The state of Illinois long ago made the embarrassing leap from local joke to national joke. The Land of Lincoln is now the corrupt, insolvent, morally vacuous, leftist dystopia of U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth, Springfield mob boss Mike Madigan, Governor J.B. Pritzker, and Mayor Lori Lightfoot. I guess the lazy, irresponsible, anti-science, and morally vacuous community organizers that comprise the Chicago Teachers’ Union thought Illinois was not getting quite enough national PR, so on Sunday, they tweeted,

The push to reopen schools is rooted in sexism, racism and misogyny.

Say what? Even for head-scratching comments from leftists, that’s a doozy.

Are black and Latino families who want their children back in school learning and socializing racists?

Are mothers who want their daughters back in school learning and socializing sexist and misogynistic?

No need for defining terms, making assertions, and providing evidence that others are completely free to critique through reason and the provision of counterevidence. Just call names plucked from the intersectional name-calling toolbox.

Safety of school openings

Parents have seen the scientific evidence which clearly and consistently shows that if infected, children under 18 have a 99.997 percent chance of surviving COVID-19. These parents wonder why their children should suffer socially, emotionally, and academically from school shutdowns when the health risk of opening schools is negligible.

If the CTU opposes school openings out of fear for the safety of their union members, here are the survival rates for adults by age if they should contract the Wuhan virus:

22-24: 99.996 percent survival rate

25-29: 99.987 percent survival rate

30-34: 99.976 percent survival rate

35-39: 99.960 percent survival rate

40-44: 99.925 percent survival rate

45-49: 99.879 percent survival rate

50-54: 99.793 percent survival rate

55-59: 99.677 percent survival rate

60-64: 99.544 percent survival rate

Over two-thirds of public school teachers (71 percent) are under 50 years old, and only 17% are over 55.  According to the Illinois Policy Institute, “More than 71 percent of [Illinois’ Teachers’ Retirement System] members retired before the age of 60.” So, most teachers are at little risk of dying from COVID-19. Those employees who have co-morbidities that put them at great risk from contracting the Wuhan virus should be free to stay home.

But no teacher whose chance of surviving COVID-19 is over 99 percent but chooses not to work should not be paid one red cent. Their jobs should be filled by teachers who are rational and eager to work.

If teachers think it’s unsafe to work unless they’re guaranteed 0 percent risk of death, then they shouldn’t be working—anywhere. There’s a risk of death by driving to and from work or contracting influenza from a student or colleague. There is a risk of death from tripping over a small child or being bowled over by a strapping high school boy during passing periods. Life carries risks.

CTU tweet straight out of Critical Race Theory

The CTU’s tweet is what Critical Race Theory (CRT) has wrought in America. CRT—whose ideas are taught everywhere including in our public schools—divides society up into two groups: the purported oppressors and the purported oppressed. CRT claims that oppressors are those who allegedly have power and that the oppressed are those who allegedly lack cultural power.

So, who has no power—allegedly? People of color, women, those who are erotically attracted to persons of the same sex, and those who wish they were the sex they aren’t. That’s who. Those with power—allegedly—can’t help but oppress them.

Pastor and theologian John Piper identifies accurately the unbiblical assumptions at the dark heart of Critical Race Theory:

[A]t root [critical race theory proponents] believe a person’s essential identity is self-chosen, self-constructed, not God-designed or God-given. Or another way to say it would be that, when it comes to our own identity, we are our own god. We do not acknowledge or submit to any divine truth or morality as above us, constraining or limiting our own self-definition, self-construction.

So, if I choose to be a woman though God made me a man, I am right to do so. No God, no morality, no religion, no ideology can replace me as the self-determining, self-defining, self-deifying sovereign of my own identity. …

[The] fundamental assumption is that human identity is self-constructed, not God-given. Any group, therefore, that claims to have access to an infallible word of God that dictates human identity and human right and wrong is a manifest threat to human autonomy. Within the framework of critical race theory, the claim of biblical authority can be understood only as a group trying to seize power. …

Inside critical race theory, God is small and negligible. The Bible is small and negligible. Truth is small and negligible. And evil is big, and there is no answer for it. It is a hopeless path.

Who really oppresses whom in America?

While virtually the entire institutional power structure in America now worships at the altar of the gods of melanin, sexual libertinism, and genitalia, the Chicago Teachers’ Union expects us to believe persons of color, the sexually deviant, and women are relentlessly oppressed.

While people can and do lose their jobs for saying they believe homosexual acts are immoral and humans with penises are not women, the powerful in society celebrate those who announce that henceforth they will pretend to be the sex they aren’t.

I wonder, if the CTU believes opening schools constitutes hatred of women, what do they believe the vivisection of minor girls who suddenly believe they’re boys constitutes?

Chicago Teachers Union squeaks “uncle”

Facing a barrage of national criticism and mockery, the CTU deleted the absurd tweet and tweeted this in hope of soothing the justifiably outraged parents:

Fair enough. Complex issue. Requires nuance. And much more discussion. More important, the people the decision affects deserve more. So we’ll continue give [sic]them that.

“Continue” giving people affected by the CTU’s activism “nuance,” “discussion,” and “more”? Does the CTU expect people to be deceived by their inclusion of the word “continue” into believing the CTU has been providing “nuanced discussions and more” to everyone affected by their actions?

Once again, the CTU reveals its disdain for the public that pays their bloated salaries and benefits.

If only the CTU, the National Education Association, and all “progressive” activists working in public schools had the humility and commitment to tolerance, diversity, and critical thinking that they claim to have, we might have a shot at making government schools places of education instead of indoctrination.

If only “progressive” educators really believed what they tell parents about “honoring all voices” instead of censoring all voices with which they disagree, schools could become a “safe space” for even conservative students and teachers.

If only “progressive” educators who use the classroom to assail the beliefs of parents who pay their salaries respected boundaries, perhaps the government school system wouldn’t need to be dismantled.

Imagine a government school system in which “progressive” teachers and administrators admitted that some other things are complex and require nuance and much more discussion and where all voices were included in those discussions without fear or favor.

Imagine a government school system where systemic bigotry against conservative ideas did not reign supreme.

Imagine a government school system in which teachers and administrators acknowledged that ideas about race and racism derived from Critical Race Theory and embedded in the 1619 Project and a host of other resources recommended by CTU members are not objective facts but arguable assumptions.

Imagine a government school system in which teachers and administrators acknowledged that teaching other people’s children that conservative beliefs on sexuality constitute ignorant, hateful bigotry is neither objective, nor factual, nor the business of public employees.

Two chances of that happening: slim and fat.

This rare semi-apology from one of the most arrogant demographics in American society—leftist government schoolteachers—demonstrates one good thing: the collective voices of the great unwashed, ugly, deplorables still have some power remaining. And that’s why leftists want to undermine the First Amendment, pack the Supreme Court, end the filibuster, corrupt elections, and allow Big Tech and Big Media unfettered control over communication.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Absurd-Tweet-by-CTU.mp3

We are committed to upholding truth while resisting and opposing the rising wave of delusional thinking and tyrannical laws/mandates that have afflicted our state and nation. IFI will continue to provide our supporters with timely alerts, video reports, podcasts, pastors’ breakfasts, special forums, worldview conferences, and thought-provoking commentaries—content that is increasingly hard to find.

We encourage you to join us in our efforts. Your support will help us to continue our vital work in 2021. A vigorous defense of biblical truth is needed more than ever in Illinois. 

Written by Jeremy Dys
Special Counsel for Litigation and Communications, First Liberty

We did not suddenly arrive to the moment where riot police arrest CNN journalists. Though the issues may be complex, recent history suggests that the suppression of civil rights—even for a pandemic—leads inexorably to the abuse of other core freedoms by the government.

Until recently, several states—including Minnesota—declared that it was unlawful to engage in the free exercise of religion in groups of ten or more. When churches dared pursue legal recourse to correct that issue, politicians, pundits and journalists offered criticism.

As one of the attorneys on the receiving end of that criticism on more than one occasion, it left me perplexed. “What’s the big deal?” they might say, “Why can’t churches just worship online?!

The answer should be obvious to any with a passing appreciation for the First Amendment. Our U.S. Constitution guarantees the “free exercise of religion” and the “right of the people peaceably to assemble.” In other words, those with a divine mandate to meet together in worship—regardless of the religion in which they participate—should not require the permission of the state to do so, nor may those rights be treated as lesser rights to visiting retail, restaurants or hardware stores. There is no pandemic exception to the U.S. Constitution.

Because we have (for now) survived the political left’s vision for the lesser “freedom to worship,” we ought to appreciate the free exercise of religion all the more. State officials are not immune from brutal and corrupt behavior. Indeed, the very reason we have a First Amendment is to guard against the natural aggression of power toward that which challenges a state’s authority.

The last three months reveal that too many state and local officials often resist that limitation on their power. The truth serum embedded in the coronavirus appears to be that it reveals the lust for power dormant in many public officials. They believe it within their power to, like a light switch, turn civil rights on or off as they see fit.

If that is the view of some state officials, as we have seen in New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and others, then there can be no surprise whatsoever that other state officials would place journalists—also unequivocally protected by the First Amendment—under arrest.

Of course, this fundamentally disagrees with the central message of our Bill of Rights: The rights articulated therein belong to, and remain with, the people by virtue of their humanity. The limited rights of government—what the people empower government to do—are articulated in the body of the U.S. Constitution. The Bill of Rights make plain what the people refused to permit the government to govern. Together, this works to restrain government and ensure freedom.

If you have been inclined to roll your eyes over citizens insisting upon their religious liberty just to sit in a car at a drive-in church service, remember that part of what they seek to prevent is what we now see in the detention of four CNN journalists. Religious people, lately held in contempt by some for simply wishing to exercise their religion at a safe social distance, are actually doing their part to preserve everyone’s freedom.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey should understand this by now. When the threat of litigation by the Roman Catholic Church and Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod forced Governor Tim Walz to recognize that churches could safely meet in-person at a bare 25 percent capacity, Mayor Frey declared the idea to be, “a recipe in Minneapolis for a public health disaster.” Frey went on to suggest to CNN that religious people may be less capable of social distancing than shoppers at the Mall of America. They should stay in their virtual worship services, you see, for their own good lest these religious people infect us all.

