Written by Pastor Ceasar LeFlore

The city of Chicago continues to experience persistent violence and crippling needs. As followers of Jesus, we acknowledge the urgency to prayerfully engage our region together with the love of Christ and to stand for peace and transformation in our local communities.

On Saturday, July 14​^th​, we are calling 40,000 Christians to come together across Chicago in united prayer to see an end to violence, healing for our city and region, and continued community transformation through the love of Jesus. This is another part of the ongoing faith-based movement of prayer, faithful presence in neighborhoods, and civic engagement by the Church—committed to building blocks for peace and making safer, healthier communities throughout Chicago.

Full details & promotional media available at ​www.handsacrosschicago.com

PRO-LIFERS,

AS PART OF THIS GREAT EVENT WE WILL PRAY FOR AN END TO THE VIOLENCE OF ABORTION IN FRONT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD ON 112^TH & HALSTED.

JOIN US!

Written by Daniel Horowitz

In case you thought that the potential to flip Justice Kennedy’s seat alone will bring us back to the constitutional promised land, think again. So long as the lower courts are not restrained, we will never return to the Constitution and the principles of the Declaration of Independence.

There is nothing more radical than a lower court granting standing to random plaintiffs to sue against non-coerced public prayer in county government meetings, prayers that have been going on since our founding. Yet a district judge in 2015 and the en banc decision of the radical Fourth Circuit in 2017 barred Rowan County, North Carolina, from opening council sessions with a prayer, similar to what our federal Congress does every day. [Last week], the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant certiorari to the appeal from Rowan County, despite three years of being under a tyranny that the judges know is unconstitutional.

We shouldn’t even need to get into court precedent to understand our heritage and the true meaning of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. But just four years ago, in Town of Greece v. Galloway, Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority that as long as the prayer “comports with our tradition and does not coerce participation by nonadherents,” there is no room for judicial intervention. “To hold that invocations must be non-sectarian would force the legislatures sponsoring prayers and the courts deciding these cases to act as supervisors and censors of religious speech,” Kennedy wrote in the 2014 case.

The Fourth Circuit rejected precedent because this prayer, in the court’s estimation, was tantamount to coercion because it makes non-religious attendees feel like “outsiders” and “the overall atmosphere was coercive, requiring them to participate so they ‘would not stand out.’” (More on that case and how contrary it is to our founding here.)

For the U.S. Supreme Court not to take the appeal is egregious, especially given that the Sixth Circuit recently ruled the other way, triggering a circuit split. Justice Thomas, as has become his tradition recently, dissented from the decision to deny cert. Thomas noted, “The Fourth Circuit’s decision is both unfaithful to our precedents and ahistorical” and observed, “For as long as this country has had legislative prayer, legislators have led it.” Gorsuch joined the dissent.

There are a number of important observations to be made here in light of the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy, calling into question our ability to change the direction of the judiciary absent broader reforms:

• Aside from the contorted construction of the First Amendment inherent in this ruling, the courts are continuing to grant standing to random plaintiffs (as straw men for the ACLU) who have no justiciable injury-in-fact other than that their sensibilities are offended. The notion that you can even take such a policy to court is absurd and has grown the power of the courts to that of a legislature rather than an individualized adjudicative body. So long as the Left can lodge hundreds of frivolous lawsuits on important abstract policies every day and have the most liberal districts and circuits uphold them, the shift on the U.S. Supreme Court will not bring much relief. The ACLU and its offshoot organizations essentially have unlimited power so long as the U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t change its policies and more aggressively police the lower courts.

• The fact that Roberts knows there will be a more conservative fifth justice added to this wing of the court in the fall and still refused to take up the case is all the more disturbing and demonstrates that we cannot rely on him to overturn these insane lower court rulings expeditiously.

• There is no such thing as a conservative win at the U.S. Supreme Court. Lower court justices will always find hairs to split in any case that is not 100 percent identical and completely ignore precedent, something conservative lower court judges will never do in defiance of liberal U.S. Supreme Court opinions. This is why just hours after the high court affirmed the president’s full power to place conditions on entry, a California judge said that the president must find every single family entering illegally and unite them within 30 days. In another ludicrous ruling on immigration, a New York federal judge said yesterday that the Trump administration cannot promulgate a rule requiring the director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement to personally sign off on the release of illegal immigrant child detainees. Yes, we have no sovereignty, and the president has no powers to even establish some oversight before swamping the country with foreign nationals, who flood into our schools and communities and who often join MS-13. Chief Justice Roberts said that there are no limits to the president’s power to regulate entry into the country, but that will not stop lower courts from granting standing to illegal aliens to sue against every minute piece of policy.

This is all to say that unless the lower courts are dealt with, we will continue to suffer increasingly at the hands of the lower courts even as the membership on the U.S. Supreme Court officially gets better. The bottom line is: We don’t have five Clarence Thomases and will not get them any time soon.

It is incumbent upon conservatives in Congress to create a movement to reorient the power of the lower courts. Rather than the default being that any random court can shut down our heritage and system of governance for years until the U.S. Supreme Court grants relief – if ever – the injunction should automatically be placed on hold until and unless the U.S. Supreme Court takes up the case and affirms the ruling. Granting a congressional-created court supremacy power over the other branches of government is a case of the inmates running the asylum. If the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to act supreme to its own underlings, then why should we respect its supposed “supremacism” over the rest of us?

This article was originally published at ConservativeReview.com

As a result of the homosexual agenda’s effectiveness, some states have been forced to enact policies and laws that violate the religious liberty of faith-based adoption and foster care agencies.

Adoption agencies in California, Massachusetts, Illinois, Philadelphia and the District of Columbia have been closed because of their refusal to violate the religious conviction that children considered for adoption should be placed in a home with a mother and a father

Congress is considering a bill, the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, to address this issue and protect the “sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions” of faith-based adoption and foster care agencies. If passed, the legislation would prevent these agencies from being discriminated against by the federal government and by state governments that receive federal funding.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to contact and urge your congressman to support the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, to also call on U.S. House leadership to provide their strong support by helping bring the bill to the floor and to whip the votes for passage.

