1

The Shape of Things to Come in the Biden/Never-Trumper Dystopia

Good job, David French, Ed Stetzer, Christianity Today, Lincoln Project, and other assorted Never-Trumpers. The senile, morally corrupt President-Elect of the once great United States of America just nominated a delusional man with a cross-dressing fetish to be the Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services. Now decent people won’t be able to teach their young children about our president’s Cabinet. With Dr. Richard “Rachel” Levine‘s appointment will come Big Brother’s prohibition of “misgendering” Levine. In other words, Big Brother and his minions will command all Americans to mis-sex the burly Dr. Levine. Not gonna do it. Wouldn’t be prudent.

Oh, but that’s not all.

Biden has a plan to spread the leftist sexuality ideology within the United States and export it to infinity and beyond. Biden—the self-identifying Catholic—chooses to offend the God he claims to serve rather than offend the gods of homosexuality and “trans”-cultism he actually serves. In terrifying rebellion against God, Biden calls theologically orthodox biblical beliefs about homosexual acts “hatred,” specifically identifying Mike Pence’s beliefs as such.

Further, Biden says, “defeating” those beliefs “is an essential first step” in achieving the leftist goal of full societal approval of homosexuality, which he fallaciously calls “equality.”

Biden has committed to passing the Equality Act, which has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with eradicating First Amendment protections of religious free exercise. Biden has said that through the Equality Act, he will force women’s shelters to house biological men who pretend to be women. Those places where abused women and their children take refuge, often from abusive men, will under Biden, house men.

Biden has committed to reversing the ban on sexual passing in the military. In other words, female soldiers will be forced to bunk and shower with men who pretend to be women, and U.S. taxpayers will be forced to subsidize elective cosmetic procedures and ongoing cross-sex hormone-doping for delusional soldiers.

Biden has committed to forcing Christian adoption and foster care agencies to place children in the homes of homosexuals or lose access to all government funds. In other words, Biden will discriminate based on religion when funding adoption agencies.

Biden has promised that on his first day in office he will require all public schools to allow “trans”-identifying students to have full access to the restrooms, locker rooms, and sports of opposite-sex students. I’m sure that will go over well with Muslim parents.

We can’t forget that Biden has promised to restore funding to America’s abattoirs, Planned Parenthood. With Biden ensconced in the Oval Office, Christians from sea to shining sea will be forced to fund human slaughter. But at least now that the uncouth, boorish Trump is gone, Never-Trumpers will be able to sleep at night.

And this is just the tip of the cold, dark iceberg, Biden and Never-Trumpers kept hidden during the campaign.

Never-Trumpers, besotted with dreams of Downton Abbey’s Lord Grantham (without the white skin, biological sex, or elitist title, of course) running for president, couldn’t abide the coarse, abrasive, pugilistic Trump winning a second term, so they colluded with leftists to kneecap him.

Never mind that Joe Biden is an inveterate liar and plagiarist. Never mind that he inappropriately touches women. Never mind that he has been accused by Jill Biden’s first husband of having an affair with her when Joe’s wife was still alive and Jill Biden was still married. Never mind that he was accused of digitally raping a staffer years ago. Never mind that there is good evidence that Joe and his corrupt son and brother colluded to line their pockets with the filthy lucre of America’s chief enemy. Never mind that with a straight but slightly confused face, he lied during election season, telling voters that he knew nothing about Hunter Biden’s shady business dealings. To Never-Trumpers, Biden’s plans to destroy America are trivialities to be ignored.

While facilitating the election of Joe Biden—a man who will enact policies that destroy the bodies, minds, and hearts of children—apparently has no bearing on our Christian witness, voting for Trump does—or so goes the argument of Ed Stetzer, dean and professor at Wheaton College and contributing editor at Christianity Today.

Stetzer thinks the dim view the world has of evangelicalism has everything to do with gullible, non-thinking, Trump-voting evangelicals. No mention of the hatred the world has for the word of God when it comes to homosexuality and sexual passing.

No mention either of the unconscionable cowardly silence of theologians and pastors who have said next to nothing as the world captured the hearts and minds of children in their own houses of worship and whose silence contributed to the spread of evil so dark and ugly that many evangelicals, when faced with the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, believed rightly that Trump was better.

Trump offered hope to parents who didn’t want their daughters sharing locker rooms with boys. He offered hope that Planned Parenthood would be defunded. He offered hope for a Supreme Court that would protect their religious liberty.

In Stetzer’s myopic view, expressed in a USA Today editorial devoid of nuance, “far too many [evangelicals] failed to live up to their promise of speaking truth to power.” Perhaps. But there are tens of thousands more evangelicals who voted for Trump than there are well-known evangelicals who had access to Trump to speak truth to power, and Stetzer lumps them all together.

What about the well-known evangelicals who have had opportunities for decades to speak truth to power about the poisonous, enslaving “LGBTQ” ideology and have said nothing either to the powerful or publicly. How does Stetzer think the world—whose opinion he seems to care so much about—would think about evangelicalism if every well-known evangelical spoke truth to power publicly about the “trans”-ideology and homosexuality?

Has Stetzer considered that maybe evangelicals wouldn’t have been so attracted to Trump’s muscular rhetoric, if evangelical leaders had not been speaking in such emasculated tones for so many years?

Maybe Stetzer doesn’t know any, but there are scores of evangelicals who see with clarity Trump’s flaws and who worship no political (or evangelical) leader. Those evangelicals were careful to distinguish between Trump the man and the policies of his administration. Given a choice between a corrupt man with terrible policies and a corrupt man with better policies, they chose the latter.

The dark shape of things to come

The 1619 Project has changed the date of America’s founding. All summer, Orwellian monsters—also known as Biden voters—rampaged through our cities, tearing down statutes and demanding that buildings and streets be renamed and artwork replaced. Birth certificates are now legally falsified to indicate a biological male was identified at the time of his birth as female. Birth certificates will now identify a biological woman who was impregnated by a biological man and birthed a baby as the “father.” Within a nanosecond after the announcement by a Hollywood starlet at age 33 that she will henceforth pretend she’s a man, the Internet was scrubbed of any past references to her by female pronouns. Her history was erased.

In the novel 1984, George Orwell wrote,

Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.

As I wrote several weeks ago, “Leftists See Orwell’s Novel 1984 As a Blueprint for Progress.”

So, tell me again, Mr. French, Mr. Stetzer, and Christianity Today, how exactly does facilitating the election of the patently corrupt Biden who heartily endorses sexual perversion, religious persecution, human slaughter, and the erasure of history enhance the witness of theologically orthodox Christians?

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/auThe-Shape-of-Things-to-Come.m4a


Please pray for our state and nation and especially for our newly inaugurated officials in Springfield and Washington D.C.  

PLEASE also consider a financial gift to IFI to sustain our work. For almost 30 years now, we have worked diligently to  fulfill our mission to “boldly bring a biblical perspective to public policy” in the state of Illinois.




Cancel Culture is Upon Us

Democrats in California have passed a resolution to tear down a statue of John Wayne and to remove his name from the airport where it stands. The reason they say that they are doing this stems from a 1971 interview Wayne gave in which he was asked about white supremacy. (I believe they dislike John Wayne because he truly loved America.) His answer was unclear. It seemed to me he was trying to say if differing groups want to be supreme, they need to act that way. It was not a good answer, but it was just words.

No one condemning Wayne has seemed to notice that his actions betray what he may, or may not, have meant to say 50 years ago. John Wayne had three wives during his life. All three were of Mexican descent. His family adamantly insists that he never mistreated anyone due to race. The Duke wasn’t much of a white supremacist in his daily life, but having said the right politically correct words is all that matters today. . . Just ask Mike Pence.