Four days later and Mayor Frey’s office is handing out free face masks to those engaged in a form of free speech (and worse)—in groups quite larger than ten—while the police take members of the free press into custody.

Being “all in this together” means that, whether we agree or disagree, we each do our part to insist that our civil rights are secured—even in the midst of a pandemic or panic. Without that commitment, the erosion of our civil rights—and our very freedom—is where it leads.

This article was originally published online on Newsweek on June 1, 2020.

Written by Jorge Gomez

The greatest threat to America is not the COVID-19 virus.

We don’t dismiss the deadliness of a rapidly spreading illness. However, the virus itself isn’t the most pressing threat to the fabric or the foundations of our country.

The most imminent danger to our republic is the overreach of government power, especially during a crisis. Our nation faces a fatal risk when government takes actions that violate our fundamental freedoms, leading us down the road of tyranny, to the erosion of our constitutional system.

When we survey the landscape of stay-at-home orders and restrictions imposed during the last several weeks, we see officials in numerous states abusing their authority to severely cut back freedoms, as they don’t want to let “a good crisis go to waste.”

Nowhere has this been more apparent than in the burdensome policies, bigotry and discrimination directed against America’s houses of worship and religious communities.

Churches and people of faith nationwide have largely shown love for their neighbor, complied with health guidelines, gone the extra mile to adapt their religious services and continued serving communities as their faith teaches. Even still, relentless and outrageous violations of their religious freedom are constantly launched against them.

What does this say about the state of our nation?

One thing is increasingly clear. The attacks on our First Freedom during the health crisis are a warning sign that America is facing a constitutional crisis.

Downgrading America’s First Freedom to Second Class Status

The first indication that the U.S. Constitution is in deep trouble comes from data showing that most Americans think it’s okay to maintain ongoing limitations on religious liberty.

A recent University of Chicago Divinity School / Associated Press poll reported that 42 percent of Americans think in-person religious services should be allowed with restrictions, and 48 percent think they should not be allowed at all.

That’s half of Americans who believe churches should be banned from meeting, even if they follow the same restrictions and all safety protocols as businesses, retail, liquor and other stores which are allowed to be open. That’s pure discrimination.

Let’s ask ourselves a difficult question: Have we elevated commercial activity so high on our list of “essential services” and downgraded religious freedom to second tier, or even further down the list?

Are we at a point now when we’re categorizing this First Freedom as “non-essential?”

This reveals something deeply concerning about our understanding of basic constitutional freedoms.

It’s almost as if religious freedom—including the inalienable right to exercise one’s beliefs by attending church—has become just like any other casual lifestyle choice. By the looks of it, many in positions of authority and a majority of Americans think this right is just a hobby we can push down the list, like going to a baseball game, or to a concert with friends.

There’s a reason why our Founders fought to ensure that religious freedom held a special (and first) place in the U.S. Constitution. They understood that people of faith and churches were essential to the fabric of our society, and therefore it was necessary to restrain government power, so that religious communities could freely live out their faith as well as contribute to the flourishing of our country.

Today, even if many state governors or local officials say otherwise, religious services and religious freedom are still indeed “life-sustaining” and essential. They are a lifeblood for millions in times of national crisis or distress.

It’s worth reminding those officials who relegate religious freedom and the religious community to second tier of a blunt truth: Religious freedom has been essential since the U.S. Constitution was drafted, and today it still is the primary and most essential of our liberties.

Here’s the bottom line: If “We the People” forget, willfully ignore or downgrade religious liberty from being first on the list of freedoms listed in the U.S. Constitution, then it’s a sign we’re in a constitutional crisis.

State Officials Who Think Themselves Above the Supreme Law of the Land

Another clear and present threat to our constitutional system is seen when governors and local officials across several states think they can override or run roughshod over the religious freedoms of Americans.

Consider that in the state of Washington, Gov. Jay Inslee imposed a ban on religious gatherings of any size during the COVID-19 pandemic, even prohibiting two people from meeting together to pray and read scripture and criminalizing all religious gatherings outside of family members.

First Liberty intervened against this attack on religious freedom, seeking a temporary restraining order on behalf of our client, Joshua Freed, who wanted to hold a one-on-one Bible study in his home while adhering to CDC guidelines. Thanks to our involvement, Gov. Inslee backed down and Mr. Freed can have a one-on-one Bible study, and the Governor will not enforce the rules against home Bible studies on a one-on-one basis.

In Kentucky, First Liberty had to fight on behalf of churches prevented by Gov. Andy Beshear’s executive order from holding CDC-compliant religious services, a policy that even threatened them with criminal penalties. In that state, First Liberty won two seminal victories reclaiming the rights of churches to hold both drive-in and safe, in-person services.

Or take a look at the fact that in Chicago, Illinois police recently fined several churches for hosting in-person services. The situation in that state was so bad that Gov. J.B. Pritzker at one point announced he would demand places of worship keep their doors closed until a vaccine is developed (whenever that is!), despite their “over-compliance” with health regulations.

Over the course of the pandemic, there’s been no shortage of government leaders abusing their power and trampling on the U.S. Constitution by singling out and discriminating against people of faith and churches.

The U.S. Constitution is designed to protect religious institutions, so that no governor, state or local official arbitrarily singles out religious activities for restrictions that do not apply to other areas of life. But as we see from the examples above (as well as many more not mentioned here), some in positions of authority don’t really grasp the U.S. Constitution’s protection of religious freedom.

Terrible mismanagement of religious liberty at the state and local level is alarming because it poses a threat to our constitutional system, indeed to the political health of our republic.

Think of it this way. We have a constitutional crisis when governors or municipal leaders put themselves above the Supreme Law of the Land (U.S. Constitution)—like when they make policies that directly violate the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom.

There’s a big lesson to learn here: The health crisis has brought to the forefront the reality of a constitutional crisis, a crisis caused by an impending threat of government interfering with our God-given liberties.

Right now, First Liberty is fighting for and reclaiming the First Amendment freedoms of religious communities nationwide. Protecting religious liberty is essential in this critical time, and it’s the first step in making sure we preserve America’s precious and unique constitutional system.

This article was originally published at FirstLiberty.org.

Late last month we sent email alerts to churches and pastors to let them know that we were organizing lawsuits to challenge Gov. J.B. Pritzker‘s illegal “shelter-at home” Executive Orders, and invite them to join us in making a case against his abuse of authority.

Big box stores, Planned Parenthood clinics, “medical” marijuana dispensaries and liquor stores are considered “essential” by the governor, while church services have been banned. This sets a dangerous precedent. The First Amendment specifically protects our religious liberties from tyrannical government forces. It doesn’t take much foresight to realize how similar future orders could be mandated and extended in the name of “safety.”

In response to our email, we received replies from 24 interested churches across the state. We’ve been able to match up 7 churches with local Christian attorneys who will file their complaints, hopefully this week, in circuit courts in Lake County, Grundy County, Montgomery County, Winnebago County and Madison County.

We are still looking for other attorneys to help represent churches in 9 other counties. Therefore, we covet your prayers for these items and more at this time.

Please Pray:

• That the cases that have been or will be filed would find the presiding judge to be sympathetic and responsive to the complaints presented on behalf of pastors/churches.

• That the attorneys would be winsome and persuasive in presenting the cases and answering questions.

• That the judges hearing the cases would clearly see how Gov. Pritzker’s orders violated state law and Illinois Christian citizens’ constitutionally protected civil rights.

• That additional attorneys would come forward to offer their legal assistance to churches not yet represented.

Pray for the Trump Administration:

• That God would bless President Donald Trump, Mike Pence, the president’s Cabinet and his close advisors with wisdom and discernment in every situation.

• That they will recognize how dependent they are on almighty God in administering their duties for the American people.

• That God would show President Trump’s medical team how to wind down COVID-19 restrictions and Trump’s economic team how to reboot the American job market.

• That God would use President Trump to safeguard and even advance religious liberty in the United States and around the world.

• That God would show President Trump how to deal with our adversaries: China, North Korea, Russia and Iran.

Pray for the Church:

• That as God shakes the world with this COVID-19 pandemic, families would run to God as their fortress and high tower. Pray that our friends, neighbors and relatives would cling to Him instead of inadequate worldly solutions.

• That God would convict the church of areas were we have failed or fallen short. Pray that the church would recognize and become resolved to heed God’s call to repent and reform.

• That God would bring a third great awakening in America, which can only come after true repentance. May God use His remnant of faithful servant leaders and followers to advance His Kingdom. May His will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

• That God would raise up rigorous gospel-minded leaders who will boldly proclaim the truth and seek to advance God’s will on earth.

Pray for Families:

• That God would instill in us a desire to serve and bless others within our own local church and in our communities. Pray that families would work together to be the hands and feet of Jesus to meet physical and spiritual needs of their neighbors.

• That God would continue to turn the hearts of fathers to their children. Pray that every father realizes they are the pastors of their own households, and it is their responsibility to point their children to God and His Word as often as possible, to impress upon them God’s perfect precepts and commandments, and to testify to His amazing work in our lives.

• That God would help mothers realize the sway they have in their children’s lives and use it to edify and equip their children to be godly and productive citizens who love and follow the God of the Holy Bible. We know how much influence mothers have in the lives of their children. The old adage tells us that the hand that rocks the cradle rocks the world.

• That God would inspire and encourage grandparents to be the mortar in the bricks of their children’s families, filling in gaps and helping to cement bricks together. Pray that God would give them a vision for their role in the training of their children and wisdom on how to instill a Biblical worldview.