An estimated 440,000 children are in foster care each year, and nearly 100,000 of them are in need of being adopted. These children should not suffer the consequences of bad policy in liberal states. You can help do something about this.

Editor’s Note: This legislation is co-sponsored by Illinois U.S. Reps. Randy Hultgren (R-Campton Hills), Darin LaHood (R-Peoria), and John Shimkus (R-Effingham).

This article was originally posted at AFA.net

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently came out with a report with staggering information.  Suicide is on the rise.  The report mentions that suicide rates are up more than 30 percent in half of the United States since 1999.

The report also shares that more than half of the people who died by suicide did not have a known mental health condition. In 2016 alone, about 45,000 lives were lost to suicide.  Suicide is now one of the top 10 causes of death in the United States.  Anthony Bourdain, Robin Williams, and Kate Spade were all victims of suicide.

What leads a person to a place of contemplating of taking their own life?  In many cases, it’s boiled down to the feeling of being hopeless.

When we edge God out of our society, government and lives, we will place our hope, strength and comfort in the wrong things.

Ecclesiastes 4:1-3 paints a grim picture of what life looks like without God.

“I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.
But better than both
is the one who has never been born,
who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun.”

Solomon (the writer of this passage) examined the oppressed. He noted that there is none to comfort them in their oppression. If there is no comforter, the oppressed suffer, and that’s just the way things are.

After seeing a life of hurt, pain and brokenness without a comforter, the final conclusion was that it would be better never to exist in a world without God due to the amount of evil and suffering under the sun.  (Verse 3)

As unrighteousness continues to be on the increase in our culture, the Church needs to be ready to minister, because unrighteousness only leads to brokenness. 

Abortion leads to brokenness

Illinois Right To Life quotes some eye-opening statistics, “Women with a history of abortion have higher rates of anxiety (34 percent higher), depression (37 percent), alcohol use/misuse (110 percent), marijuana use (230 percent), and suicidal behavior (155 percent) compared to those who have not had abortions.”

Homosexuality leads to brokenness

The Central Disease Center has quoted on their website, “In 2014, gay and bisexual men made up an estimated 2 percent of the U.S. population, but accounted for 70 percent of new HIV infections. Approximately 492,000 sexually active gay and bisexual men are at high risk for HIV.”

Divorce leads to brokenness

Divorce makes a negative impact on the family, not to mention the lasting effects on children.

Pornography leads to brokenness

Porn ruins a person’s ability to relate with others sexually and ruins marriages.  A 2016 Science Magazine study revealed divorce rates double when people start watching porn.

Premarital Sex leads to brokenness

In addition to the risk of contracting STDs and other diseases or becoming pregnant, premarital sex leads to emotional distress, distrust, regret and emptiness.

As unrighteousness continues to be on the increase in our culture, the Church must be ready to minister, because unrighteousness only leads to brokenness.

And sadly the brokenness will continue if we allow evil to prevail in our culture, government and families.  As the Church, we’d better get ready to respond. We have the message of hope.

Jesus said, “Look, I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see that the fields are white for harvest.” ~John 4:35

What can you do? 

PRAY: That pastors and churches will be faithful in sharing the full Gospel, which can bring hope and cultural transformation.

PRAY: That you can be a willing vessel in sharing God’s wonderful message of grace.

PRAY: That you can support ministries that are promoting a biblical worldview and/or ministering to those who are broken.

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

What does it mean to be a Conservative? Historically, issues of faith and family that reflect traditional morals and values – the sanctity of life, heterosexual marriage, and belief in God and in His Word – have been the primary hallmarks of conservatism. But today, a new type of Conservative is emerging, one that identifies as an atheist, transgender, or gay. How (or can) we reconcile our established definition of conservatism with the views presented by these new, non-religious, non-traditional, self-proclaimed Conservative voices?

Dr. Michael L. Brown contrasts the foundational importance of faith, family, and freedom to the traditional conservative position with the new conservatism that espouses a redefinition of marriage and LGBT activism. Please watch and listen to this important 5 minute video as Dr. Brown asks: Is it possible to be a true Conservative if one does not adhere to the most fundamental values of conservatism?

Please share!

I was part of an extended Facebook conversation with Chuck Colbert, a homosexual journalist from the Boston area who graduated from Notre Dame University but has renounced his Catholic faith and converted to Reform Judaism. He expressed virtually every fallacious claim that homosexual ideologues everywhere express—claims that conservatives should be prepared to refute. In the service of helping to equip IFI readers for such conversations, here are some of his claims (in boldface) followed by rebuttals.

1.) “Jesus said nothing about gay people.”

First, Jesus also says nothing about pedophilia, incest, rape, polyamory, sadomasochism, voyeurism, or infantilism. Are we to assume that Jesus, therefore, approved of these types of acts?

Second, arguments from silence are considered weak—if not fallacious—arguments. Anyone who has as much academic training as Colbert claims to have should know that. The fact that Jesus says nothing on a topic tells us nothing about what he thinks on that topic. We do know that Jesus said this:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 

Jesus does not abrogate any of the transcendent, eternal moral prescriptions and proscriptions found in the Old Testament.

2.) “There are more than a few biblical scholars who interpret the passages [about homosexuality] much differently.”

Not until the last quarter of the 20th Century did a single scholar in the history of the church interpret any passage in Scripture in such a way as to imply God approves of homosexual activity. Radical reinterpretations of Scripture passages that address homosexuality were not driven by new discoveries. They were driven by the sexual revolution and the sexual desires of same-sex attracted persons. That said, even today, there are homosexual scholars who admit that Scripture is clear that God condemns homosexual activity.