Over the weekend the Vice President stood strong in refusing to repeat the slogan “Black Lives Matter” during an appearance on CBS’ Face the Nation.  When pressed to say what the left wants, instead Pence said:

“All my life, I’ve been inspired by the example of the reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. . .  I cherish the progress that we have made towards a more perfect union for African-Americans throughout our history. . .  And as a pro-life American, I also believe that all life matters, born and unborn.  

“But what I see in the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement is a political agenda of the radical left that would defund the police, that would tear down monuments, that would press a radical left agenda. . .

“I really believe that all lives matter, and that’s where the heart of the American people lies.”

I would caution people not to post the Black Lives Matter slogan. Everyone knows and supports the words, but not the connotations it carries. It is the same reason why I would not encourage people to say, “every child a wanted child.” Should all children be loved and wanted?  Yes, of course! But that is a slogan of the abortion industry which has worked to kill millions of babies under the banner of that compassionate sounding slogan.

While black lives certainly matter, the organization supports the disproportionate killing of black unborn babies, the destruction of the traditional family, and the radical LGBT agenda, and it holds racist views toward Jews and Israel.

Regarding what to say, a recent Rasmussen Poll found that by a two-to-one margin Americans support the phrase “All lives matter” more than “Black Lives Matter.” Even among black voters, 47 percent prefer “All Lives Matter” compared to 44 percent who prefer “Black Lives Matter.”

Read more: Exposing Black Lives Matter


This article was originally published by AFA of Indiana.




Leftist Hostility to Pence, Prayer, and God

Written by Emily Carder

A meme circulating Facebook depicts a disconcerting dystopian scene: A man in a trench he cannot climb out of is warming himself before a fire; he has used the rungs of the ladder he could have used to climb out of the trench to build the fire. So, he has destroyed his own means of freedom for temporary comfort.

Vice President Mike Pence openly prays to His Heavenly Father for guidance before taking action. He is currently being chided for his 2015 response to an AIDS outbreak in Indiana. Does anyone seriously think the time Pence took to pray is actually responsible for more AIDS infection? Yes. Read for yourself:

Pence’s slow response to the quick spread of HIV in Scott County, Indiana in 2015 led to the infection of over 200 people. When the idea of a needle exchange to slow the infection rate of the illness was presented to Pence he responded by saying, “I’m going to go home and pray on it.”[1]

There you have it. The spread of AIDS in Scott County, IN, is Pence’s fault because he took time to pray.

Fast forward to the current “crisis,” the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Pence is now spearheading the government’s response. What is his first course of action? To pray. To which Fox News’s Jessica Tarlov snarks,

“Well, with climate science, he thinks you should pray on it,” Tarlov replied. “If you have HIV, you should go to a doctor. If you have a Coronavirus, you should go to a doctor. And this isn’t about insulting prayer, it’s just saying that that kind of policy and that kind of thinking is outdated and has no place in modern society.”[2]

When was the last time Newsweek or anyone in the MSM spoke against euthanasia? Anything other than glowing approval of abortion up to birth? Giddy joy for no medical care for born-alive aborted infants? I have a question for those, like Tarlov, who warm themselves at the self-conceited bonfires du jour: How many living infants were left to die following abortions; how many infants were dismembered in utero; how many children began transsexual disfigurement, chemical or surgical, in the time it took for her to utter her ill-considered denouncement of Pence and prayer? Though she claims this is not “about insulting prayer,” it is precisely that. Rather, it is about insulting the one to whom prayer is addressed. It is blatant and open anti-Christianity. Pence is unqualified because he is a practicing Christian according to Tarlov.

It’s not as though the Newseek authors and Tarlov don’t have their own religion. They do. When Newsweek suggests Pence’s prayer caused greater suffering, and when Tarlov dismisses prayer as a rightful response in the modern era, it is because they have different gods. When government is looked to as the solution for all needs, it becomes a god. Not too long ago some were suggesting a “Scroogian” resolution to the climate crisis: reduce the surplus population. [3]  It still needed to be decided who the surplus were, and who decided.

Yet, we are well on our way with the likes of Bernie Sanders and the advocates of euthanasia. Still, with the advent of COVID-19, it seemed rather ironic there was so much panic in the face of such a natural population eliminator. In all seriousness, what this demonstrates is that those who celebrate abortion but then panic over COVID-19 actually do hold life to be valuable. It is the Creator of life they reject. When lives are in the trenches, it’s the ladders they don’t mind burning.

In his explanation of the First Commandment Martin Luther wrote, “To have a God properly means to have something in which the heart trusts completely.”[4] He builds on that thought in both his Morning and Evening Prayers when he borrows from Christ’s own praying of Psalm 22 on the cross, “For into Your hands I commend myself, my body and soul, and all things.”[5] If we return to the image at the beginning of this short piece, a ladder is the answer to a prayer sent into the trench (i.e., a crisis) in which we live. Either we use it as God intends, or we burn it. It all depends on who we believe sent the ladder, on how we treasure Him and His gifts.

If God is the Creator of all that is seen and unseen, then He is the one who also sustains it. And it is He who daily and richly supplies all our needs. We need daily bread, that is, food. His Son taught us to pray for it. Yet it does not magically appear on our tables. God sends farmers. God still sends favorable weather for crops in due season. We pray for bountiful harvests. Likewise, we pray for good government and peace in our nation, that all our economic efforts may be productive.

We need each other’s vocations, neighbors serving neighbors through our various careers and interests. We live in union with each other. In Luke 12:22-28 Jesus teaches us how the Heavenly Father regards the least of His creatures, birds of the air and lilies of the field. If they do not have a care because He feeds and clothes them, why should we, who are His treasured ones, the ones for whom His own Son died? In all ways it is a matter of perspective. If God is the giver of all good gifts, then we are also the stewards of all He gives.

Pence isn’t only praying—as Newsweek’s and Tarlov’s derision suggests. The VP is also working with people of differing vocations. His COVID-19 Task Force consists of members from many disciplines. Among them are,

Ambassador Debbie Brix, White House Corona Virus Response Coordinator; Secretary Alex Azar, Department of Health and Human Services; Dr. Robert Redfield, Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Dr. Anne Schuchat, Principal Deputy Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Dr. Stephen Hahn, Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Food and Drug Administration; Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.[6] (not exhaustive)

When God answers prayers, He sends people of various vocations to be in service to each other through acts of mercy to each other, to be stewards of His gifts to and with each other for the greater good.

So, in the depth of life’s trenches, we pray. (And when aren’t we in the trenches?) He surrounds us by a host of angels. For, He is our refuge and strength (Psalm 46; Psalm 91). Sometimes we might even imagine He sends us a ladder in the form of soap and water to wash our hands, often and much.


Footnotes:

[1] https://www.newsweek.com/mike-pences-pray-it-plan-combat-indiana-hiv-outbreak-resurfaces-after-trump-taps-vp-lead-1489344

[2] https://www.rawstory.com/2020/02/fox-news-pundit-slams-mike-pence-for-pushing-prayer-over-science-he-shouldnt-be-anywhere-near-coronavirus/

[3] https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/population_and_sustainability/climate/; https://www.inverse.com/article/48236-population-control-can-help-climate-change; https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/population-climate-change-1.5331133

[4] Tappert, T. G. (Ed.). (1959). The Book of Concord the confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. (p. 366). Philadelphia: Mühlenberg Press.