• That God would have mercy on those who are considering abortion. Pray that He would convict the hearts of mothers to choose life for their babies. Pray that God would provide a strong and visible support system for these women.

Miscellaneous Prayer Requests:

• Pray for the Illinois Christian Home Educator’s free online conference that starts today. Pray that Christian families abandon government schools and explore home education as a much better way to instruct, equip and train their children to thrive as independent and productive adults.

• Pray for the General Election and for godly candidates who must find ways to get their campaign messages out during this time of social distancing. Pray that a large wave of pro-life/pro-family candidates would be triumphant in November at the state level as well as on the federal level.

• Pray that the federal government’s investigation into political corruption in Illinois would root out self-serving wicked incumbents and government employees.

• Pray for the financial demise of Planned Parenthood International. Pray specifically against their new abortion mills in Flossmoor, Fairview Heights and now Waukegan. Pray that more and more abortion employees would see abortion for what it truly is and quit. Pray that they cannot fill these positions and are forced to shut down.

• Finally, pray that God will draw more and more people to Himself during this time of uncertainty. Pray that He would use our families to spread the light of the Gospel.

The works of His hands are truth and justice;
All His precepts are sure.
They are upheld forever and ever;
They are performed in truth and uprightness.
He has sent redemption to His people;
He has ordained His covenant forever;
Holy and awesome is His name.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom;
A good understanding have all those who do His commandments;
His praise endures forever.
(Psalm 111:7-10)

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. 

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

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Planned Parenthood opened a new clinic in Waukegan, its 19^th in Illinois. Like its predecessor in Fairview Heights which opened last October, it was built in secret. The clinic, called The Waukegan Health Center, is located within a 1.5-mile radius of a middle and a high school.

Bonnie Quirke, president of Lake County Right to Life, learned of the clinic’s opening when, “I read an article in our local paper. The surprise was the stealth nature of it.”

“We knew it was coming, especially after the passage of last year’s Reproductive Health Act,” she shared. “Still, it was devastating.” The Reproductive Health Act, which allowed abortions throughout a woman’s pregnancy, was signed into law by Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker in June 2019.

The Pro-Life Action League has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to find out more information about how the clinic was built.

Waukegan, located in Lake County, has the third largest population in the state of Illinois. It also has the fifth highest rate of uninsured residents, a growing number of which have tested positive for STDs, which Planned Parenthood cites as part of its rationale for placing a clinic in the city. Quirke noted, “The county health department is located not too far from the clinic. They do HIV and other testing, which is paid for with our tax dollars, therefore, free to the public.” That would make the clinic’s services a duplication of those offered by the county.

According to the media release from Planned Parenthood of Illinois, the clinic was originally scheduled to open in March, but was delayed due to the pandemic. While the release doesn’t mention surgical abortion services, it does list chemical abortions as one of the services it provides. However, when Quirke called the center, she was told the chemical abortion information was correct, only then to be informed that surgical abortions were going to be offered as well.

The new clinic has two procedure rooms, five exam rooms, plus a conference room and administrative space. The presence of the two procedure rooms gives further evidence surgical abortions will be performed.

Quirke went by the location, noticing the new landscaping with multiple fir trees, but the public sidewalks have been “torn up from around the building.” The center is located in a remodeled bank building and has 100 parking spaces. With so many parking spaces, trees, and removal of sidewalks, Planned Parenthood has removed the visibility of people entering and exiting the center. In addition, they’ve taken away legal public access for pro-life advocates to protest abortion and to counsel women.

In the release, Planned Parenthood lamented the prior lack of nearby abortion facilities, however Quirke pointed out there is clinic in nearby Kenosha, Wisconsin, just 20 minutes away. Including Waukegan, there are now 11 clinics in the greater Chicagoland area. The Planned Parenthood website states it has 18 clinics in Illinois, however, it does not list the Fairview Heights clinic which opened in Oct. 2019, making the count 19.

“Social problems are never solved by killing, they’re only exacerbated.” said Quirke. “The community should be outraged on all levels, including the spiritual level.”

She urged churches and church members to act. “Girls need to know there are other things we can provide. We have given up our religious rights, we have allowed abortion rights, and we have remained silent. We have to mobilize.”

Take ACTION: Quirke invited pro-life advocates to, “Come out and witness on Friday, May 22, at noon in front of the clinic.” Waukegan is a COVID-19 hotspot and proper social distancing is expected. Attendees should wear masks and stand at least 6 feet apart. The clinic is located at 1601 N Lewis Avenue in Waukegan. Click HERE for more information.

To learn more: Visit the Lake County Right to Life website, e-mail lakectyrtl@sbcglobal.net or call (847) 223-7022.

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. 

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

Gov. J.B. Pritzker has filed an emergency rule to punish businesses that open to customers in defiance of his illegal lock-down orders. Violators could be charged with a Class A misdemeanor, which is a fine between $75 and $2,500.

Additionally, this emergency rule extends the governor’s emergency authority from 30 days to 150 days.

According to this online report by Amanda Vinicky, because “it’s classified as ’emergency’ in nature, the rule change took effect as soon as it was filed Friday.” State lawmakers sitting on the JCAR Committee will have to vote to reject the governor’s unilateral power grab. Without a tsunami of calls and emails, this order will be rubber stamped, possibly as soon as this Wednesday.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send an email to the 12 members of the JCAR Committee asking them to reject this confiscation of power.

More ACTION: Please also call the following committee members and leave a similar message:

Background

State Representative John M. Cabello (R-Machesney Park) issued a press release publicly objecting to this rule change:

We have a dictator Governor who is weaponizing our Department of Public Health to treat our citizens like criminals. The pure irony lies in the fact that the Governor is doing this at the same time that he is commuting sentences for murderers and rapists. The greatest danger today from the COVID-19 is the alternative universe that is being created here in Illinois.

People are resisting because they view the Governor’s Restore Illinois plan, and his general approach to the COVID-19 health crisis, as a hodgepodge of arbitrary rules and restrictions placed on citizens and businesses by a hypocritical leader. Recall the news stories about the Governor’s wife traveling to Florida while the rest of us are being told to lockdown. Now we are hearing that the Governor’s family has been up in Wisconsin too. In another case of irony those two states have been easing their restrictions.

I think our Governor needs to look in the mirror when he starts to criticize the people of Illinois for their lack of compliance and confidence in his approach to the COVID-19. Telling a family of four who just drove in the same car to the boat dock that only two of them at a time can be on a boat is not only stupid, it is just one example of things that undermine confidence in the way the entire issue is being handled. Perhaps the Governor should travel to Florida with his family next time and get some advice from their Governor.

It is imperative that Illinois citizens speak up loudly about this new rule that not only punishes working families but grants untenable powers to the governor.

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. 

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

Written by Dave Olsson

The coronavirus crisis of 2020 has exposed the dark underbelly of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the dangers of U.S. dependency on China. Not only was the CCP irresponsible in concealing the outbreak while allowing it to spread across the globe, but they also threatened to withhold pharmaceuticals so that America would be “plunged into the mighty sea of coronavirus.”

While that international confrontation is serious, the coronavirus has also exposed something else much closer to home and potentially as sinister. As our federal and state governments have reacted to the crisis with “stay-at-home” and “social distancing” directives, it’s revealed a disturbing willingness by some of our state and local authorities to impose orders on local churches that appear to violate their constitutional rights.

In Florida, a pastor was arrested and “charged with unlawful assembly and violation of a public health emergency order” after holding two Sunday services in violation of a safer-at-home order.

In Greenville, Mississippi, congregants were fined $500 each for attending drive-in services in the church parking lot where they kept their windows up and listened as the service was broadcast over the radio.

In Chincoteague Island, VA, a pastor was criminally charged “for violating Governor Northam’s COVID-19 Order 55” after holding a service with 16 people. Northam’s order limited gatherings to 10 people.

In Kansas City, MO, the plan for reopening the city included a requirement to record “names and contact information of attendees” during church services for possible “contact tracing” before it was walked back and made voluntary.

Here in Illinois, Governor J.B. Pritzker introduced a five-phase reopening plan that “gives guidance to schools, businesses, churches, and other religious centers.” Part of that guidance is that churches “will not be allowed to hold in-person services of more than 50 people until phase five, even if it takes more than a year to get to that position.”

Those are jarring examples of the government interfering in the life of the church. But none caught my attention like the one in Knox County, TN where local authorities took the dangerous step of decreeing what a church service could—and could not—include:

[T]he health department just announced that while churches may reopen on May 1, the Lord’s Supper is forbidden. The order was announced by Knox County Health Department Regional Hospital Coordinator Charity Menefee, who announced that Communion is not part of “core worship.”

The immediate question is, “Who is Charity Menefee and who gave her permission to determine what is or isn’t part of ‘core worship’ in the church?” It gets worse:

Not only that, but church attendees are also banned from physically embracing or shaking hands with one another. And singing, while not banned, “is discouraged as it is thought to be an activity that expels significantly more virus than talking.”

Got that? You may meet, but you may not sing, hug, shake hands or take communion. The order goes on to proscribe the use of hymnals, Bibles and offering plates and prohibits other activities that bring congregants together.

The civil authorities in Knox County are clearly operating outside their jurisdiction. Back in March, Douglas Wilson wrote about the nature and extension of civil government when it comes to the things of God:

In historic Presbyterian polity (all rise!), the civil magistrate had no authority in sacred things (in sacris), but he had definite authority surrounding sacred things (circa sacra). Put simply, the magistrate has no right to tell the church what to preach, how to pray, how to administer the sacraments, who to discipline, etc. That is not their assigned task. They need to stay in their lane.

But when it comes to questions of public safety (which is exactly what this is), preachers need to stay in their lane. It would be different if we were talking about a monastery with a bunch of recluse hermit monks, and the magistrate told them they couldn’t gather in their own chapel for prayers. That would be none of the magistrate’s business. But if great herds of Baptists head out to the Golden Corral after services, and they do this during the time of an epidemic, the magistrate has full authority and obligation to tell all of them “not so fast.” This is circa sacra.