Biblical scholar and expert on the topic of the Bible and homosexuality, Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon cites two homosexual scholars, historian Louis Crompton and professor of Christian Studies, of Women’s and Gender Studies, of Classical Studies, and of Religious Studies at Brandeis University, Bernadette Brooten—both of whom affirm homosexual marriage—who argue that such a position is not consistent with Scripture.

3.) “There was no such thing in biblical times of a positive LGBT identity. The modern understanding of same-sex marriage is different from the biblical times.”

There was “no positive LGBT identity in biblical times” because God condemns homosexual activity. God’s condemnation of homosexual acts is categorical—no exceptions. Paul tells us that those who affirm such sin as righteousness will not see the kingdom of Heaven.

The hubris of this argument is astonishing. It suggests that there is something that Jesus—who is God, and, therefore, omniscient—didn’t know about human nature, human activity, or human experience.

4.) “The fact is that many, many LGBTs have been married within their various faith communities; their children are doing just fine. Take some time to get to know real LGBT people.”

Though homosexuals may be “married” legally, they are not in reality married because marriage has a nature, which Jesus himself said is the union of one man and one woman.

Getting to know those in faux-marriages does not change the Word of God.

How we feel about people has nothing whatsoever to do with a moral assessment of volitional acts. Colbert’s suggestion “to get to know real LGBT people” reveals that to him the experiences of fallen humans supersede Scripture when it comes to homosexuality.

Does he apply that principle consistently? Would he, for example, recommend that people who disapprove of consensual adult incest take some time to get to know two brothers who are in love and raising kids together as a means to eradicate their disapproval? Would he suggest “getting to know” the five people of assorted sexes in a poly union as the means by which to assess the morality of polyamory or poly-parenting?

Intentionally denying children either a mother or father is unconscionable no matter how nice the two parents are. In addition to the intrinsic right of children to be raised whenever possible by a mother and father, there are a number of studies that indicate children being raised by homosexuals are not fine—and some of these studies are far better studies than those worshipped by the homosexual community. The “LGBTQ” community savages these studies by applying standards that they never apply to studies whose results they like.

For example, homosexuals—including Colbert—frequently tout a study on lesbian parenting without citing the serious structural problems with the study including small sample size, method of selecting participants (i.e., “convenience sampling” vs. far superior “random sampling”), self-reporting nature of responses, absence of a control group, and failure to do long-term follow-up testing.

For research that contradicts the claim that children raised by homosexuals fare as well as children raised by mothers and fathers in intact families, click here, here, here, and here.

5.) “LGBTs are active and productive members within their communities. As more and more people get to know and understand gay people, they see that we are just as good as everybody else. I am sure God is fine with ‘their behavior.’”

The fact that homosexuals do good things tells us precisely nothing about God’s view of homosexual acts. Virtually all sinners do good things as well.

No one is good. Romans 3: 10-12: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

6.) “Why would you care anyway? LGBT life has no adverse effect on your life anyway.”

The homosexual and “trans” community really must stop disseminating the patent lie that widespread cultural approval of homosexual activity, the legal recognition of intrinsically non-marital unions as marriages, and acceptance of the “trans” ideology affect only the parties involved. Here are just some of the adverse effects that harm countless lives:

• Lies that destroy temporal and eternal lives are being disseminated as truth.

• Children are being denied their intrinsic right to be raised by a mother and a father.

• Children are being fed the lie that either mothers or fathers are dispensable.

• Government schools are teaching implicitly and explicitly the lie that disapproval of homosexual activity constitutes hatred of persons.

• Schools are now teaching kindergartners about homosexual relationships—rather, they’re teaching children leftist ideas about homosexual relationships.

• Schools are teaching that biological sex has no intrinsic or profound meaning, including regarding feelings of modesty and the desire for privacy in private spaces.

• A feckless school board (April 27, 2018 Brabrand Briefing.pdf) in Fairfax, Virginia has proposed replacing the term “biological sex” in the health curriculum for grades 8-10 with the nonsensical, science-denying term “sex assigned at birth.” Apparently, board members aren’t “woke” to the fact that doctors don’t assign sex. They identify it.

• Government schools are mandating that faculty lie, ordering them to refer to students who masquerade as the opposite-sex by incorrect pronouns.

• Government schools are engaging in absolute censorship of resources that dissent from “LGBTQ” dogma even as they present resources that affirm it. That’s not education. That’s indoctrination.

• Professors are losing their jobs for expressing conservative or theologically orthodox views on sexuality and marriage.

• Christian owners of wedding-related businesses are being sued.

• The Boy Scouts of America was forced to accept openly homosexual scouts and leaders, and then girls who pretend they’re boys.

• Public libraries now have drag queen story hours for toddlers, and little boys dressed in drag march in the shameful “pride” parades that deface our once-great cities every June.

• “Progressives” like New York Times writer Frank Bruni have reinterpreted First Amendment religious protections to be limited to pew, home, and heart.

• Adoption and foster care agencies have been forced out of business for refusing to place children in the homes of homosexuals.

• Corporate America, professional medical and mental health organizations, the mainstream press, and the arts promote the pro-homosexual/pro-“trans” ideology.

• While leftists express their views of homosexuality freely at work, even starting pro-homosexual clubs and slapping silly safe space stickers on work spaces, conservatives risk loss of employment for expressing their views.

• Brendan Eich was forced out of his job at Mozilla, the company he founded, for donating to Prop 8—the California proposition that would have banned homosexual marriage.

• Minors are being surgically mutilated and chemically sterilized in a futile quest to mask their sex.

The homo/“trans” ideology not only affects but also harms everyone.

7.) “Gay people are in nature so how can they be against natural law. There have been gays throughout history.”

There are diverse definitions of the word “natural.” Colbert seems to be using it in the sense of “found or existing in the world,” which is not how it’s used in natural law theory. Natural law refers to the design of humans which points to their intended purposes (i.e., teleology).