[5] Rydecki, Paul A. (Tr.). (2018) Luther’s Small Catechism; An Introduction to the Catholic Faith. (p. 39). Paul A. Rydecki.

[6] https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/06/vp-mike-pence-provides-coronavirus-task-force-update-grand-princess-cruise-ship-has-21-testing-positive/




Pence Doesn’t Believe in Science?

Written by Jerry Newcombe

After President Donald Trump named Vice President Mike Pence last week to lead nation’s battle against the coronavirus, many in the media decried the choice because supposedly Mike Pence “doesn’t believe in science.” How could he? He’s a Christian. So the logic goes.

They mock along the lines of: Maybe he just wants to pray the virus away.

The late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel quipped, “Why is Mike Pence in charge? What is his plan to stop the virus, abstinence?”

Writing for mediaite.com (2/26/20), Reed Richardson noted,

“President Donald Trump’s decision to task Mike Pence with heading up the federal government’s coronavirus response triggered an immediate backlash as critics noted the vice president’s record of doubting scientific evidence and his role in exacerbating an HIV outbreak in Indiana while he was governor.”

Richardson argues that Pence allegedly did a poor job in quelling the HIV outbreak in Indiana because for two days, he cancelled a needle exchange program and supposedly during those two days, the HIV “infection rates exploded.” After praying about it, Pence relented. An explosion of new cases in just two days?

Meanwhile, Richardson has compiled many comments from those criticizing Trump’s choice of Pence for this fight. Included in the criticisms is that he doesn’t believe in “climate science.” Why should he? Man-made catastrophic climate change is a hoax.

Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tweeted against the choice of Pence: “Trump’s plan for the coronavirus so far:…Have VP Pence, who wanted to ‘pray away’ HIV epidemic, oversee the response…Disgusting.”

Another socialist, Democrat Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez commented:

“Mike Pence literally does not believe in science. It is utterly irresponsible to put him in charge of US coronavirus response as the world sits on the cusp of a pandemic.”

One critic tweeted:

“America is a driving force in fighting epidemics, and now the director of that fight is Mike Pence, a guy who’s [sic] scientific knowledge consists of how many times you have to pray before you’re cured of being gay.”

An M.D. remarked,

“Trump names Mike Pence as the Coronavirus Czar rather than CDC Director Robert Redfield or Surgeon General Jerome Adams. A physician should be in charge of the nation’s coronavirus response, not some dude who quarantines himself from other women when dining out.”

It seems like most of the criticisms are that Pence is unqualified to head up this task force because he is a devout Christian. Therefore, the same people who argue that a man can give birth  are pro-science, while because of his Christianity, Mike Pence is supposedly anti-science.

The canard that Christians are somehow anti-science is astounding. After all, Christian invented modern science. As the great astronomer Johannes Kepler put it, the scientist is a priest of the Most High God, “thinking His thoughts after Him.” A rational God had created a rational world, and it was the scientist’s job to try and discover God’s laws in nature.

The founder of every major branch of science was created by a Bible-believing Christian of one stripe or another. I highlighted this in a previous post. As the great evangelical thinker, Dr. Os Guinness, once told me, “Actually, many of the earliest, and some of the very greatest of scientists have been people of enormous faith.”

Daniel Lapin is an author and an orthodox Jewish rabbi. He once told me in an interview about the impact of Christianity on the world, “Sir Isaac Newton wrote far more on faith, theology and religion than he wrote on gravitation. And there is a reason for that. Once we are given a clue, wait a second, ‘In the beginning, God created heaven and earth,’ then that tells me that one way I can get to know God better is by studying heaven and earth. And that’s why, until relatively recently, all the great scientists were also great Christians.”

Lapin also said, “If you look at the last thousand years…ninety-eight percent of all the major technological scientific medical advances took place again, let’s face it, under Christendom: they were in Christian countries.”

As D. James Kennedy and I noted in our book, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?: “Both Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947) and J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904–1967) have stressed that modern science was born out of the Christian world view…..Whitehead [in his 1925 book, Science and the Modern World] said that Christianity is the mother of science because of ‘the medieval insistence on the rationality of God.’”

The arguments that Mike Pence is disqualified from serving as the top executive to fight the spread of this virus because of his Christian commitment makes no sense.

Pence has a good record of mobilizing people to work together for the common good—and to do so in a humble attitude of “servant leadership.”


This article was originally published at JerryNewcombe.com.




Actress Ellen Page, Catholic-in-Name-Only Stephen Colbert & Marriage

Lesbian actress Ellen Page just posted an Instagram photo of her and her “wife” topless and kissing in honor of LGBTQ “pride” month, providing symbolic evidence that the cultural movement to normalize homoeroticism is chiefly about sex—not love—at least not love in its true and complete sense.

Page is the young actress who in early February delivered an anti-Christian screed on The Late Show with arrogant Catholic heretic Stephen Colbert in which she attacked Vice President Mike Pence over his theologically orthodox views on marriage. In her diatribe, Page demonstrated—again—that cultural regressives can’t distinguish between moral disapproval of acts and hatred of persons.

With a sycophantic Colbert hanging on her every word, the over-emoting Page declared that Mike Pence’s views on homosexuality and marriage were the cause of the allegedly homophobic attack on homosexual actor Jussie Smollett:

The vice president of America wishes I didn’t have the love with my wife…. Connect the dots! If you were in a position of power, and you hate people, and you want to cause suffering to them… you spend your career trying to cause suffering, what do you think is going to happen? Kids are going to be abused and they’re going to kill themselves. And people are going to be beaten on the street…. This needs to f**king stop. 

So many questions about her unhinged lecture.

Pence spent his “career trying to cause suffering”? Really? His entire career?

Do efforts to retain sexual complementarity in the legal definition of marriage constitute “trying to cause suffering”? If so, do efforts to retain the criterion regarding number of partners in the legal definition of marriage constitute “trying to cause” polygamists and polyamorists to suffer? Does the desire to prohibit close relatives from marrying constitute “trying to cause” those who experience Genetic Sexual Attraction to suffer?

What exactly “needs to stop”? Does Page think Christians should stop believing Scripture? Stop reading it? Stop preaching it? Stop expressing biblical truths in the public square, where Page remains free to express her anti-biblical beliefs? If so, which biblical truths should Christians stop expressing in the public square? All biblical truths or just the ones Page doesn’t like?

What is Page’s conclusive, research-based evidence that it is the faith of theologically orthodox Christians who express their views in a biblically defensible manner that causes child abuse, childhood suicide, or “hate” crimes?

Word to Page: No one objects to her “loving” another woman. Christians are commanded to love their neighbors and even their enemies. No, theologically orthodox Christians never begrudge people love. What Christ-followers disapprove of are homoerotic acts.

And they believe that marriage has a nature—an ontology—central to which is sexual differentiation, and without which a union is intrinsically non-marital.

If Page is befuddled by the origin of such beliefs, she should ask Catholic heretic Colbert who surely knows their origins even as he rejects them. Colbert surely knows what the Old Testament teaches about homosexual acts, what St. Paul teaches about homosexual acts, and what Jesus teaches about marriage.

Colbert and Page would be well-served by spending some time with Carl Trueman, biblical studies professor at Grove City College, who recently wrote an essay for First Things titled “Love Is Not a Feeling” in which he said,

in contemporary Christian approaches to political issues, “love” –a code word for whatever the political piety du jour may be—is set in opposition to “dogma” or “doctrine”—code words for whatever piece of traditional Christian teaching is deemed to be inconsistent with said political piety….