There are so many areas where the church should be resisting statism, it would be shame to waste our powder on any issue where the state is acting well within its rights.

In Knox County, the state is most assuredly not “acting well within its rights.” While Charity Menefee rightly permits churches to reopen based on her authority “surrounding sacred things (circa sacra),” she violates the boundary separating church and state by assuming authority “in sacred things (in sacris).”

Menefee may not have done so with malice; in fact, she may have considered her directive magnanimous. But such a violation is still a violation—and a dangerous one at that because it is done in the name of “safety.”

The question, “You want others to be safe, don’t you?” acts like a sedative on us in which we drop our defenses as the natural impulse to care for others takes over. Of course we want others to be safe.

But that’s not the right question. The question is, “Whose domain?” The practice of communion is not based on whether it is considered “safe” to do so by civil authorities. Follow the progression of that thinking and in ten years communion will be declared “unsafe” because it reinforces religious dogma that increases the risk of perceived threats to some minority group.

No, communion is first and foremost based on the authority of Jesus Himself.

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. (1 Cor. 11:23-26)

More important for this discussion, the freedom to practice communion without government interference is grounded in the First Amendment, which protects religious belief and expression. With emphasis added, it reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

And in 1940, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Cantwell v. Connecticut that the Free Exercise Clause is enforceable against state and local governments. Menefee, then, is abusing her authority and violating her Christian citizens’ constitutional and God-ordained rights.

When it comes to the act of taking communion, the authority of the U.S. Constitution supersedes the authority of the Knox County Health Department Regional Hospital Coordinator. And the authority of Jesus Christ supersedes the authority of the U.S. Constitution, which protects our God-given right to worship as we see fit.

Fortunately, the Knox County Health Department removed the communion ban and other restrictions, instructing places of worship to “See State Guidance.” If such draconian restrictions return, the churches of Knox County must unite and issue a kind but firm rebuke to the local “magistrate,” making it clear that the encroachment on their civil and religious liberties will not go unchallenged.

The COVID-19 crisis won’t be the last time the local church faces off with civil authorities. While not every act of government interference with the church is illegal or unjustified, it is interference. All churches would be wise to think through how to respond. Even if the orders are legal and compliance is reasonable, such accommodation gives authorities a foot in the door. Be sure that agreeing to a modest request doesn’t lead to them barging all the way in.

This article is an expansion of a previous version published on DAVEOLSSON.COM.

Euphemistic language is an essential tool of all efforts to promote evil as good. Watch anti-life, anti-woman, anti-human-rights “feminist” Sophie Lewis defend human slaughter through such absurd language-torturing that it would be comical if it weren’t serving such an evil end. Lewis:

In the past the strategies that our side has tended to use have included a kind of ceding of ground to our enemies. We tend to say that abortion is, indeed, very bad, but we say, “Luckily it’s not killing, luckily it’s just a healthcare right.”

We have very little to lose at the moment when it comes to abortion, and I’m interested in winning radically. And I wonder if we could think about defending abortion as a right to stop doing gestational work.

Abortion is, in my opinion—and I recognize how controversial this is—a form of killing. It’s a form of killing that we need to be able to defend. I am not interested in where a human life starts to exist. . . . The other end of the spectrum is learning to die well . . . and let each other go at the end of our lives as well as the beginning.

But looking at the biology of this kind of hemochorial placentation helps me think about the violence that, innocently, a fetus metes out vis-à-vis a gestator. And that violence is an unacceptable violence for someone who does not want to do gestational work. The violence that the gestator metes out to essentially go on strike, or exit that workplace, is an acceptable violence.

Extraordinary Incuriosity

Now that panicked, anti-life dogmatists can no longer deny that the product of conception between two humans is a human, they’ve shifted into rhetorical overdrive, saying, “Well, of course, it’s human, but it’s not a person,” the womb is a “work place,” pregnancy is “gestational work,” and human gestation is “violence.” At least she admitted abortion kills.

But after acknowledging that abortion “is a form of killing,” Lewis shockingly admits to being completely uninterested in figuring out if the living thing being killed is a human life. In admitting such extraordinary incuriosity (especially for a scholar), she implicitly concedes that abortion may kill a human being. Only sociopaths have no qualms about killing innocent humans.

In addition to being morally flawed, her statement is nonsensical. It’s inarguable that the object growing in a woman’s womb is living because you can’t kill something that is non-living, and Lewis admitted abortion is killing. And it’s inarguable that the product of conception between two humans is a human. Lewis knows that abortion kills, she knows that the thing abortion kills is alive, and she knows that the living thing abortion kills is a human.

Redefining Violence

What the heck is “hemochorial placentation,” you may be asking yourself, and how does it do “violence” to “gestators”? Defining it is easy-peasy. “Hemochorial placentation” is a $10 technical term that refers to the natural process by which a mother’s body sustains her developing offspring by bathing his or her chorion (outer layer of tissue enveloping the baby) in nutrient-rich blood (hemo) via the placenta (placentation).

Hemochorial placentation doesn’t mete out violence—innocently or otherwise—unless, of course, “violence” is redefined to include non-violent, natural processes. Lewis needs to redefine this natural process as violence in order to justify the actual violence mothers and their hired killers mete out to humans in the womb—humans that have no part in nor cause the alleged “violence” of “hemochorial placentation.”

Lewis, author of the book Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family, should be able to notice the difference between letting “each other go at the end of our lives” and voluntarily snuffing out others at the beginning of their lives.

Embryonic Moral Reasoning

As demonstrated by both the anti-woman Lewis and the morally empty shells at Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker‘s Kill-Babies-Bill celebration—shells held upright by a constant refilling of hot air and puffed-up pride—euphemisms are the stock-in-trade of every leftist.

Recently, New York Times writer Alan Blinder (I kid you not) said this (I kid you not):

Louisiana lawmakers voted on Wednesday to ban [abortion] after the pulsing of what becomes the fetus’s heart can be detected. . . . The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing.

Someone should drive a stake through the New York Times‘ organ of pulsing and then through their embryonic organ of moral reasoning.

Empty & Chilling Words

One mother’s embryonic moral reasoning is evident in a PBS documentary on abortion in which she is seen starting the chemical abortion of her twins. But first some euphemistic language from the abortionist who says, “This is the mifepristone that will stop the pregnancy from growing. . . .”

A pregnancy (also known as gestation) doesn’t grow. Humans grow.

The doctor then explains that the second medication will help the mother’s body “push the pregnancy tissue out of her uterus.” She won’t even say fetus—let alone baby. I wonder, when she enters delivery rooms at the moment of delivery, does she say, “Okay, mom, push that pregnancy tissue out of your uterus.”

Finally, hear the empty and chilling words of the mother, spoken about and to the twins she’s aborting:

What I hope I feel is a sense of peace, not only with myself and the decision that I’ve made but also of a sense of peace with these two beings that I’ve chosen not to bring into the world.

Thank you for choosing me. And I’m honored to be given this gift of life. And also, I can’t do it right now.

Can’t? Or won’t?

Soul-sickening, dishonest rhetoric.

This article was originally published by Salvo Magazine.

What was Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton thinking when she purchased recreational marijuana in Chicago on the first day of its legal sales in Illinois? Does she not understand that as a public official she is setting a reckless and foolish example, especially for children and teens?

Illinois policy makers continue to send a dangerous message to our young people. First, they called marijuana “medicine.” Now, they call it “recreational.” Do you know of any other drug that’s used for both medicine and recreation? The hoax has worked.

Gone are the days of “this is your brain on drugs.” Instead, public officials like Stratton are celebrating drug use by welcoming the marijuana industry to communities throughout the state. Their feckless example will mislead citizens, old and young, into a diminished understanding of the dangers of drug use until it affects them personally. As the perception of risk plummets, drug use (and addictions) will climb.

Not only have lawmakers failed to do their due diligence before passing this marijuana law, but they also failed to heed the compelling research that indicates how regular use of marijuana affects young people, including an increased risk of psychiatric illnesses and a permanent loss of IQ points.

Parents, grandparents, teachers, and religious leaders would do well to counter Stratton’s irresponsible example by returning to the sensible message, “just say no to drugs.”

Myths and Misconceptions

There has been much talk about the so-called “equity” part of the Illinois Recreational Law. The legislative sponsors and their allies in the media are celebrating how this new law will supposedly help create a “clean slate” by righting the wrongs of the so-called “war on drugs,” which they believe disproportionately impacted those who chose to use or deal drugs.  When Governor J.B. Pritzker signed the bill into law, he proclaimed it to be the most “equity-centric in the nation.”

The social equity portion of this new law is so important to Illinois regressives that on New Year’s eve, Gov. Pritzker granted more than 11,000 pardons, clearing marijuana misdemeanor offenses from people’s records. This is only the first wave of such expungements, as it is estimated that 116,000 convictions involving 30 grams or less of marijuana are to be erased.

Is this a good thing? As Christians, we believe in second chances and redemption. Proponents rightly point out that erasing drug-based criminal records will make it easier for thousands of Illinoisans to get jobs, housing, guns* and loans. Regressives want us to believe that they are helping victims of an unjust system that unfairly targeted users. But is that really the truth?

Back in May 2016, retired longtime Cook County State’s Attorney Ed Ronkowski wrote an exclusive for IFI pointing out that “first time cannabis users don’t go to jail or prison.” He goes on to explain that that even the third and fourth time offenders don’t go to jail or prison. It is “only after the fifth arrest will judges start giving out jail or prison because probation did not work.“ Mr. Ronkowski points out that (in 2014), only 1.4 percent  of Illinois’ prison population was a result of a marijuana violation.

Progressives and the media are not telling you that the vast majority of expungements are being given to repeat offenders. Furthermore, according to Mr. Ronkowski, many of that 1.4 percent are serving time with a marijuana conviction on their record because they plea-bargained down from a more serious offense.