All manner of disordered desires and deviant activities exist in nature, including all sorts of “paraphilias.” Would Colbert argue that because some humans exist who desire to be hurt or hurt others, to expose their genitals, or to have sex with toddlers that these phenomena are natural—in the natural law sense—and worthy of affirmation?

8.) “Your view for LGBT Christians is pretty judgmental. Take a look at the planks in your eyes before you go after the specks in LGBTs’ eyes.Judge not, or you will be judged.”

The erroneous claim that the Bible prohibits making judgments between right and wrong must be examined in light of the following verses: “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment” (John 7:24), and “The mouth of the righteous utters wisdom, and his tongue speaks justice” (Psalm 37:30).

The verse that says, “Judge not, that you be not judge” means that we are not to engage in unrighteous judgment. We are not to condemn hypocritically a sin that we are engaging in. We’re to recognize the universality of sin and offer forgiveness as we have been forgiven. This verse does not entail a refusal to judge between right and wrong behavior. It does not prohibit humans from making distinctions between moral and immoral conduct.

It’s absurd to claim that the Bible prohibits Christians from making statements about what constitutes moral conduct (i.e., to judge). If it did mean that, we could not say that slavery, racism, bestiality, polyamory, selfishness, fornication, adultery, aggression, incest, lust, or gossip is immoral, for surely those moral propositions constitute the kind of judging that repels critics like Colbert.

Everyone does and should judge right from wrong. Every civilized human makes judgments every day between right and wrong actions. Christians have no moral authority to judge the salvific status of others, but Christians have every right to discriminate between right and wrong actions and to express those beliefs publicly. The ethical legitimacy of public speech is not dependent on the subjective response of those who hear such expressions.

As he railed against judgmentalism, here are some of the terms Colbert used to describe those who disapprove of homosexual acts: “self-righteous,” “sanctimonious piety,” “condescending attitude,” “rabid,” “bigoted,” “prejudiced,” and “hateful.”

9.)  “I did not choose to be gay anymore than you chose to be, presumably, straight. Being gay has nothing to do with a choice.”

While erotic attraction to persons of the same sex is not chosen, acting on those feelings is, indeed, chosen. Humans experience myriad powerful, persistent, unchosen feelings. Our task as moral beings is to determine on which of those feelings we are morally justified to act. And that task requires some arbiter of morality—some basis on which to judge right from wrong.

10.)  “I am not defying God. God does not condemn gay people, our lives and our love. God is fine with his creation of gay people.”

On what basis can Colbert make the claim that he is not defying God? He can’t rationally make such a claim based on either the plain words of the Old or New Testament.

God does, indeed, condemn homosexuals as well as many others. God condemns anyone who rejects the work of Christ on the Cross. One of the clearest signs of being saved from God’s wrath is repentance. Doing the will of the Father and confessing when we fail are signs that we are saved. Perpetual embrace of that which God condemns and calling that which God condemns “good” are sure signs that one will not see the kingdom of Heaven:

Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

God creates men and women. Through the fall of Adam, all of us are born with a fallen nature and are in need of redemption. While God for a time allows the disordering of his creation, he no more created in humans homoerotic desire than he created in humans adulterous desire, polyamorous desire, incestuous desire, “minor-attraction,” murderous desire, the desire to be an amputee, the desire to gossip, pride, covetousness, or physical anomalies.

If Christians truly love their neighbors as themselves, they should be prepared to respond courageously to claims like Colbert’s. Authentic love depends on knowing first what is true.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Conversation-with-Homosexual-Journalist.mp3

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

Dahleen Glanton, columnist for the Chicago Tribune, recently penned a column about homosexuality that began with this ironic statement: “It is painful to acknowledge one’s own intolerance.” Glanton doesn’t say who’s experiencing this pain, but one thing’s for sure: It’s not her. Her entire column is an exercise in religious intolerance.

Glanton condemns as “intolerant” those who believe that “two men or two women joined in holy matrimony is somehow unnatural,” or who believe that “such an act makes a mockery of the institution of marriage.”

Glanton-the-Tolerant writes that theologically orthodox Christians who accept as true the clear teaching of Scripture on homosexuality and marriage “don’t even recognize their own bigotry,” suggesting they contribute to a “climate of hatred” and “are wallowing in self-righteous oblivion.”

Glanton then makes this comical claim:

It is easy to read between the lines of the Bible that God doesn’t favor homosexuals. At least that’s what many churchgoing folks choose to believe.

Yes, she actually said “between the lines.”

While pontificating on what the Bible says about homosexuality, she reveals the embarrassing extent of her biblical ignorance. Maybe her ignorance and intolerance are connected.

So, let’s look at those lines between which Glanton claims some churchgoing folks choose to read God’s disfavor:

• “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22).

• “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13).

• “For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error” (Romans 1:26-27).

• “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

• “Understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:9-10).

• “Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire” (Jude 1:7).

Since the focus of Glanton’s column is same-sex faux-marriage, here’s another relevant passage from Scripture. This is Jesus speaking:

But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate. (Mark 10:6-9)

I’m choosing to read in these lines and the spaces between that Jesus says marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

Perhaps Glanton is unaware that until the latter half of the latter half of the 20^th Century, there was not a single biblical scholar in the history of the church that thought Scripture teaches anything other than that God condemns homosexual activity.

What set off Glanton’s intolerance radar was the disapproval of homosexuality on the parts of parents and school administrators. Parents in Elgin, Illinois objected to music teacher Nathan Etter sharing with first-grade students that he was “married” to a man. Parents in Arlington, Texas objected to art teacher Stacy Bailey showing fourth-graders photos of the woman she was going to “marry.” And the administration of a Miami, Florida Catholic school fired first-grade teacher Jocelyn Morffi after she “married” a woman—in defiance of Catholic doctrine.

Stacy Bailey is suing her district, “seeking… reinstatement at the school and possible damages.” Her lawsuit claims she was “born that way.” It will be interesting to see what hard evidence her attorney provides to prove that claim.