Trueman exposes the thinness, instability, and error in contemporary conceptions of “love” by summarizing the ways three different scholars characterize post-modern man’s conception of love, which in turn shapes post-modern man’s understanding of man:

To approach the matter from Philip Rieff’s perspective, we might characterize modern men and women as psychological selves for whom the good and the true is identical with whatever happens to make them psychologically happy at any particular moment. Or we could use Charles Taylor’s notion of expressive individualism, that the modern self is the person who expresses outwardly that which they feel inwardly…. Or we could adopt Alasdair MacIntyre’s notion of emotivism, and see modern ethics as manifestations of emotional preferences. Bringing all three to bear upon the sexual revolution, it becomes clear that the LGBTQ moment is not merely a revolution in what sex means; it is a revolution in what it means to be human. (emphasis added)

Trueman further argues that,

For many, gay marriage is a dead issue…. And therein lies the danger: We need to remember that for a Christian to recognize gay marriage as Christian… is not simply to recognize a shift or expansion in the definition of marriage. It is far more significant for the Faith…. it is to abandon Christian teaching about the self—as made in the image of God, and as resting upon an order which transcends individuals and their contexts—in favor of one constituted by whatever the moral structure of society happens to be at any given moment in time.

Gay marriage emerged from the sexual revolution; and the sexual revolution is the latest iteration of a revolution in the self, which has been taking place for hundreds of years and which stands opposed to the essentialism regarding human beings at the heart of orthodox Christianity. The moral structure of contemporary society stresses the foundational importance of individual psychological conviction with a marked preference for prioritizing polymorphous sexual desire as definitive of a sense of self. In legitimating gay marriage, a symptom of this underlying structure, Christians therefore effectively affirm the legitimacy of this deeper revolution of the self.

It’s important to note that the conception of marriage as the union of one man and one woman as articulated by Jesus is intellectually accessible even to those who reject Christ.

It’s important to note also that to reject Page’s and Colbert’s re-conception of marriage is not a manifestation of hatred but, rather, of true love—the kind that children deserve and society desperately needs. Homosexual faux-marriage will no more be a dead issue for committed Christ-followers than will be the slaughter of the unborn.

“The grass withers, the flower fades,
but the word of our God will stand forever.”
(Isaiah 40:8)

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Ellen-Page.mp3


A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!




Vice President Pence’s Religious Persecution Warning is Already Here!

Hoosiers know that our own Mike Pence is one of the best orators in Washington, DC. It was no surprise to hear the positive reviews the Vice President received from his commencement speech at Liberty University on Saturday. If you have not read about this, you can watch his outstanding address HERE.

The Vice President warned the graduates of America’s largest Christian university that if they live out their faith in a Biblically consistent manner, persecution is to be expected. This is a truth every discerning Christian should understand today. As Christ said in John 15:20, “A servant is not greater than his master.  If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you.”

Here is one of Pence’s comments:

“Some of the loudest voices for tolerance today have little tolerance for traditional Christian beliefs.  So, as you go about your daily life, just be ready.  Because you’re going to be asked not just to tolerate things that violate your faith; you’re going to be asked to endorse them.  You’re going to be asked to bow down to the idols of the popular culture. . .”

His words are prophetic.   This week, the U.S. House is expected to vote on H.R. 5, the misnamed “Equality Act.”

The American Family Association has warned, “The deceptive “Equality Act” is a religious liberty wrecking ball.

It would be hard to imagine a more anti-freedom bill than this one. This legislation would allow the government to discriminate against people of faith, bypassing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and forcing people to violate their consciences or face the full weight of state punishment.  I have often said that LGBT stands for “Let’s Get Behind Tyranny.”   H.R. 5 is proof of where the sexual anarchy agenda is going.

Here are just a few of the many problems H.R. 5 could cause if enacted:

  • H.R. 5 would force Christian schools, ministries and churches to change their employment policies that are aligned with traditional teachings on sex, gender, and human sexuality.
  • H.R. 5 would force many faith-based organizations to pay for abortion in their health care plans by creating a right to demand abortion coverage from health care providers.
  • H.R. 5 would harm faith-based charities, such as adoption agencies, that believe in natural marriage and strive to place foster or adoptive children with a mother and father.
  • H.R. 5 would embolden those in Indiana who have been attempting to destroy our school voucher system by undermining the teachings of Christian schools on sexual behavior that have employment policies consistent with those beliefs.
  • H.R. 5 threatens the privacy and safety of women and children by forcing genderless bathrooms and showers upon sporting facilities, parks, rest areas and other public amenities.   

Your US Representative needs to hear from you today.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to ask him/her to oppose the federal Equality Act (H.R. 5) which seeks to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include protections for an individuals perceived sex, sexual orientation and gender identity. If you know the name of your local official, you can also call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask the operator to connect you with his/her office to leave a message.


This article was originally published by AFA of Indiana.




Don’t be Shocked When Many “Christians” Cheer the Criminalization of Christianity

Written by Peter Heck

As I read the enraged responses from professing Christians at the news that Vice President Mike Pence would be the commencement speaker for Taylor University (a leading private, Christian institution located in tiny Upland, Indiana) I realized something.

Keep in mind that Pence has been one of the most outspoken Christian public servants in recent decades.  He makes no effort to hide his faith, acknowledging himself as, “A Christian, a conservative, and a Republican…in that order.”  Therefore, it is completely logical that a Christian institution would invite him to speak, in addition to the fact that he was a long-time Congressman from the Hoosier state, as well as its Governor, before ascending to the second highest office in the land.

The odds of students at Taylor University getting the opportunity to have a sitting U.S. Vice President deliver their commencement speech are minuscule at best.  To say this was a coup for University President Lowell Haines and the rest of his administration would be a gross understatement.  Haines announced the news by posting:

“Mr. Pence has been a good friend to the University over many years, and is a Christian brother whose life and values have exemplified what we strive to instill in our graduates.”

And that, the fact that a professing Christian, native Hoosier, and sitting Vice President would give the inaugural address at their school gave a number of alumni and current students the shakes.  No, seriously:

“I have never been made to feel so physically ill by an email before. Taylor University, you should be ashamed of yourselves,” Claire Hadley, who graduated from Taylor in 2015, began in a long Facebook post. “I am physically shaking. The fact that the school who claims to love and support me, and each of it’s [sic] students and alum, would invite such a vile individual to speak on the most important day of the year??”

“The fact that Taylor would invite Pence as a speaker honestly kills me a little bit,” Austin Linder wrote on the petition. “I can’t imagine what it must feel like for lgbt students to have to see this man’s harmful bulls**t be honored on the Taylor stage. Really disgusting stuff, Taylor. Really ashamed to be an alum right now.”

Claire and Austin weren’t alone.  A few thousand signed a Change.org petition calling on the university to rescind its invitation.  And that’s when it dawned on me – when the criminalization of Christianity comes to this land (and it is coming), it will be championed by and met with the fanfare of many professing Christians.

The number of supposedly Christian individuals whose moral compasses are calibrated to the spirit of the age rather than the authority of Scripture has become astounding.  Leaning on their own understanding they choose the attributes of a god they want to worship, one who seems “worthy” of their worship, and they bow to it.  The God of Scripture is too narrow-minded.

When another Christian actually clings to the words of Scripture, not only are they reviled by the world, but a sense of guilt triggered by conviction prompts the culturally compromised Christians to react with bitterness, condemnation, and (ironically) a judgmental contempt.  I say ironically given that being judgmental is the go-to condemnation heaped upon Bible-believers by this crowd. All this leads to a surreal spectacle of Christians attacking other Christians as terror-inducing, vile, and stomach-churning.  And that’s just at Taylor University; Chick-fil-A could tell you a bit about this as well.