And there’s more to this destructive law. Lawmakers have made sure that those who have been in the illegitimate drug selling business be offered low interest loans to open their own “legitimate” drug-selling businesses.

What else are they not telling you? State Representative Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) and State Senator Heather Steans (D-Chicago) want us to believe that Illinois’ new marijuana law is cutting edge, a model for the nation. They promised their colleagues in the General Assembly that they would institute a responsible cap on THC levels that are available for purchase. But even after “legal” marijuana sales have begun, no cap has been instituted by any of our state agencies. This is as foolish as it is dangerous. High concentrate marijuana products are highly addictive and are linked to higher rates of psychosis.  (Read more HERE.)

Take ACTION: Click HERE to contact your state lawmakers to demand that they either repeal this marijuana law or cap the THC level on marijuana products to 15 percent or less. In parts of Europe, marijuana with 15 percent or higher THC levels are considered hard drugs such as heroine and cocaine, due to its highly addictive nature. This is a minimum safegaurd for this foolish law.

*The federal government still classifies marijuana as an illegal Schedule 1 Drug. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) says it is a dangerous intoxicant that has “a high potential for abuse.” Regardless of Illinois’ new recreational marijuana law, federal law still prohibits the sale, possession, purchase, and use of marijuana plants and products. According to USACarry.com:

Federal law, supported by administrative orders and court rulings, prohibits marijuana users from owning, possessing, or buying firearms. It also prohibits anyone from selling or giving firearms to a person they know or suspect to be a drug user or even the owner of a medical marijuana card.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) warns would be gun owners “the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”

Ironically, while marijuana use clearly disqualifies citizens from gun ownership, Illinois’ expungement of criminal drug offenses may actually qualify repeat offenders.

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

On August 15, I wasted a half hour of my day by agreeing to be interviewed by Chicago Tribune reporter Hannah Leone for an article she was writing on the “LGBTQ” school indoctrination bill that Governor J.B. Pritzker recently signed into law and which takes effect July 1, 2020. Before I talk about her article, I should explain more about the interview.

Leone asked what my primary concern is with the law, which is a difficult question because there are so many problems with it. I responded that my primary concern is that our culture-makers—including the Tribune, lawmakers, and “educators”—never discuss the arguable presuppositions on which this law depends, and which “progressives” simply assume are inarguably true.

Those presuppositions are that homosexuality and cross-sex identification are ontologically analogous to race and, therefore, the actions that emerge from homosexual feelings and the desire to be the opposite sex are morally benign or good. I told her that if “progressives” are asked to identify the specific points of correspondence between homosexuality or cross-sex identification per se and race per se, they come up empty.

I further said that “IFI supports the teaching of historically significant cultural contributions. We object, however, to teachers identifying the sexual predilections of historically significant cultural contributors and to basing the selection of cultural contributions on the sexual predilections of cultural contributors.”

She then asked me,

What about movements/milestones like the stonewall riots, HIV/AIDS epidemic, don’t ask/don’t tell, and legalization of same-sex marriage?

I responded,

Because of the complex and controversial nature of these cultural events, they should not be presented in elementary school at all. In middle and high school, they should be presented only if teachers are willing to spend equal time exploring fairly, neutrally, and comprehensively both sides of debates regarding whether these movements have served the culture in positive ways or corrupted culture. Such presentations must include discussions of foundational presuppositions. If teachers are unwilling to present the best resources on both sides of the debate or unwilling or unable to discuss neutrally foundational presuppositions, then they have a pedagogical obligation not to introduce the topics. If they present only affirming views of these movements, they transform education into indoctrination. If they believe reading criticism of these movements will make some students too uncomfortable, they should avoid the topics. If they believe students are too young to understand the foundational presuppositions, then the topics are age-inappropriate. I would argue that most public school teachers are intellectually ill-equipped to address the foundational presuppositions, which are critical to the entire project mandated by this law.”

I also addressed the reason we don’t see leftists fighting for the roles and contributions of polyamorists and zoophiles to be taught to children and teens, which is that lawmakers and “educators” understand that teaching about their roles and contributions would contribute to normalizing polyamory and zoophilia, which they don’t want to do because they’ve concluded polyamory and zoophilia are immoral. And there you have it: Lawmakers and “educators” are imposing their moral beliefs about homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation on Illinois children.

Leone initially told me her article would be published sometime the following week. When it wasn’t, I asked her when it would be coming out. On Monday night, Sept.2, she told me it would be out Tuesday and told me this:

We had a limited amount of space to work with and your interview did not get included, but your perspective still helped inform the article, so thanks for your time anyway.

Then Monday, I read her front-page, lengthy, 2,136-word article. For perspective, the average newspaper article is between 600-1,500 words.

Here are just some of the nuggets of Fool’s Gold in Leone’s biased advocacy masquerading as a news story:

1. The Inclusive Curriculum Law, signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker on Aug. 9, mandates that by the time students finish eighth grade, public schools must teach them about contributions to state and U.S. history made by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

Note that the law mandates that indoctrination must begin before eighth grade. And it must include contributions to state history made by homosexuals and opposite-sex impersonators, which tells you that the contributions chosen will not be based on historical or cultural significance but on the sexual predilections of contributors.

2. “This law will give more young people the opportunity to see themselves in those who came before us and recognize they are not alone,” [Chicago mayor] Lightfoot said in a statement to the Tribune.

What about the young people who experience other types of powerful, unchosen, seemingly intractable subjective, internal desires that they choose to act upon? What if they or their many parents identify as polyamorous? What if they identify as kinksters or zoophiles? Should people from those marginalized communities have an opportunity to see themselves in those who came before them and recognize they are not alone?

When I pose this question to “progressives,” they get all judgy-judgy, huffing indignantly that it’s offensive to compare homosexuality or opposite-sex impersonation to zoophilia or any other sexual identity they view as disordered or immoral. Their indignation reveals that the Leftists who run the Springfield swamp and public schools have, indeed, arrived at ontological and moral conclusions about homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation and treat them as indisputable facts. And now they’re imposing their subjective beliefs on all Illinois families who have the misfortune of not having a choice on where their children are educated.

President of the Illinois Association of Regional Superintendents of Schools, Mark Klaisner (who carries around a bit of baggage), who is “Helping compile resources for schools to draw from,” whines about the possibility that the “vagueness” of the law will result in schools not indoctrinating enough:

3. Being that vague could mean a simple unit or a few lessons at one grade level in the school, which I think is insufficient.

Can’t have positive portrayals of what many view as sexual perversion be foisted on other people’s children for a mere unit. That’s not nearly enough time for propaganda to take effect.

Imagine an “educator” saying, “a simple unit or a few lessons about polyamory or Genetic Sexual Attraction at one grade level is insufficient.”

Even more troubling is feckless Klaisner’s view on the appropriate age at which to introduce children to ideas about homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation:

4. For younger students, it may make sense to introduce names and fewer details, and wait until around third grade to mention someone identified as gay or transgender. (emphasis added)

Third grade—an age at which children are wholly incapable of understanding the conservative and “progressive” foundational assumptions about homosexuality and opposite-sex identification—is the age by which Klaisner wants these topics introduced.

Michelle Vallet, mother of a daughter who “identifies” as (which in plain language means pretends to be) a boy, disagrees with Klaisner:

5. Vallet said she doesn’t think it’s ever too early to bring up [these topics]…. Normalizing these identities early is key.

There you have it in plain, unguarded English. The goal of Leftists is to use curricula, taxpayer money, and captive audiences to normalize abnormal, disordered sexuality.

Leone writes that one of the law’s sponsors, State Representative Anna Moeller (D-Elgin), is not yet satisfied:

6. [T]hough passing the law reflects an advancement in civil rights, more still needs to be done, Moeller said.

Then Moeller trots out the tired and absurd comparison of homosexuality and opposite-sex identification to race:

In the way schools have become required to teach about African Americans, Latinos, women and other marginalized communities, now they’ll be required to include… some discussion of LGBT.

Moeller doesn’t explain in what specific ways homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation per se are like race or biological sex per se. Nor does she say whether she ultimately wants schools to be required to discuss all “marginalized communities” or just the ones whose volitional acts she deems morally acceptable.

Like Moeller, Garcia High School biology teacher Bryan Meeker has disturbing hopes for students:

7. Meeker said he’d also love to see students in English classes reading works by Harvey Milk, a San Francisco politician and one of the first openly gay elected officials in the United States before his assassination in 1978.

Yikes! A high school teacher wants the works of an ephebophile (i.e., an adult who is sexually attracted to teens) to be taught in government schools in order to change the perception of teens toward homosexuality? Harvey Milk was a “short-tempered demagogue” and ephebophile who exploited multiple suffering teen boys for his own sexual gratification. And he was not a martyr for the cause of “equality.” He was murdered for “petty” political reasons by a supporter of “gay rights.” Milk was also a friend and promoter of cult leader Jim Jones. Are schools now going to teach positively about the “roles and contributions” of ephebophiles and murderous cult leaders?

Perhaps high school teachers should teach Cult City: Jim Jones, Harvey Milk, and 10 Days That Shook San Francisco. And English teachers who teach The Laramie Project should include as a companion piece The Book of Matt: Hidden Truths About the Murder of Matthew Shepard written by homosexual journalist Stephen Jimenez.

The only “opponent” of the law Leone cited in her article was retiring State Representative Margo McDermed (R-Mokena) who voted against the “LGBTQ” school indoctrination bill but only for fiscal reasons:

8. “It’s not … that it’s not a good cause…. I vote against mandates no matter how worthy the topic may be, and of course this is a worthy topic.”

With Republican friends like this, conservatives definitely don’t need enemies.

