you to mark me and marginalize me?

Of course, there are double standards on all sides of the debate, on the right as well as on the left. And there is more than enough hypocrisy to go around, from the most progressive to the most conservative.

All of us also have our share of blind spots, so we tend to condemn in others what we justify in ourselves. Welcome to human nature.

Still, it is conspicuous that the same behavior gets treated differently by the leftist elite (including many a university professor) and by watchdog groups like the SPLC and by the internet giants.

Back in 2004-05, when I first began to address gay activism, I was widely mocked for saying, “Those who came out of the closet want to put us in the closet.”

The response was consistent: “No one wants to put you in the closet!”

A few years back, I noticed a change in tone: “Bigots like you belong in the closet!”

But of course!

While being interviewed on a Christian TV program back in 2011, I quoted the comment of a Christian attorney. He told me that those who were once put in jail (speaking of pioneer gay activists) will want to put us in jail.

For having the audacity to say this on Christian TV, I was vilified and maligned.

Yet when Kim Davis was jailed in 2015 for refusing a court order to grant same-sex marriage licenses, there was widespread rejoicing on the left: “Kim Davis is ISIS! Lock her up!”

Again, I’m aware of double standards on all sides, and it’s a point of personal reflection and self-examination in my own life.

For example, I believed that, in 2004, San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom should have been disciplined for issuing same-sex marriage licenses in violation of the law. Yet I believe that Kim Davis was within her rights in refusing to issue such licenses and her home state of Kentucky failed to protect her, under the law.

These are debates we can (and should) have.

What I’m talking about here has to do with fundamental attitudes, with the basis of our judgments, with the inability to see wrong on one’s own side. I’m talking about a dangerous hypocrisy. (For the record, I never compared Gavin Newsom to Muslim terrorists.)

In my May, 2016, article “Is Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg a Well-Intended Liberal with a Massive Blind Spot?”, I referenced the kidnapping of Adolf Eichmann, the notorious Nazi mass murderer, who was apprehended by two Israeli agents while living quietly with his family in Argentina.

They had to wait for several weeks before smuggling him out of the country, during which time they spent many hours in private conversation with him, somehow managing to restrain themselves from taking the law into their own hands.

During one of the conversations, one of the agents realized that Eichmann had given the order to exterminate the village in which his wife’s family lived, killing every single one of them.

When asked how he could do such a thing, Eichmann seemed perturbed, responding, “But they were Jews.”

Of course he gave the order to kill them. What else was he to do?

Again, to be clear, I am not comparing the SPLC or Facebook or Google to Eichmann and the Nazis. That would be as bad as leftists comparing conservatives to Nazis. Not a chance.

I’m simply pointing out that in Eichmann’s twisted world, he was only following orders and doing what was right.

So also, in Antifa’s twisted world (although, again, I emphasize, not as twisted as that of the Nazis), they are doing what is right in violently opposing the tyrannical right. Somebody’s got to do it!

Thankfully, there is an ongoing, healthy push-back against this liberal hypocrisy. In fact, just this week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions called out the SPLC for using hate group labels to “bully” conservatives. Let their hypocrisy be exposed.

But remember: You have been prejudged as guilty, so your mistreatment is well-deserved.

It is this highly bigoted attitude we must overcome with truth, reason, determination, and love.


This article originally posted at Townhall.com.