A couple years ago when my local city council was preparing to enact a non-discrimination law for sexual orientation and gender identity, several Christians in the community spoke out against the unintended consequences – everything from opening up girl bathroom facilities to the grown men, to the potential violation of the conscience rights of Christian florists, bakers, and photographers.

When I stood for my public comment, I asked the council a simple question.  “Your ordinance exempts ministers from this non-discrimination policy, ostensibly meaning that if a minister doesn’t want to participate in a gay wedding, he doesn’t have to.  I’m curious as to why you’ve done that?  What makes a Christian minister’s right to conscience any less offensive, bigoted, or discriminatory than a Christian baker’s?”

While no councilman could or would answer my question, it sparked a conversation in which a culturally compromising Christian journalist in the town admitted on Twitter that he thinks ministers should have to perform such weddings.  And if they don’t?  “Government fines, jail, and/or loss of tax-exempt status for the church.”

That’s why I often tell fellow Christians that when the day comes that the government is telling them how they can and can’t exercise their faith, the kind of beliefs that are acceptable and the kinds that aren’t, and the type of public expression that will be allowed and the type that won’t, don’t be surprised when it comes accompanied by the raucous cheers of many wearing the name of Jesus.


This article was originally published at PeterHeck.com




Advancing Religious Liberty Is ‘America’s Most Noble Effort’

Written by Brandon Showalter

Vice President Mike Pence swore in Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback as the new Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom [last week], a key State Department post that advocates for persecuted religious minority groups worldwide.

Following a contentious nomination process, Pence had to cast the tie-breaking vote twice in a divided U.S. Senate last month for Brownback to be confirmed. Brownback took the oath of office at a White House ceremony attended by dozens of friends and religious freedom advocates Thursday afternoon.

In remarks before administering the oath, the vice president praised Brownback for his three decades of public service, and referenced their close friendship while serving in Congress and as state governors at the same time.

“In all the years I’ve known him, I’ve never ceased to be encouraged or inspired by his example, his faith, his unwavering belief in the goodness of the American people and his dedication and commitment to fight for what’s right. It’s all those qualities I know that made this decision an easy one for President Donald Trump,” Pence said.

In brief remarks after taking the oath, Brownback noted that never before has there been so much religious persecution in the world, highlighting the plight of the Rohingya people in refugee camps in Myanmar, and the 21 Coptic Christians who were beheaded on a beach in Libya. The right to determine the destiny of one’s own soul is a freedom Americans cherish and it’s a freedom worth fighting for on the world stage, he said.

Religious liberty for everyone is one of America’s most “noble efforts,” Brownback said, and “perhaps, and in my opinion it is, the greatest of our efforts and the greatest of our causes.”

Religious freedom is a “foundational human right,” he said, “and its establishment is foundational for a nation to prosper and move forward in freedom.” Americans believe in this and “we will fight for it,” he added.

“If you want more security and less terrorism in your country, have more religious freedom. It’s a byproduct, a fruit of more security and peace. It’s in all the data, and now we need to spread it to all the world.”

The new ambassador expressed confidence that with the backing of the Trump administration the Islamic State’s atrocities against religious minorities in the Middles East will cease.

“We will see the expansion of religious liberty around the world. Mark my words. This is going to happen. We will get it done,” he told the crowd to enthusiastic applause.

“So as a son of the prairie, I humbly accept this high role for our nation. May God bless this cause,” Brownback concluded.

In addition to his wife and three of his children, guests attending Brownback’s ceremony included his predecessor, David Saperstein, and Federal Communications Commission head Ajit Pai, who once worked for Brownback when the Kansas governor was a U.S. Senator. Also present was former Congressman Frank Wolf, a passionate advocate for religious freedom and human rights, after whom the revamped International Religious Freedom Act of 2016 is named.


This article was originally posted at ChristianPost.com




Dependable vs. Deplorable

Written by Gene Mills

The ‘deplorable’ reports keep flowing out of Hollywood, including the sophisticated cover-up which afforded a powerful predator, Harvey Weinstein, to stalk and then silence dozens of victims. One would assume that the “are you kidding me?” response given to Vice President Mike Pence’s personal ethical guidelines earlier this year, regarding his treatment of women other than his wife, might get a more favorable reconsideration in light of the Hollywood ethic. Reporters, academics, entertainers, and art enthusiasts claim to envision a ‘respect women’ ethic. I can only wonder which vision best aligns with their’s – Weinstein or Pence?

Based on a Washington Post article , Pence said “that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side.” Thought childish by some morality whisperers, Pence, rather, is to be commended for his extremely high esteem for women in general, and specifically for his own wife! 

Actress and producer, Jessica Chastain, had this criticism for her colleagues on the Weinstien ethic: “Oh we’re very quick to point the finger at others and address the issue with social action and fundraising,” then she continued. “Yet there is a clear disconnect between how we practice what we preach in our industry.” 

Jessica, we call that hypocrisy and any response that denies basic human nature is sheer ignorance. Humans can do all kinds of cruel and shameful things. It’s unfortunate, but it’s also true. We call that the depravity of man, remedied only In Christ!

Pence seems to grasp the essence of what is at stake as well as the value of each life encountered. That’s why he takes reasonable precautions – to honor his covenant, his bride, and the women he encounters. Paul wisely warned, Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” 1 Cor. 10:12

My hope is that my wife and daughters would be treated to the ‘Pence standard’ and that I would treat the daughters and wives of others with the very same value I desire for the Mills women! Perhaps, we could restore the dependable and durable respect, which every human deserves. As for the deplorability quotient, we should consider that while Hollywood is extremely talented, most of their ranks are not a reliable source for morality, advice or truth. It is Proverbs which teaches, ‘drink water from your own fountain!‘ Excellent advice which could have saved Harvey Weinstein alot of trouble if he had chosen to heed the warning. 

Men, I challenge you to take the Pence Respect pledge. It restores some values we have lost along the way. 


This article was originally published by the Louisiana Family Forum.




Being Pro Life Empowers Women and Families

Many individuals may directly associate the phrase “pro-life” with being pro-birth or opposed to abortion. While of course both of these statements are true, what many people perhaps fail to fully grasp is that being pro-birth is only a part of being pro-life. The truth is that pro-life is pro-woman, pro-adoption, pro-child, and pro-family. But proponents of the legal killing of an infant while it is in its mother’s womb always ignore the many facets of what it means to be pro life. Instead they try to paint those who are pro life as extremists who are against the empowerment of women and families.

The truth is that abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women and opposition to abortion has historically been a feminist issue. Many of the most capable and vigorous proponents of the pro-life message are strong women.

Miss North Dakota, Mary Christianson reminded us back in March that pro life is not anti-woman. “Not only do we support our women but we support our women who are unborn and can’t speak for themselves,” Christianson said. Pro-life is pro-woman, says Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life. “We know that a message many people hear in our country is that in order to be ‘pro-woman,’ you have to be pro-choice. I would offer that nothing could be further from the truth,” she told Cosmopolitan.com. “I see that as rhetoric and I see that as false. Life is empowering for women. A woman’s capacity to have children is an incredible thing, not something to be ashamed of. It doesn’t mean that I am defined by that, but it doesn’t mean I’m going to pretend it’s not part of me. It’s an incredible gift.”