Leone reveals her bias when she refers to “milestones such as marriage equality.” “Marriage equality” is a Leftist term. Conservatives would refer to “marriage redefinition.” Defining marriage in law as the union of two people of opposite sexes is no more evidence of inequality than is defining marriage in law as the union of only two persons or of only persons not closely related by blood, definitions which exclude plural and incestuous marriage.

Experience both in my current job and my former job in the writing center at Deerfield High School has taught me that many—perhaps most—”progressives” violate with regularity their purported commitments to tolerance, respect for diversity, inclusivity, and critical thinking. They substitute epithet-hurling for argumentation and evidence, and they censor dissenting views. As everyone knows, this is most common when it comes to issues involving homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation. What is remarkable and troubling is that the hatred of progressives is virulent and directed at those who hold theologically orthodox views, including those who are Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, and Orthodox Jews.

My views on these issues are historical, mainstream theologically orthodox views. They are not fringe positions. I’m just willing to express them publicly. And why do so few Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestants express their views as boldly and publicly as I do (and as progressives express theirs)? They recoil from being falsely called “haters” or losing their jobs. Toxic progressivism has led to religious discrimination of a kind never seen in America, and it’s getting worse.

It’s also remarkable and troubling that the Chicago Tribune seems so incurious about these topics. There are brilliant men and women writing about these issues eloquently, intelligently, and piquantly. I suspect most Trib writers and editors (and public school teachers and Springfield swampsters) haven’t heard of them, haven’t read their material, and don’t have any interest in interviewing them for articles, book talks, or festivals.

Perhaps the Trib’s incuriosity is bolstered by the bias evidenced by news reporters like Hannah Leone who must have thought I just tumbled off the proverbial turnip truck. She seemed to think I would believe that in a front-page, 2,100-word article, she had insufficient space to include anything from our interview or any comment from any other conservative opponent.

I’m not sure how my “perspective helped inform the article” as Leone claimed it did unless she’s referring to this one sentence about opposing positions: “But some detractors see the state forcing local districts to promote an agenda conflicts with their personal or religious beliefs.” If so, wow.

Word to presumptuous lawmakers and propagandists who identify as educators and journalists: It is not the role of government-employed teachers to make students feel good about their subjective sexual feelings—not even those sexualities that Leftists have deemed the darling identities ‘o’ the day.

Word to conservative parents: GET OUT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS!

Word to churches: Help parents get their children out.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Toxic-Schools.mp3

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

-and, please-

Illinoisans shouldn’t need a reminder of how committed Illinois politicians are to using tax dollars and government schools to indoctrinate other people’s children, but Governor J.B. Pritzker just gave them one last Friday when he signed the “LGBTQ” school indoctrination bill into law. This law, which takes effect in July 2020, requires that all children ages 5-18 in public schools be taught about the deviant sexual proclivities of men and women who have made some significant cultural contributions. Well, not all deviant sexual proclivities are included. Only the deviant sexual proclivities currently and publicly approved by homosexuals and cross-sex pretenders will be included—for now.

When the time is right, those who identify as polyamorous—er, I mean, “sexually non-monogamous”—or as hebephiles, ephebophiles, kinksters, zoophiles, or infantilists will claim their proclivities constitute a “sexual orientation” and will demand to have the “roles and contributions” of fellow deviants be included in curricula. They will one day rise up against the intolerant, ignorant, hateful bigotry that has resulted in their exclusion and oppression. And then those with other disordered identities—not necessarily sexual in nature—like “amputee-wannabes” (i.e., Body Integrity Identity Disorder) will plead for inclusion.

The reason all these groups will battle for the “roles and contributions” of people like themselves to be taught to our young, impressionable, and vulnerable children is that the central reason for teaching children about the disordered desires and deviant acts of cultural contributors is to normalize deviance. It happens in three ways:

1.) Exposing children repeatedly to a set of beliefs about, for example, homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation from age 5 on up desensitizes children to deviance.

2.) Positive portrayals of deviance from age 5 on up from teachers who are role models shape children’s moral views of deviance.

3.) When, for example, homosexuality or opposite-sex impersonation are associated with admirable qualities like achievement, creativity, intelligence, or bravery, the good feelings children have for these admirable qualities are transferred to homosexuality or opposite-sex impersonation. And that’s exactly what “progressives” seek.

Of course throughout human history there have been cultural contributors who experienced all manner of perverse and sinful desires and engaged in all manner of perverse and sinful acts, but historically teachers discussed only their contributions—not their perverse and sinful desires and acts. Now, however, a segment of the population has concluded that two forms of sexual activity are neither perverse nor sinful and are using government schools, tax money, and captive audiences to eradicate all dissenting beliefs.

Equality Illinois, Illinois’ foremost organization for promoting perversion, said this about Pritzker’s most recent offense against decency:

“We thank Gov. Pritzker for signing the Inclusive Curriculum Law and ensuring that LGBTQ youth will now see themselves in the history they are taught….” An inclusive curriculum can have positive, affirming benefits.

Since when is it the role of taxpayer-funded government schools to provide “affirming benefits” to children, and what specifically constitutes an “affirming benefit”? Before concluding that affirmation of homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation is a benefit, lawmakers and government-employed “educators” had to have concluded those phenomena are morally good, which is decidedly not their right to do in their professional roles when it comes to highly arguable moral issues.

Moreover, when teachers affirm the unproven, non-factual, subjective beliefs of the “LGBTQ” community, they are implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) condemning the beliefs of many people of faith.

Another of Illinois’ sexual deviance cheerleaders, Mary F. Morten, board chair of the deceptively named Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, said this about the “LGBT” indoctrination law:

Gaining a greater knowledge and understanding of the contributions of various underrepresented communities benefits all of us. 

Does inclusion require affirmation of all beliefs, ideas, feelings, and volitional acts? Are those who identify as polyamorists, ephebophiles, zoophiles, and kinksters part of the “underrepresented communities”? Why should homosexuals and biological sex-rejectors be the only sexually deviant groups to “see themselves in the history they are taught”?

Equality Illinois claims it “builds a better Illinois…. where everyone is treated with dignity and respect.” Don’t believe them. They want to ride roughshod over people of faith and deride them as hatemongers.

Remember too that this brazen effort to use government schools to promote “progressive” sexuality assumptions and eradicate the beliefs of countless people of diverse faith traditions is bolstered by the efforts of not only Equality Illinois and the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance but also by the Human Rights Campaign; the Illinois Human Rights Commission; the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, the National Education Association; and Pritzker’s recently appointed “trans” task force.

Conservatives, if you don’t have a plan to exit the state of Illinois, you’ve got 11 months to come up with a plan to exit Illinois public schools. The inept and corrupt miscreants who run the state want you to stay put for two reasons: 1. They want your money, and 2. If they weren’t able to kill your children in the womb, they want to corrupt their hearts and minds via government schools and your money.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Look-Whats-in-Store-for-Public-School-Students-in-Illinois_audio_01.mp3

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

-and, please-

The unholy trinity of J.B. Pritzker, creepy State Representative Kelly Cassidy, and her creepy “wife” Candace Gingrich (who goes by the pronoun “they,” #eyeroll) continue in their efforts to destroy whatever good remains in Illinois. (And yes, people who promote feticide, taxpayer-funding of feticide, homosexuality, and cross-sex impersonation are creepy—uber-creepy.) Now, through the legalization of recreational marijuana, Pritzker, Cassidy and their ideological allies are trying—by sucking money out of Illinoisans’ pockets while keeping them stoned—to dig Illinois out of the fiscal gorge liberals  have dug.

If it’s not bad enough that Gingrich has worked for the Human Rights Campaign for 23 years, the Chicago Sun-Times reported on July 31 that she,

will serve as vice president and head of business development for Revolution Florida, a sister company to Illinois-based Revolution Enterprises. Revolution makes a variety of cannabis products, including food, beverages, topicals and pet products…. Gingrich… will also serve as the company’s ambassador to the LGBTQ community. Gingrich… plans to establish LGBTQ-focused medical cannabis treatment centers and increase economic opportunities for LGBTQ people in the sector.

Gingrich’s fake-wife Kelly Cassidy was the lead sponsor of the “massive marijuana legalization measure signed into law last month,” which followed close on the heels of the massive human slaughter bill that Cassidy led the charge on. But the creepy couple assert that since Gingrich was hired after the bill passed in late May, there’s nothing to see here folks, so just move along.

Pritzker too scoffs at the idea that there is any connection between his support for the pot bill and the business interests of relatives, in his case his second cousin Joseph “Joby” Pritzker and Joseph Pritzker’s father Nicholas J. Pritzker who head up a capital investment firm “that has… poured money into a pair of cannabis-related ventures, PAX Labs and MJ Freeway.”

Tao Capital Partners, which Nicholas Pritzker co-founded, was an early investor in the e-cigarette company JUUL, which “was developed by the cannabis vaporizer company PAX.” Due to the concerns of many that the slow death of the tobacco industry will result in JUUL moving into the burgeoning cannabis industry, on June 7, U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, chair of the House Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy, sent a letter to JUUL requesting, among other things, this:

All documents, including memoranda and communications, referring or relating to proposals, plans, and/or intended partnerships or collaborations between JUUL and any cannabis-related companies, including but not limited to Cronos Group [a Canada-based cannabis company].

Last year, Pritzker’s campaign claimed “the governor had not spoken” to his relatives “about marijuana policy or anything else ‘in a long time.’” First, how long is a long time? Second, not speaking to family members about policy pertaining to business interests related to marijuana that he knows they have is hardly a defense.

Oh, but there’s more. The Sun-Times quoted Dr. Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, who exposed that the Chicago way of profiting while harming Illinoisans thrives:

Governor Pritzker worked to buy off legislators during the budget process in closed door meetings and now his family will now vastly benefit. Senator Van Pelt was putting plans in place to obtain a marijuana license while the bill was being written.

According to a May 21 article in the Sun-Times, starting last January “Van Pelt was marketing… investment seminars and leading a company that intends to obtain licenses to grow and sell marijuana in the state, she also was named as co-sponsor of a bill to legalize the drug statewide.”