“Progressives” believe that if married heterosexual couples are permitted to share with students information about their spouses, homosexual couples should be permitted to do likewise. But sexually differentiated marriages are not controversial, whereas homosexual couplings have been controversial throughout history and in all corners of the world.

Moreover, equality demands that we treat like things alike, and the two types of unions are not merely unlike. They’re antithetical.

Someone should ask Glanton how she thinks homosexual teachers should demonstrate tolerance for parents who view homosexual acts and relationships as profoundly immoral and don’t want their little ones exposed to any ideas about homosexuality when they’re too young to understand critical ideas about morality, theology, epistemology (how we know what we know), ontology (the nature of things that exist), and teleology (the study of design and purpose of things that exist). These are the bases on which a moral assessment of homosexuality depend.

And how does Glanton think homosexuals—including  homosexual teachers—should  demonstrate tolerance for the Catholic Church, which teaches that homosexual attraction is disordered and homosexual acts sinful?

Glanton writes glowingly about the cultural shift in attitudes toward the legal recognition of intrinsically non-marital same-sex unions as marriages. She waxes jubilant that the number of people who “believe marriage should occur only between a man and a woman” is decreasing, including among people who identify as Christians. She cites a survey conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute that shows increasing support for same-sex pseudo-marriage among diverse demographic groups. Apparently, what the Bible clearly says carries less weight for Glanton than does the number of people who abandon the Bible’s clear teaching.

The survey identifies particularly strong support among 18-29-year-0lds. Their support should surprise no one since this is the generation that has been exposed to the most pro-homosexuality propaganda and the most pervasive censorship of dissenting ideas. Coincidentally, this is the generation least likely to have been raised by theologically orthodox and committed Christians.

Glanton also prophesies:

They [i.e., “self-righteous” Christian bigots] are hoping that one day the law [i.e., laws permitting same-sex faux-marriage] will be reversed and the issue will go away for good. But that’s not going to happen, and it’s time those holdouts accepted it.

Not being a prophet myself, I can’t vouch for the accuracy of this prophesy, but it may well be borne out. Scripture teaches that “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions.”

But as for true Christ-followers accepting the absurd notion that two people of the same-sex can be in reality married? Never.

Glanton proclaims that “people don’t even recognize their own bigotry…. They just don’t think that people who happen to be gay deserve the right others have to choose with whom to make a lifetime commitment.”

Glanton is wrong. While people may just “happen” to experience same-sex attraction, they don’t just “happen ” to affirm it as a positive part of their identity. That is a choice they make.

Glanton is wrong again. Christians don’t say anything about the “right” of homosexuals to make a lifetime commitment to persons of the same sex. Rather, Christians say marriage is something. It has a nature central to which is sexual differentiation and without which a union is not marital. Christians and other conservatives say that homosexuals have no more “right” to unilaterally jettison the criterion of sexual differentiation from the definition of marriage than polyamorists have a right to jettison the criterion related to number of partners or sibling-lovers have a “right” to jettison the criterion of consanguinity (i.e., blood kinship).

Glanton describes the legalization of same-sex faux marriage as “civil rights for gay people.” First, there is no civil right for one special interest group to redefine marriage, and second, homosexuals have always had the right to participate in the institution of marriage. They were not seeking a right to marry. They were seeking to redefine marriage.

Without engaging the ideas of a single theologically orthodox biblical scholar, the biblically ignorant and sanctimonious Glanton refers to biblical orthodoxy as “baggage” from “religious teachings” and as “outdated beliefs… based on pure ignorance.”

While Glanton considers biblical prescriptions for marriage and proscriptions of homosexual acts “outdated,” here are the words of Jesus:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Glanton said one thing with which I heartily agree:

It takes a conscious effort to acknowledge one’s own intolerance. But it takes an even greater effort to go through the process of learning and understanding what is necessary to reverse it.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Intolerant-Journalist-Demonstrates-Biblical-Ignorance.mp3

For up-to-the minute news, action alerts, coming events and more you can now sign up for IFI Text Alerts!

Stay in the loop by texting “IFI” to 555888 or click here: goo.gl/O0iRDc to enroll right away.

Click HERE to donate to IFI

Christians are uniting in prayer for Illinois and the nation as lawmakers press for an anti-life, anti-family agenda that threatens our culture with even further decline.

On May 25, 2018 there is a very important referendum taking place in the Republic of Ireland (pop. 4.68 million people). The referendum is over whether the Eighth Amendment, which recognizes the right to life of the unborn child, will be repealed or remain as law. The Eighth Amendment was passed in 1983 with 67% support. In 2013, legislation was passed which allowed for abortions if the mother’s life was immediately threatened. This included suicide.

As you can image tremendous pressure is being brought by anti-life forces on the Republic of Ireland. The law is called misogynistic. The foolish argument that banning abortion does not stop all abortions is also being used. The Irish government has proposed legislation that would legalize abortion up the 12th week of pregnancy. Somehow the humanity of the unborn child changes after twelve weeks. Sadly it is estimated that 150,000 women have travelled outside Ireland for abortions since the 8th Amendment became law.

Would you be in prayer for the country of Ireland that this law would remain in place? Let us pray also for the advancement of the gospel in Ireland. Good laws are necessary, but only the gospel of Jesus Christ can truly change hearts. Let us also pray against the efforts of many in government and entertainment who are seeking this law to be overturned. May their lies be stopped. May God’s people be bold in proclaiming God’s truth.

Would you also encourage others to be in prayer? Maybe you could help organize a time in your church sometime before this vote. Our church is going to have a special time of prayer on Wednesday, May 23. Let us be in prayer and do what we can to support the promotion of life in Ireland.

Pastor Calvin Lindstrom

Church of Christian Liberty

Arlington Heights, IL

What do you do when the world’s most famous atheist mocks you internationally on television and throughout social media? What consolation can you find when you’ve become known worldwide as atheism’s celebrity idiot?