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, echoed this sentiment, writing in an op-ed for Newsbusters:

Clearly, the public visibility of strong women who oppose abortion on demand is causing a big change.

Protecting our unborn children from abortion is not an attack on women. Women know this because women are the ones who understand what it is to nurture, shelter and grow an infant in our own bodies.

Pro-life is also pro-adoption, as Vice President Mike Pence explained during the Vice Presidential debates. “If you’re going to be pro-life you should be pro-adoption,” he said, hinting that adoption needs to have a bigger part in the abortion debate. A woman experiencing an unplanned pregnancy may feel tremendous pressure and may feel completely unequipped to handle the responsibilities of parenting a child. She may feel her only option is to abort her preborn child — but it isn’t. Adoption is a beautiful, lifesaving option, and mothers experiencing unplanned pregnancies have the right to information about how adoption works. Pro life individuals recognize the importance truly informing women of the healthy options that are available to them – instead of pushing abortion on women who already feel frightened and helpless.

Pro-life is also pro-child. Abortion is an atrocious embodiment of violence against the lives of the most innocent among us. “If we don’t treat the weakest members of society with the respect that we have for ourselves, how is that justice?” asks Lila Rose, President of Live Action. “How is that equality? How is that upholding human rights?”

Pro-life is pro-family. It has been said that the things most important in life are the things closest to home, and Confucius stated, “The strength of a nation derives in the integrity of the home.” Nothing hits closer to home than family, and individual lives are what constitutes a family. Pope Francis has famously said, “The right to life is the first among human rights.” By protecting the lives of the preborn, we protect the institution of the family, thereby promoting a healthy, nurturing society.

Every life has value because every person endowed by their Creator with life is created in the image of God. Being pro-life means that every life deserves to be respected regardless of circumstances because human life is created with an inherent sanctity and dignity. Being pro-life is more than just pro-birth; it’s pro-woman, pro-adoption, pro-child, and pro-family.


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

Please join the conversation! Visit us on social media and…

like_us_on_facebook_button




Momentum Building To Defund Planned Parenthood

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

We urge you to join today.




Prayers Needed for POTUS, Congress and General Assembly

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

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

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

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

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

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

POTUS

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

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

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

U.S. Congress

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

Illinois General Assembly

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

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

Illinois State Senate:

Omar Aquino (D-Chicago)

Christina Castro (D-Elgin)

Paul Schimpf (R-Murphysboro)

Dale Fowler (R-Harrisburg)

Illinois State House of Representatives:

Teresa Mah (D-Chicago)

Julia Stratton (D-Chicago)

Melissa Conyears (D-Chicago)

Justin Slaughter (D-Chicago)

Nick Sauer (R-Barrington)

Steve Reick (R-Woodstock)

Tony McCombie (R-Savanna)

Michael Halpin (D-Rock Island)

Ryan Spain (R-Peoria)

Daniel Swanson (R-Woodhull)

David Welter (R-Morris)

Jerry Long (R-Ottawa)

Lindsay Parkhurst (R-Kankakee)

David Olsen (R-Downers Grove)

Brad Halbrook (R-Shelbyville)

Katie Stuart (D-Edwardsville)

LaToya Greenwood (D-East St. Louis)

Dave Severin (R-Marion)

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

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

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

May God be pleased to answer our prayers!


?

Join IFI at our Feb. 18th Worldview Conference

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

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

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

online-registration-button




U.S. Senate Sees First Win in Obamacare Fight

Yesterday a Washington Times headline read “GOP wins first Obamacare fight in Senate budget vote.” Katie Pavlich reported this at Townhall.com:

Republicans eager to show quick action against Obama’s health care law took an initial procedural step Tuesday, introducing a budget bill that would have to be considered under a parliamentary procedure that would prevent Democrats from using a Senate filibuster to protect the health care law.

Pavlich also reported that Vice President-elect Mike Pence told Congressional Republicans that President-elect Donald Trump wants Obamacare (i.e., the Affordable Care Act) repealed and sent to his desk by February 20.

With Republicans in control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue after January 20, the Republican Congress will be able to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with the help of the new president.

Candidate Trump made clear his intentions, and President-elect Trump began to make good on his commitment to repeal and replace the ACA with his choice of U.S. Representative Tom Price (R-GA) to serve as his Secretary of Health and Human Services. Rep. Price is considered one of the most knowledgeable Republicans on healthcare policy.

Since the election, a lot has been written about the challenges in repealing the ACA. The bill ran thousands of (mostly unread) pages when it was signed into law in March, 2010, and tens of thousands of pages of regulations dealing with the ACA have been added since then.

What will replace Obamacare is a work in progress as conservative health care expert Lanhee Chen explained:

It’s not that we don’t have enough ideas as conservatives, it’s that we actually have too many. A lot of thinking and research has gone on the last several years around how you create a health care system that is more consumer friendly, that pays attention to costs first, that recognizes the importance of health care in people’s lives but doesn’t believe that the federal government is necessarily well-suited to make all of those important decisions.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to U.S. Senators Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth, and your local U.S. Representative asking them to support the repeal of Obamacare.

Obamacare has caused many to lose their existing coverage, insurance rates to soar, policy options to be restricted, and increased the national deficit. The law has negatively affected the economy in several ways, especially by discouraging companies from hiring.

take_action_button


?

Join IFI at our Feb. 18th Worldview Conference

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

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

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

online-registration-button




California College Instructor Caught in the Act of Being a Leftist

lauries-chinwags_thumbnail*WARNING: NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN*

Orange Coast College, a community college in Costa Mesa, CA, employs Olga Perez Stable Cox to teach classes on human sexuality. During a recent human sexuality class, Cox went on an anti-Trump/anti-Pence/anti-conservative rant which was recorded by a student and posted online. In it Cox is heard calling President-Elect Donald Trump a “white supremacist” and Vice-President-Elect Mike Pence “one of the most anti-gay humans in this country.” She further described the election of Trump as an “assault” and “an act of terrorism.”

Then in an act of astonishing hubris and irrationality, Cox condemns everyone who voted for Trump:

One of the most frightening things for me and most people in my life is that the people creating the assault are among us. It is not some stranger from some other country coming and attacking our sense of what it means to be an American and the things that we stand for and that makes it more painful because I’m sure that all of us have people in our families and our circle of friends that are part of that movement and it is very difficult. 

There is a second, less-viewed video in which Cox expresses her happiness that Orange County, California where she lives voted Democratic, saying that “Living in Orange County is scary” because it’s conservative.

Apparently not noticing the irony, Cox goes on to say that she is committed to keeping her “classroom safe.” In the service of “safety,” she tells students she will provide phone numbers they can call if they “find anyone being racist, or in any way prejudiced, or treating you in an unfair way”—with “unfair” being determined by Leftist assumptions. Last time I checked, it’s as legal to be a racist bigot as it is to be an anti-Christian or anti-conservative bigot.

Two students also report that Cox “tried to get everyone who voted for Donald Trump to stand up and show the rest of the class who to watch out for and protect yourself from.” She has a very odd way of making conservative students feel (in “progressive” parlance) “safe.”

Here’s a bit more on Cox who has no academic degrees in political science and was not hired to pontificate on matters political. She is a 64-year-old lesbian with a bachelor’s degree in sociology and a master’s degree in “Marriage, Family, and Child Counseling.”