Last January, Senator Patricia Van Pelt (D-Chicago) began advertising on social media her $100 seminars on how to profit from recreational pot once it was legalized. According to the Sun-Times, “Less than four months later, those seminars and another cannabis-related business Van Pelt is involved with are being investigated by the Illinois Secretary of State’s office.”

A damning news report from WCIA in Springfield on Van Pelt’s “scheme,” reveals that scheming isn’t new to Van Pelt:

In 2015, while in office, she promoted a multi-level marketing pyramid scheme that later ended abruptly when its owners were convicted for dodging taxes and defrauding investors of $4 million dollars.

The Sun-Times reported the extent of Van Pelt’s troubling entanglements with the cannabis industry:

In addition to charging nearly $100 to watch her online cannabis investment seminars, Van Pelt also serves as the president of WaKanna For Life. The multilevel marketing company… aims to win licenses to grow and sell pot, according to company CEO Melissa Boston-Atoyebi.

On April 20, considered a holiday among pro-pot advocates, Van Pelt and her co-investors sold tickets to a seminar they held on the cannabis industry at the Harold Washington Cultural Center in Bronzeville.

According to WCIA, Van Pelt’s actions represent not only a violation of ethics guidelines for lawmakers but perhaps even state law:

Undeterred by ethics laws that prohibit public officials from using their office to enrich themselves, Van Pelt uses her personal Facebook page to post images of her private meetings with Governor J.B. Pritzker, including images of March 21st Legislative Black Caucus meeting agenda which outlined how the state should prioritize marijuana shop licenses for black business owners…. Van Pelt’s personal involvement in a company that could reap handsome profits in the wake of legalization has raised ethical questions about the potential for a conflict of interest. Several members of the Legislative Ethics Commission, who are legally restricted from discussing open investigations, said they were unaware of Van Pelt’s activities, but acknowledged that her actions were troublesome, and that they could easily trigger an ethics complaint to the Legislative Inspector General.

Van Pelt signed on to the recreational marijuana bill as a co-sponsor in early May. The WCIA exposé came out on May 14. The Sun-Times reported that shortly after her scheme was exposed,

New conflict of interest provisions were added to the marijuana measure just before the Illinois Senate passed it, banning lawmakers and their family members, as well as state employees, from being able to get a cannabis business license for two years.

Then on May 15, Van Pelt was removed as a co-sponsor of the bill.

The creepy actions of creepy leaders like Pritzker, Cassidy, and Van Pelt help explain the growing movement to have Chicago go its own way, that is to become a separate state. And they help explain the mass exodus of Illinoisans to places with green pastures rather than fetid swamps.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Predatory-Profiteering-Leaders.mp3

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

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

Former Illinois state senator Daniel Biss recently guest-hosted a culturally regressive radio program titled “Live, Local & Progressive” in which he sought to draw attention to yet another God-forsaken executive order (2019-11) from Illinois’ morally bankrupt governor, J.B. Pritzker, which was signed “shortly before the Pride parade.” The executive order establishes a 25-member “Affirming and Inclusive Task Force,” essentially to use government schools to advance the ideology and goals of the “trans” cult.

Lest anyone think the task force will be ideologically balanced between those who believe biological sex matters when it comes to, for example, private spaces and athletics and those who believe it doesn’t matter, here’s what Pritzker’s order dictates:

The Task Force shall consist of at least one representative from the Office of the Governor and no more than twenty-five (25) members, selected by the Governor, who have experience or expertise related to supporting transgender, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming students in schools including, but not limited to, students, parents or guardians, teachers, school administrators, lawyers, medical professionals, and representatives from community-based organizations.

Note that members must have “experience or expertise” related to “supporting” students who embrace “trans”-cultism. The word “supporting” has nothing to do with assisting students in ways that move them toward accepting their immutable biological sex. It means facilitating their reality-denying feelings, their invasion of the privacy of their peers, their tyrannical linguistic demands of others, and the hijacking of hard-won girls’ athletic opportunities by objectively male students.

Any guesses which community-based organizations Pritzker will include? Could it be the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance? Equality Illinois? The Center on Halsted?

The order took effect on July 1, 2019 and its recommendations are due on the governor’s desk by Jan. 1, 2020.

Biss’ guests were the following:

Nat Duran, a young woman who pretends to be a man and works for the  “LGBTQ”-indoctrinating organization the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance.

Nicki Bazer, an attorney “who represents school districts in her day job, and also does pro bono work on behalf of transgender youth.”

Juliet Berger-White, Deputy General Counsel in the Office of the Governor and another activist for all things “trans”—particularly school issues—who helped craft Pritzker’s executive order.

Nat Duran exposed the lie that “gender identity” is fixed and immutable—a lie that some “trans” ideologues have tried to pass off to a gullible public:

[W]hen folks often think of trans and gender expansive young folks in school systems, they immediately go to restroom and locker room usage, right? Anyone who’s been in a public space and used these facilities know that they are really gendered, and so how do we make sure that students who maybe are exploring different aspects of their identity are able to use these spaces in a way that feels safe and supportive to them…. [E]specially as you think of younger grades, I think especially around middle school, students who are really just figuring out a lot of things about their lives, like allowing room for fluidity as well. I think sometimes… even if a school in the best of intentions enforces a really supportive practice, is it so rigid that it doesn’t allow for a student who’s like, “Well, I think I might be trans, or maybe I’m non binary, but I’m still figuring it out, and so I don’t know what restroom feels best to me right now.

Point of correction: restrooms and locker rooms aren’t “gendered.” They’re “sexed.” They correspond to objective, immutable biological sex.

Duran didn’t explain exactly why private spaces should correspond to “gender identity” as opposed to biological sex. Nor did she explain why it’s hateful for normal students to refuse to use restrooms with opposite-sex peers, but it’s not hateful for cross-sex passers to refuse to use restrooms with opposite-“gendered” peers.

And if, as “trans”-cultists assert, it’s impossible to know the authentic “gender identity” of a person by their clothing, hairstyles, or anatomy, “trans”-identifying students can’t possibly know whether their same-sex peers are male or female. Therefore, they shouldn’t care where they change their clothes or shower. Imagine a boy who identifies as a girl filing an expensive lawsuit to access the girls’ locker room only to discover all the girls identify as boys.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive—particularly when we do it based on an incoherent ideology.

Duran’s discussion of identity exploration and fluidity points to the end goal of the “trans” revolution. The end goal is the eradication of public recognition of sex differences everywhere. Identity exploration, gender expansiveness, and gender fluidity preclude the existence of anything other than the wholesale sexual integration of every space, activity, and context. No more sex-segregated anything for anyone. Even school practices that are “really supportive” of opposite-sex-identifying students is insufficient. Duran and most other “trans” activists seek locker room and restroom free-for-alls—literally, restrooms and locker rooms Free. For. All.

It is critically important to understand that if society is legally prohibited from “discriminating” based on both sex and “gender identity,” there remains no legal way to prohibit what leftists call “cisgender” persons (i.e., persons who accept their sex) from using opposite sex private spaces. If a public school allows biological male Bob who pretends to be Mary to use the girls’ locker room, there would be no way to prevent biological male Tom who accepts his sex from using it. The school couldn’t prevent him from using it based on his sex because they’ve already allowed another male access to it. And they couldn’t prevent Tom from using it based on his “cisgender” identity, because they can’t discriminate based on “gender identity.” Abracadabra, all private spaces become co-ed.

Duran’s discussion also reveals how young the children are whom cultural regressives seek to inculcate with the “trans” ideology.

Duran also longs for government schools to be complicit in concealing information from parents about their own children:

[H]ow do we think through parental communications? If I’m calling home to talk to a parent, [is the student] out, or safe and supported, at home? Am I going to be using a different name or set of pronouns when I do that?”

In the view of “trans” dogmatists, those parents who reject the unproven, arguable, doctrinaire assumptions of the “trans” cult are unsafe and unsupportive and, therefore, deserve to lose parental rights.

Attorney/activist Nicki Bazer deceived Biss’ audience by omission. Here’s what she said:

[T]he rights of transgender, gender expansive, non-binary students are already protected in Illinois…. [U]nder the Illinois school code, all students have a right to equal opportunity to all educational programs and services. And under the regulations that the state board of education has issued, they have defined that, and made clear that you cannot discriminate or exclude or segregate students based on their gender identity. [T]hat applies to all schools within Illinois that are public schools. The Illinois human rights act also touches all non-sectarian K12 schools, or pre-K12 schools, and that also prohibits discrimination in all schools on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. And under the Illinois Human Rights Act, sexual orientation, sex, is defined as including gender identity.

Interestingly, Bazer did not share these relevant words from the Illinois Human Rights Act, which is state law:

The Act permits schools to maintain single-sex facilities that are distinctly private in nature, e.g., restrooms and locker rooms.

Nor did she share this from the 2016 Transgender Students in School  guidelines posted by the Illinois Association of School Boards:

[F]ederal courts in non-school cases have recognized a fundamental right to privacy or acknowledged the legitimacy of safety concerns in cases involving individuals undressing, using the restroom, or showering in an area to which a member of the opposite birth sex has access. Moreover, a federal district court recently asked the question whether a university engages in unlawful discrimination in violation of Title IX or the Constitution when it prohibits a transgender male student from using restrooms and locker rooms designated for men on campus. The court concluded: “The simple answer is no.”

Juliet Berger-White inadvertently exposes the hypocrisy of cultural regressives who claim to value diversity:

The goal of the executive order is to ensure that we are bringing together a crucial group of stakeholders who have great experience on the ground…. These stakeholders have been doing this work on an ongoing basis, but the benefit of doing it from the perspective of a governor-appointed task force is that it can help these private stakeholders collaborate with the government, and the Illinois State Board of Education, to figure out what next steps should be, and what that looks like.”