You look to the Scriptures and take consolation in how Joseph was humiliated before the time came when God opened a big door of opportunity for him, and how Moses was abased before God opened a big sea for him. You take comfort in knowing the principle of humiliation before promotion—that God often takes someone low before raising him up for His use.

And that’s what happened when Ray Comfort was christened “Banana Man” by Professor Richard Dawkins. Millions heard the everlasting gospel, all because of that humiliating name: Banana Man. So if you’re afraid of looking foolish, this true story not only will encourage you and bring your fears into perspective, it will increase your faith in God and help you to see His wonderful hand in your own life.

ACTION: Join Illinois Family Institute for a screening of Ray Comfort’s latest production and a fascinating look at how God has used him to confound the dominant thinking of our day. (Please watch the trailer HERE.)

Click HERE for a flyer

IFI will be hosting free screenings on the following dates and locations. Click on the link for more information:

Friday, May 11th at 7:00 PM
Parkwood Baptist Church (map)
11355 S. Central Park Ave
Chicago, Illinois  60655

Monday, May 14th at  7:00 PM
Trail’s Edge Restaurant (map)
20 Kansas Street
Frankfort, Illinois  60423 
(10% off your meal with flyer)

 

Friday, May 18th at 7:00 PM
Church of Christian Liberty (map)
502 Euclid Avenue
Arlington Heights, Illinois  60004

Please invite neighbors, friends, and family members!

With about 4 weeks left of the Illinois General Assembly’s session and several bad bills that still could be voted on, it is very fitting to appeal to “Him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine,” (Eph. 3:20) and Him through Whom “all things are possible.” (Matt. 19:26)

Illinois is in a serious state of depravity and no weapon on this planet is powerful enough to make things right, because our weapons are not of this world. Now is the time to utilize the most powerful weapon we have. Prayer.

Heavenly Father,

You alone are worthy of all praise, honor and glory. You are the King of all kings and Lord of all lords. You have no equal. You sit on the heavenly throne and rule over the universe and everything in it, including the affairs of man.  Though our mortal minds can’t fathom Your greatness, nor begin to understand Your mercy toward us, we believe Your Word and its promises, because You are unchanging, ever faithful and completely trustworthy. And we believe that You love us because You took on human flesh and took the punishment we deserve so that we could spend eternity with You.

Father, we thank you!

Lord, we humbly implore You to move in Illinois, which is sick and in desperate need of healing. Many have turned away from You and have done what seems right to them; to their peril. Even some who proclaim You as Lord live no differently than the world.

Lord, please forgive us for the wickedness of our culture.

Lord, forgive me for falling short of Your call to holiness. Give me the strength I need to overcome the lies of Satan and the sinful desires of my old nature.

Forgive us all for our failure to recognize that You alone sit on the throne.  Forgive us for not speaking out when schools indoctrinate our children with godless ideology.

Forgive us for our apathy and lack of love for our neighbors; for looking the other way as we allow things once called evil to be called good.

Forgive us for feeling as though there’s nothing that can be done to remove the darkness over our land, when Your Word is clear that there’s hope and have called us to shine the light of Christ.

In 2 Chronicles 7:14, You say “if My people, who are called by My name, will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

Illinois’ healing is contingent upon us.

Lord, You see all things and know all things. You already know all that plagues Illinois. But You also tell us that we don’t receive because we don’t ask. (James 4:3)

Lord, we specifically appeal to You to stop the Equal Rights Amendment, which will enshrine abortion rights into the U.S. Constitution, force states to subsidize abortion, and strike down laws that protect women and children.

We ask that You would stop the efforts to subject children to further indoctrination into perverse sexual behavior that Your Word clearly says is sin. Father, we pray for the demise of HB 5596 and SB 3249.

Lord, please protect our children.

We ask that the plans of the proponents to legalize “recreational” marijuana would fall apart. We pray that this juggernaut would be derailed and that our lawmakers would fully realize the dramatic, costly and deadly consequences of approving this legislation. We pray that IFI and other opponents of this policy would have success in educating and activating voters in Illinois to the truth.

Thank you for hearing our prayer, Lord.

Amen.

My wife is about to give birth to our fourth child in six years. Our first two—both boys—were born just seventeen months apart. Our third—a girl—came just over two years later. Now, we’re about to become parents again.

Becoming a father has been a life-changing experience to say the least. Welcoming children into the world should be enough to make any man pause and realize the magnitude of the responsibility he carries. It’s certainly something I’ve contemplated.

What sort of father am I? What sort of father do I want to be? One day I will depart this life and leave behind only some memories and a legacy of the man I was and the lives I touched. The time to do good, to speak encouragement, to tie heart strings, and to lovingly nurture, will pass. Time is short. And so I ask again, What sort of father do I want to be?

There are so many answers I could give to this question—so many qualities I hope to possess as a father. I know I won’t be perfect. Thankfully, that’s not required. My children only need one perfect Father, and I’m not that one. But I do want to aim high. In an age when fatherhood is in crisis, I want to rise above the cultural trends and, with God’s help, be a dad who will zealously raise my children to honor God and be a shining light in their corner of the world.

This is the father I want to be.

First and foremost, I want to be a godly example. I want to have a relationship with my Savior that others—especially my family—can see. I can’t pass something on that I don’t possess. If I try to live with a façade of godliness without sincerely seeking to live righteously, my children will see it. Even if they are unable to articulate the difference between the genuine and the fake, it will impact them just the same. Faking it is never a good idea, but faking it when everyone knows it’s fake is worse than useless—it’s loathsome and contemptible. If I want my children to be godly, I have to be godly. If I want them to love and honor Christ, then I have to love and honor Christ. It’s that simple.