On her faculty bio site, there is no curriculum vitae, but there is a lengthy list of sexuality resources including links to Go Ask Alice, Out Proud, Alternative Sex, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, National Coalition of Sexual Freedom, American Civil Liberties Union, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Human Rights Campaign, The Advocate (homosexual magazine) and two pornographic websites. She also provides links to the websites of numerous “sex educators” including Annie Sprinkle a “feminist stripper” who for a performance “art” piece titled “A Public Cervix Announcement” inserted a speculum into her nether region and invited male and female audience members to view her cervix with a flashlight—which they did.

So, California residents pay the salary of a woman who refers students to Annie Sprinkle’s website. Sheesh.

It would be interesting to learn more about what qualifies Cox to teach collegiate-level courses in human sexuality—well, other than her extensive familiarity with homosexual and pornographic websites.

The Coast Federation of Teachers, AFT Local 1911 took to Facebook to extol the virtues of Cox and criticize the student who recorded her unprofessional whining. The teachers union claims Cox “encourages open discussions on challenging and provocative issues and topics” and “skillfully allows students to respectfully present their varying opinions.” From what I saw, there was no encouragement of an open discussion” regarding the election unless asking Trump-voters to stand in a line-up encourages open discussion.

“Progressives” are usually obsessed with power dynamics, and yet there’s nary a peep from the union about the power differential between Cox and her students. After Cox accuses those who voted for Trump of being terrorists, how comfortable would the alleged “terrorists” be in challenging Cox’s provocative claims when she has the power to pass or fail them?

It’s clear that Cox had no interest in fostering dialogue or critically examining her assumptions. Her goal was to inculcate students with her beliefs using—not reason—but demagoguery.

Safety

Let’s take a quick look at the way “progressives” have redefined “safety,” which is inextricably entwined with their redefinition of “identity.”

Safety used to refer to freedom from danger, injury, or serious risk. It did not refer to freedom from exposure to unpleasant ideas, claims, or beliefs—even ideas, claims, or beliefs that criticize  beliefs and feelings that we may place at the center of our identities. Safety does not require that others respect the beliefs and feelings we place at the center of our identities or the life choices that emerge from those beliefs and feelings. To respect something means to hold it in esteem, and no one has an ethical obligation to hold all the beliefs, feelings, or volitional actions of others in esteem.

Here’s another proposition the Left should chew on: Conservatives have no ethical obligation to acquiesce to the rhetoric that they manipulate to serve their social and political goals. Conservatives have no ethical obligation to accept the Left’s beliefs about “safety.” And conservatives have no ethical obligation to accept the Left’s assumptions about what constitutes harm.

Accepting the claim of the “self-esteem movement” that irreparable harm will be done to people if their feelings, beliefs, or volitional acts are not affirmed by others has led us to a cultural place where infantilized college students seek succor in nurseries safe spaces replete with puppies and crayons following a bracing encounter with ideas they find offensive.

Identity

It’s impossible to discuss “safety” as currently construed by “progressives” without also discussing “identity” as currently construed by “progressives,” which I did earlier this year:

Homosexual activists began transforming the concept of “identity.” They sought to recast identity as something intrinsically inviolable, immutable, and good. They sought to refashion identity in such a way as to make it culturally taboo to make judgments about any constituent feature of identity. They re-imagined identity in such a way as to move homoeroticism from the category of phenomena about which humans can legitimately make moral distinctions to one about which society is forbidden to make judgments.

…Identity when applied to individual persons simply denoted the aggregate of phenomena constituting, associated with, affirmed, and experienced by individuals. Identity was “the set of behavioral and personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group.”

Identity was not conceived as some intrinsically moral thing, because identity could refer to either objective, non-behavioral, morally neutral conditions (e.g., skin color) or to subjective feelings, beliefs, and volitional acts that could be good or bad, right or wrong. Prior to the new and subversive conceptualization of identity, there existed no absolute cultural prohibition of judging the divers elements that constitute identity.

By conflating all the phenomena that can constitute identity, “progressives” demanded that society should no more make judgments about feelings and volitional acts than they should about skin color.

While Cox clearly cares deeply about the “safety” of the privileged “identity” groups, one wonders if she has any interest in the “safety” of those who find their identity in Christ. The expanded redefinition of “safety” to mean insulation from unpleasant ideas is selectively enforced to apply only to those ideas that make “progressives” uncomfortable—or enraged.


End-of-Year Challange

As you may know, IFI has a year-end matching challenge to raise $110,000. That’s right, a small group of IFI supporters are providing a $55,000 matching challenge to help support IFI’s ongoing work to educate, motivate and activate Illinois’ Christian community.

donate-now-button

Please consider helping us reach this goal!  Your donation will help us stand strong in 2017!  To make a credit card donation over the phone, please call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.  You can also send a gift to:

Illinois Family Institute
P.O. Box 876
Tinley Park, Illinois 60477




A User’s Guide To Free Expression And Bathroom Sanity

Written by Ryan T. Anderson, PhD.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision redefining marriage, LGBT activists shifted their focus to the “T” in LGBT and to eliminating any dissent on marriage. At the federal, state, and local levels, the cultural Left has proposed using government coercion—in the forms of fines, penalties, and regulation—to make all Americans accept a new orthodoxy on sexuality: Boys must be allowed unfettered access to girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and shower facilities; bakers must bake same-sex wedding cakes.

Meanwhile, big business and special interest lobbyists have denounced attempts to limit these initiatives. Republican governors such as Mike Pence of Indiana and Dennis Daugaard of South Dakota have caved to media hysterics and cultural cronyism. Pence watered down his state’s religious freedom law; Daugaard vetoed a bill that would have accommodated transgender students, but not allowed boys in girls’ bathrooms.

My recent book, “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom,” discusses these phenomena in detail. Here are the Cliff’s notes on four types of laws to keep an eye on.

1. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Laws

These laws have been used to penalize bakers, florists, photographers, and adoption agencies. There is no federal Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) law, and most states and cities don’t have them yet. But LGBT activists are pushing to pass them across the country.

The proposed Equality Act would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to more or less every federal civil rights law that protects on the basis of race, expanding them beyond their current reach and explicitly reducing current religious liberty protections. If made law, the Equality Act would have government treat people who believe we are created male and female, and that male and female are created for each other, as if they were racists.

SOGI laws also force schools, businesses, restaurants, and other places open to the public to allow biological males who identify as women into the ladies’ restrooms. This tramples private property rights, which would say whoever owns the bathroom should be able to set the bathroom policies, be they sex-specific, unisex, or something else. Government shouldn’t force owners to grant unfettered bathroom access based on gender identity, regardless of the safety, privacy, or modesty concerns of owners, employees, and patrons.

Thankfully, citizens are pushing back. When the Houston city council voted to impose a municipal SOGI law, Houstonians organized and collected more than enough signatures to put the issue to a vote of the people. In November, 61 percent of voters resoundingly rejected it. And don’t let the media tell you it’s a city of bigots. Houstonians have elected Annise Parker, a lesbian, as mayor three times. But they drew the line at SOGI and won despite threats of boycotts and retaliation from big business (which proved empty).

Earlier this year a proposed sexual orientation bill died in the Indiana statehouse, partly because its supporters couldn’t stop fighting over the specifics. Gender identity wasn’t specifically included in the bill, SB 344, which made the LGBT lobby unhappy. Moreover, in a bid to broaden support, the bill’s authors tacked on limited religious exemptions as a “compromise.” The prospect of any religious exemptions upset many in the LGBT lobby. In their view, no one should be free to follow his beliefs about marriage in public life if it violates LGBT dogma.

SOGI laws increase cultural tensions, further empower an already powerful special-interest lobby, and impose unjustly on people of many different faiths. At the end of the day, they are both unnecessary and a threat to religious freedom.