In other words, outside “progressive” activists are going to collude with the government to advance their sexuality dogma. Who are these “crucial stakeholders”? Are any lesbians who object to the sexual integration of women’s private spaces included? Will the task force include members of the professional mental health and medical communities who in increasing numbers are concerned about “adolescent-onset gender dysphoria,” the effects of puberty blockers like Lupron, and how social “transitioning” at young ages may effect brain development? What about Muslims, Orthodox Jews, or theologically orthodox Christians who are taxpayers and have children in public schools? Are parents and students who object to the sexual integration of private spaces and athletics crucial stakeholders?

The name Berger-White may sound familiar to long-time IFI readers. Her husband, Jeff Berger-White, is a former colleague of mine from the years I worked full-time in Deerfield High School’s writing center on Chicago’s North Shore. He was at the center of a huge community controversy over his decision to teach the egregiously obscene play Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes.

The play revolves around two couples: married Mormon couple Harper and Joe whose marriage is disintegrating in large measure due to Joe’s repressed homosexuality, which he eventually acts upon; and a homosexual couple, Louis and Prior. Louis leaves Prior when he finds out Prior has AIDS, and then has a month-long affair with Harper’s husband Joe.

There’s the black, homosexual, ex-drag queen nurse with the heart of gold, Belize; and the Angel with “eight vaginae” whose visits prompt sexual arousal and orgasm. The play is replete with references to orgasms, fellatio, semen, ejaculation, and f***ing. It includes the line “Suck my ****, Mother Theresa.”

In the heat of the controversy, Mr. Berger-White sent a letter to our local press asserting that it is the responsibility of English teachers to “challenge the emotions and morals” of their students—a belief clearly shared by his wife. His assertion raises some questions:

• Is it really the responsibility of high school English teachers (or government lawyers) to challenge the emotions and morals of students (or other people’s children)?

• Who decided that and when?

• How does the pedagogical goal of challenging the emotions and morals of students square with “progressive” commitments to ensuring students feel “safe”?

• If society agrees that challenging the emotions and morals of students is the responsibility of high school English teachers, why do we never hear about materials being presented that challenge the emotions and morals of “progressive”/”LBGTQQAP” students?

In the Biss interview, Juliet Berger-White asserted that “the law sets the floor,” but that when it comes to government schools affirming “trans” dogma, “there’s no ceiling.” Echoing her husband’s sentiments, she acknowledges the moral implications of promoting the “trans” ideology and policies in government schools, arguing that taxpayer-funded schools should abandon respect for biological sex “not just because we’re legally obligated to do so, but because we’re morally obligated to do so.”

The presumptuous Berger-Whites are using their taxpayer-funded jobs to indoctrinate other people’s children with their sexuality ideology. Their views are premised on arguable assumptions that are rarely addressed and never proved. Neither compassion nor “inclusivity” requires the affirmation of arguable assumptions that deny reality or that deem subjective feelings of greater importance than biological reality, especially if those assumptions result in the sexual integration of private spaces and speech mandates.

Teachers, leave those kids alone.

Conservatives, teach your children well, which can’t be done in places where foolish adults don’t respect physical embodiment as male or female or by cowardly adults who passively acquiesce because they care more about themselves than the children who have been entrusted to them.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/trans-schools_audio.mp3

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

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

Here’s some news that should disabuse Illinoisans of the fanciful myth that cultural regressives care about women’s health. Last Monday, the Trump Administration announced a rule to ensure that the distribution of Title X federal funds complies with the federal statute that says this:

None of the funds appropriated under this title shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.  

The Trump Administration clarified that this statute,

Prohibits the use of Title X funds to perform, promote, refer for, or support abortion as a method of family planning.

In response to the Trump Administration’s effort to ensure federal money is not used in ways that violate federal law, Illinois’ morally repugnant governor, J.B. Pritzker, is now refusing all federal grant money to family planning/women’s health centers that serve low-income women. Instead, he’s taking an estimated $2.4 million of taxpayer dollars from the underfunded Department of Health to give to Planned Parenthood (PP) facilities so they can continue their bloody business. That’s $2.4 million for just the remaining months of the fiscal year. And this on top of the $18.6 million PP received “from state taxpayers between 2009 and 2017.”

The offenses against morality, Illinoisans, and fiscal sanity continue to pile up. Pritzker has also committed to using state funds to join a multi-state lawsuit against the Trump Administration over this manifestly just rule.

It should be abundantly clear now that J.B. Pritzker’s top priority is not women’s health or the health of anyone served by the Department of Health. His top priority is dead babies.

For decades federal Title X funds (i.e., taxpayer money) have been provided to programs where abortion is a method of family planning—chiefly PP—in direct violation of federal statute. Cultural regressives try to make the patently silly argument that federal money remains untainted by their filthy human-slaughter business, because they keep funds completely separate. Evidently, they think Americans are morons who know nothing about fungibility.

Word to the conscience-seared men, women, and pretend-women who run PP: Everyone knows that allocating millions of federal Title X dollars to the teeny tiny micromini-machinery within PP that actually tends to women’s health frees up millions of dollars from other sources to feed its coldly efficient and profitable killing macro-machinery.

Human slaughter advocates call the compliance clarification a “gag rule” that will “prevent doctors from speaking openly with pregnant women about options including abortion.”

NPR reported that now-dumped PP president Dr. Leana Wen griped,

My patients expect me to speak honestly with them, to answer their questions, to help them in their time of need. It’s unconscionable and unethical for politicians to restrict doctors like me from speaking honestly to our patients.

She and other feticide supporters can rest easy (well, unless nightmares about dead babies haunt their nights). The new clarification permits slaughterhouses to provide information on abortion. The regulation

Permits, but no longer requires, nondirective pregnancy counseling, including nondirective counseling on abortion.

Feticidal facilities that want taxpayer money for women’s health care are still permitted to speak honestly with their patients about abortion. They just can’t perform abortions, refer women to hired killers, or cheerlead for abortion.

Note the other excellent news in the new regulation: It removes the requirement that Title X recipients provide abortion information, thereby expanding choice to organizations that choose life.

One month ago, the bloodthirsty Pritzker signed into law the most extreme human-killing legislation in the country, but even that wasn’t enough.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Illinois-Gov.-J.B.-Pritzker’s-Top-Priority_audio.mp3

IFI Fall Banquet with Franklin Graham!
We are excited to announce that at this year’s IFI banquet, our keynote speaker will be none other than Rev. Franklin Graham, President & CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Christian evangelist & missionary. This year’s event will be at the Tinley Park Convention Center on Nov. 1st.

Learn more HERE.

Written by Rey Flores

Parents have plenty of concerns as they do their best to raise their children. From the moment they are born, God entrusts parents to make the best choices for their children regarding everything from their basic needs to how they are educated.

For a very long time, most families have had no choice when it comes to the schools their children attend. Income and neighborhood determine which schools families will have to send their children to, and for many Illinoisans those schools are dangerous, underperforming, and engaged in indoctrination. Far too many government schools are led by school administrators and faculty who care more about union activities and Leftist sexuality indoctrination than they do about children. 

In recent years, school choice has been a battle many parents have joined, because it should not be only wealthy parents who have the freedom to choose their children’s schools. All parents should have that freedom.

The latest challenge Illinois parents face is trying to save a fairly new private scholarships program that enables parents to have available better education options for their children and empowers parents to exercise their parental rights. If Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has his way, this program will end.

The “Invest in Kids Program” website summarizes how this program works to help provide donor-powered scholarships for Illinois families:

 “Illinois enacted the Invest In Kids Scholarship Tax Credit Program in 2017. This program offers a 75 percent income tax credit to individuals and businesses that contribute to qualified Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs). The SGOs then provide scholarships for students whose families meet the (low and middle-income) income requirements to attend qualified, non-public schools in Illinois.”

According to Empower Illinois, SGO’s have raised over $61.5 million dollars from thousands of individual donors who want to help provide these scholarships and a bright future for Illinois students, schools and communities.

School choice is critical to Illinois families. It offers children much-needed opportunities to reach their educational potential early in their formative years and on through the ninth grade. Denying school choice to Illinois families is condemning kids to subpar, politicized education simply because of their family’s socio-economic status and geographic location.

Pritzker, who seeks to limit the freedom to choose for less privileged Illinoisans, comes from an affluent and influential family, who sent him to the elite and pricey Milton Academy in Milton, Massachusetts, where cultural luminaries like T.S. Eliot, Robert Kennedy, Ted Kennedy and James Taylor attended.

Without the “Invest in Kids Scholarship” program, most low- and middle-income Illinois families will never have the incredible educational opportunities that Pritzker (and his children) enjoyed and from which they benefitted. Giving a quality educational opportunity to these children today is a long-term investment in the growth of our state’s success tomorrow. Denying Illinois children this opportunity today is denying the success of Illinois tomorrow.

The #SaveMyScholarship campaign organized by Empower Illinois, and the many parents of the Tax Credit Scholarship Community with whom the organization collaborates, are working diligently to convince Governor Pritzker not to eliminate the “Invest in Kids” program.

The campaign is also educating and encouraging Illinois lawmakers about the importance of this five-year pilot program. The governor’s proposed budget would phase out the program over the next three years so that the state can direct revenues to public schools.

As The Center Square recently wrote,

“Opponents of the program have said the tax credits given to donors is revenue that could have potentially gone to public schools. The loss of public-school students to private schools also represents a loss in government funding that’s tied to total students attending the districts. In his budget proposal, Pritzker estimated cutting the program in half would bring $6 million into the state’s coffers in the fiscal year beginning in July (2019).”

What Pritzker is proposing is preposterous. He is attempting to do away with a potentially terrific program before it has time to demonstrate its efficacy. Pritzker and other supporters of his budget proposal would rather keep kids corralled in public schools that have amply demonstrated over decades their inability to provide good educations to Illinois children.

For more information and to join the #SaveMyScholarship #SMS campaign, click here.