I want my children to know that I pray for them, and that Dad’s prayers make a difference. What if, God forbid, I were to be separated from my children for a prolonged period of time, and quite literally the only thing I could do to influence their lives was to pray for them? What if I couldn’t teach them God’s Word, nurture their faith, build character into their lives, or point them in the right direction each and every day? What if I was entirely cut off from them? What if all I could do was pray? I hope I never find myself in that position, but I think I’d do a lot more praying for my children under those circumstances than I do now. I think I would cry out to God with a depth of feeling and a level of complete dependence on Him that I rarely muster today. What does this say about me? Does it say that I’m trusting my own efforts to raise virtuous children more than I’m trusting God? I’m afraid it does. This is an area where I need to grow. I want to be a father who knows the power of prayer and who relies on God every single day.

I also want to live a life of honor and integrity in front of my children. I want them to see me doing right even if it costs me something of this world’s treasure. What is the cost, after all, in comparison to the lesson my children will learn? And what will it profit me if I compromise my principles to preserve my treasure, only to lose my children’s souls? When they one day face the storms of temptation themselves—when they are confronted with a choice between profitable compromise and costly conviction—I want them to be able to remember their dad, who stood for what was right regardless of personal sacrifice. Shame on me if they can ever look back at my example to justify a dishonorable action. That’s not the legacy I want to leave.

I want to be a father who treats my children’s mother well and shows my kids by daily example what a happy Christian marriage looks like. I want my kids to feel the security of knowing that their dad and mom are still crazy about each other and don’t mind showing it. We’ll keep it appropriate, of course, but there’s nothing wrong with displaying affection for each other while the kids look on. My wife and I will be the only example of marriage our children will see on such a close, personal level. For better or worse, we’ll be on display. Our children will either look at us and say, “I want my marriage to be like that,” or they’ll say, “If that’s what a Christian marriage looks like, no thanks.” I want to be a father who does my part to give them a beautiful picture of what God had in mind when He created marriage.

Raising and nurturing children may be serious business, but I don’t want life to be all duty and no delight. I want to be a cheerful, buoyant presence in my children’s lives. I want to be the kind of father who will enjoy a good romp with them before dinner, read their favorite stories with silly voices, sing goofy songs, play games, tell jokes, and do my part to make ours a happy home where laughter is heard and good times are enjoyed. Life is too serious to be serious all the time. Yes, life with children is complicated and messy, but I don’t want the complications and messiness to get in the way of happy times and good memories.

My kids enjoy outings to the park, hikes in the woods, and other adventures that are rarely simple or convenient. They’re innocently unaware of how much effort it costs Mom and Dad to make the memorable event happen—unless, of course, we clue them in by our attitudes and actions. If I grumble as I pack the car, if I fuss and fret when the kids get dirty, if I sigh, mutter, and gripe the day away, I can communicate to my children that raising them is more hassle, more stress, more work than I want to deal with. I can squelch their good times with my complaining, my impatience, my sarcastic or cutting remarks. I can let my comfort or convenience get in between me and the hearts of my children. Or I can smile, send up a quick prayer for some extra grace and patience, and head out to make some memories with my kids. That’s the kind of father I want to be—the kind that never says, “You’re more trouble than you’re worth.”

I want to be kind. Gentle. Loving. Humble. Humble enough to recognize my dependence on God, humble enough to apologize to my children when I mess up, humble enough to know that I don’t have all the answers and that I need help.

Finally, I want to finish well. Many great men have begun well, only to stray later in life. Solomon began by shunning riches and honor when he requested wisdom in response to God’s apparent offer to grant any desire. And yet, later in life, Solomon turned from God, following after the pleasures of this life with a rapacious appetite. When I reach my final day, I want it to be said of me that, by God’s grace, I lived a life of honor and integrity to the very end. I am keenly aware of the fact that those who reap the greatest harvest are not those who get off to the fastest or showiest start, but those who live a life of faithfulness day after day, year after year. I want to be that kind of man.

Father God, grant me the grace to walk before you in humility, relying on you each and every day to give me the strength I need to raise children who know, love, and serve you. Sanctify me so that I will be not just the father I want to be, but the father You want me to be. Let that be my highest aim, my deepest desire. And help me daily to point my children to You, the one perfect Father we can all share together as we follow after Christ. Amen.

You may have thought I was overstating things in my recent article, “Will California Go from Banning Religious Books to Burning Them?” You may have thought I was exaggerating when I referenced LGBT activists who compared Christian conservatives to ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Be assured that there was not a word of hyperbole in what I wrote. The truth is unsettling enough.

To put things in perspective, when Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, he stated clearly that marriage was the union of one man and one woman. And he knew he needed to do this to win the conservative, black vote.

Today, you are branded a radical and a dangerous fanatic if you espouse that same view. You will be grilled by the tolerance inquisition!

Ten years ago, you would have laughed me to scorn if I told you Bruce Jenner would become Caitlyn Jenner and be named woman of the year. You would have ridiculed me if I told you the federal government would punish schools that refused to open the girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms to boys who identified as girls.

Today, “transphobic” is a household word, a gender-confused teen has his (her?) own reality TV show, and drag queens are reading stories to toddlers in libraries.

Ten years ago, you would have said “Impossible!” to the idea that a minor with unwanted same-sex attraction would be forbidden by law to receive professional counseling, even if that child expressly requested it and even if that child had been sexually abused. And you would have dismissed completely the notion that some states would seek to bar such counseling from adults as well.

Today, a number of states have outlawed this much-needed counseling for struggling minors, while California is poised to make it illegal for anyone of any age to receive professional help for unwanted same-sex attraction or gender-confusion. That is the unvarnished, unembellished truth.

And what happens when we draw attention to this outrageous California bill? We are attacked as maniacs.

As one gay activist put it (specifically, in the context of my opposition to the California bill), “Brown is a religious zealot — a Christian convert — who is barely distinguishable from the folks who flew airplanes into buildings for their god. Unlike them, Brown is nonviolent. However, like those 9/11 maniacs, Brown substitutes literalist religious belief for logic, science and common sense. Brown, I think, relishes the negative attention and while I say that he is nonviolent he does equivalent violence to LGBT people every day through misinformation.”