2. Bathroom Privacy and Accommodation Laws

SOGI laws are the problem. But what are some of the solutions? One answer is to protect privacy at the bathroom and accommodate transgender students. But LGBT activists don’t like this at all.

Their official policy is that boys who identify as girls should have unfettered access to girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and shower facilities. Anything less than full access to the bathroom and locker room of their choice is, they say, a transphobic denial of civil rights and equality. This extreme position is out of step with the majority of Americans, and utterly inconsiderate of the concerns of the non-transgendered community.

Earlier this year South Dakota crafted an even-handed policy respectful of everyone’s interests. Unfortunately, the governor caved to special interest hysterics. The South Dakota bill would have prevented biological males who identify as girls from using girls’ private facilities in public schools, but it also would have required local school officials to make reasonable accommodations for such students, such as providing access to single-occupancy facilities. A win-win arrangement for everyone, it would have protected all students’ privacy and safety and created new accommodations for transgender students.

Ask yourself: Why do we have gender-specific locker rooms in the first place? It’s because of biology, not because of “gender identity.” Separate facilities reflect the fact that men and women have bodily differences; they are designed to protect privacy related to our bodies. So the South Dakota bill continued the bathroom policy America has always had, while also requiring local schools to find reasonable accommodations for transgender students.

But LGBT activists accused attacked the state of “transphobia.” And big businesses threatened boycotts. As the bill reached the governor’s desk, the head of the Human Rights Campaign warned that “history will not treat kindly those who support this discriminatory measure.”

The Obama administration also wants to be on the Left side of history here. It claims that a 1972 civil rights lawrequires schools to allow unfettered bathroom and locker room access based on “gender identity.” In 2014, the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights announced that Title IX—the 1972 law protecting the equal rights of women and girls in education—now required schools to allow boys who identify as girls into the girls’ bathroom. This unilateral reinterpretation of federal law cannot stand.

The nation is primed for yet another clash in the culture war—this time over school bathroom policy. The South Dakota legislature gave the entire United States an example of how to defuse controversy and craft principled public policy that creates good outcomes for everyone. It should have been signed into law.

We now need leaders to show courage and do the right thing: to stand up to the special interests and protect the rights and interests of all children.

3. Religious Freedom Restoration Acts

Historically, Americans have protected religious freedom by requiring the government to meet a burden of proof before it acts to substantially burden the free exercise of religion. This was the test that the Supreme Court applied under the First Amendment—up until 1990. When the Court turned away from that test, Congress voted in 1993 to reinstate it by passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

Championed by the ACLU and liberal senators Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy, it passed with 97 Senate votes and a unanimous voice vote in the House. President Bill Clinton signed it into law. RFRA bars government from substantially burdening religious exercise unless it can show a compelling interest to do so and does it through the least restrictive means possible.

Twenty-one states have implemented similar laws, and 11 more have constitutional religious liberty protections that state courts have interpreted to provide a similar level of protection. These commonsense laws place the onus on the government to justify its actions in burdening the free exercise of religion.

Over the last 20 years, RFRA-style laws have balanced the fundamental right to religious liberty with compelling government interests. They have protected Native Americans’ freedom to wear headdresses with eagle feathers, Sikhs’ freedom to wear religious head coverings in court, Muslim prisoners’ freedom to grow short beards, and Jewish inmates’ rights to kosher meals.

The federal RFRA protects against federal government violations of religious liberty; state RFRAs protect against state violations. Yet when Indiana proposed a near identical state version of RFRA last year, all hell broke loose. Similar hysterics are now erupting in Georgia and West Virginia over their RFRA proposals.

4. First Amendment Defense Acts

RFRAs create balancing tests that judges use. They protect religious exercise generally, then leave it to judges to determine if government has a compelling interest being pursued in a narrowly tailored way that justifies burdening the religious exercise in any particular case. But experience shows that ideologically driven judges can and do get it wrong. In cases where the risk of neglect or even hostility to the law by judges or government is acute, we can and should single out particular actions for protection and say government may never burden them.

We need both broad protection and specific protections. So, in addition to RFRA, Congress has passed a variety of laws that protect pro-life conscience. In Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court invented a right to an abortion. But after Roe Congress made clear that government cannot require a pro-life doctor or nurse to perform an abortion—that they, too, had rights that required specific protections from hostile judges and bureaucrats.

Likewise, in the Obergefell decision, the Supreme Court redefined marriage throughout America by mandating that governmental entities treat same-sex relationships as marriages. The Supreme Court did not say that private schools, charities, businesses, or individuals must abandon their beliefs if they disagree, but some governments are acting as if it did.

Indeed, there is no justification to force these entities to violate their beliefs about marriage. As Justice Anthony Kennedy noted, traditional beliefs are held “in good faith by reasonable and sincere people here and throughout the world.” Americans who believe that marriage is the union of husband and wife should continue to be free to live and work according to their convictions.

Now, state and federal legislatures should make it clear that no private person or institution should be forced to recognize or help celebrate a same-sex marriage—that is, that they have a right to believe—and live out—what they’ve always believed about marriage: that it’s the union of husband and wife.

The federal First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), and various state bills modeled on it, is a measured, reasonable, commonsense policy. It would ensure that no government agency discriminates against individuals or institutions for following their convictions about marriage as a man-woman union. For example, a government could not revoke their tax-exempt status or deny them government grants, contracts, accreditation, or licenses because of their beliefs. The bill protects freedom and pluralism in the wake of social change—embodying the best of American values.

Protecting minority rights after major social change is also a hallmark of American tolerance and pluralism. Yet as Georgia moves to enact a FADA, big business and special interests are attacking it.

This is yet another example of cultural cronyism. Businesses in Georgia were always free to embrace gay marriage—to bake wedding cakes for gay marriages and make floral arrangements for same-sex nuptials—and many do. But now activists want the government to force everyone in Georgia to do it. They’re threatening boycotts, travel bans, and relocations of businesses if the government doesn’t do as they wish.

Big business—as represented by “individual corporate giants including Hilton Worldwide, Marriott and InterContinental Hotels Group,” the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, and the Georgia Hotel and Lodging Association—have all claimed the religious freedom bill would open the door to widespread discrimination.

But if every Hilton, Marriott, and InterContinental hotel in Georgia already hosts receptions for newlywed same-sex couples, why can’t Georgia protect the mom-and-pop bed-and-breakfast or local Knights of Columbus hall that has a different set of beliefs about marriage? This law doesn’t harm minority rights; it protects them in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage.

The hypocrisy of big business lobbying against the law is astounding. They want to be free to operate in Georgia according to their values, but they don’t want small-business competitors to be free to operate according to theirs. If all of the major corporations are already in favor of gay marriage, then this religious freedom law poses no threat. It merely protects the rights of those who disagree.

What to Do Now

America is in a time of transition. Courts have redefined marriage, and beliefs about human sexuality are changing. During this time, it is critical to protect the right to disagree and the civil liberties of those who speak and act in accord with what Americans had always believed about marriage—that it is the union of husband and wife.

Good public policy is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to protect cherished American values. This means SOGI laws must be defeated. Bathroom privacy and accommodation laws should be enacted. And religious freedom should be protected—with RFRAs and FADAs.

These policies would help achieve civil peace amid disagreement, maintain pluralism, and protect the rights of all Americans, regardless of what faith they may practice.


 

Ryan T. Anderson, PhD, the William E. Simon senior research fellow in American Principles and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation, is the author of “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom.”


This article was originally posted at TheFederalist.com