To parse these words in any serious way is to give them a dignity they do not deserve. I simply post them to say, “You see! I was not exaggerating.”

This is what comes your way when you oppose radical LGBT activism. This is what you can expect when you take a stand for liberty and freedom. This is what happens when you tell the truth.

This same gay activist wrote, “In the final analysis, Michael Brown is an advocate of pseudoscience in order to conform the world to his religious beliefs. It should be noted that Brown sports a PhD in Near Eastern Languages. Obviously, he has no training or work experience relative to human sexuality.”

And after claiming that there is no scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed through counseling or that gender-confused children can, with help, become at home in their own bodies, he writes, “If Michael Brown knows of more compelling research, he has not cited it. He has failed to make any meaningful argument in support of conversion therapy. Promoting the existence of this mythical approach only creates prejudice and discrimination. It serves no useful purpose. Come to think of it, Michael Brown serves no useful purpose. It is a cheap shot but the guy rails against LGBT people all day, every day. Maybe he needs a new hobby.”

Actually, I and others have been citing scientific literature for years, along with an endless number of personal anecdotes from friends and colleagues. (I’m talking about former-homosexuals and former-transgenders.) But whoever we cite gets discredited immediately, since the psychologists and psychiatrists and therapists and scholars do not adhere to the standard LGBT talking points.

Ryan Anderson provides ample scientific literature about transgender issues in his new book, while a major review of scientific literature by two prominent psychologists addresses broader issues of sexual orientation change as well. Be assured that the science is there.

This, however, is not to deny that there are many gays and transgenders who have tried to change, without success. They have suffered depression and fear and self-loathing, spiraling even deeper into hopeless after unsuccessful therapy efforts. I do not minimize their struggles, I do not pretend to be able to relate to what they have endured, and I constantly call on the Church to show great compassion to such strugglers.

But to each of them – and to the critics who attack us with such venom – I make a simple appeal. Allow others to find their own path.

When you try to pass laws that will take away essential freedoms of those you differ with, and when you demonize those who oppose your values, you only discredit yourselves. In the long run, this will work against you. We will overcome your venom and anger and bills and laws with grace and truth and love – and God’s help.

This article was originally published at Townhall.com

If you are planning to assault a stronghold, you’d want to weaken its defenders prior to your attack. I discussed a weakening strategy in my prior post [i] about patriarchy and gender roles. I described how reducing the public’s valuation of “what is a family” is vital for establishing a Marxist society.

Another weakening strategy is to silence opposition to your plans. Whether society’s defenders are silenced through force, or are shamed into not speaking up, there will be few objections to your plans to change things, and less opposition to your propaganda.

This article describes how some of these attacks are currently being carried out. Some methods block speeches and communications, but the most dangerous method is to convince us that Christians have nothing important to say in American society. Through accusations of “hate speech,” and claims of various phobias, the goal is to make Christianity seem to be a strange practice, to be ignored and purged. This paper concludes with approaches for parrying these attacks.

You can’t do that: Censorship by preventing rallies

The right to peaceably assemble, [ii] to gather, hear speeches, and discuss matters, is fundamental to American politics. Yet conservative politicians and speakers are being denied this right. Their events are being attacked, or are being cancelled because of threats. Some examples are:

• Donald Trump’s March 2016 Chicago rally was canceled [iii] due to ugly crowds of protesters threatening attendees.

• At the University of California in Berkeley the event hosts canceled an April 2017 speech by Ann Coulter. [iv]

• Ben Shapiro’s September 2017 event required a massive police effort [v] to keep protestors at bay.

• In April 2018 four events in Wisconsin and Minnesota, meant to teach about the dangers of Islam to America, were shut down due to threats of violence. [vi]

Other conservative speakers were disinvited because the costs went up too high for the hosts to bear. For example, how many places can spend $800,000 on security like the University of California did for the September 2017 Milo Yiannopoulos event? [vii]

Interestingly, protesters believe that their aggressive, violent protests are their own free speech rights. [viii] Juan Prieto, a DACA [ix] recipient attending Berkeley, wrote this college newspaper op-ed [x] about why he believes the protests protect him:

“A peaceful protest was not going to cancel that event, just like numerous letters from faculty, staff, Free Speech Movement veterans and even donors did not cancel the event. Only the destruction of glass and shooting of fireworks did that. The so-called “violence” against private property that the media seems so concerned with stopped white supremacy from organizing itself against my community.” [xi]

Whether through administrators cancelling an event, [xii] protesters disrupting it, [xiii] or preventing it through mob action, [xiv] conservative speakers are being censored through the efforts of vocal, threatening protesters. Although these cited incidents largely involve conservative speakers, you will soon see that the protesters’ animosity is really aimed at the roots of American society.

You can’t share that: Censorship by blocking communication

After the 2016 elections researchers sought explanations [xv] for Trump’s victory. One theory is that Trump’s supporters look more to social media [xvi] than do Hillary’s supporters. This bothers people.

“We should all care about how social media platforms play a part in our democratic process. Because unless it’s addressed it will happen again. The midterms are in 8 months. We owe it to our democracy to get this right, and fast.” – Hillary Clinton [xvii]

In response, there has been much activity to block conservative political conversation on the internet. For example, the California legislature proposes to regulate online postings. [xviii] Rather than preventing “fake news” it would result in “government-approved news.”

Social media posts with conservative political speech have been blocked on social media:

• Diamond and Silk are two famous Trump supporters, with popular internet videos and posts. Facebook restricted their account [xix] because it didn’t like its content, saying:

“The Policy team has came to the conclusion that your content and your brand has been determined unsafe to the community,” it read. “This decision is final and it is not appeal-able in any way.” [xx]

• Twitter monitors accounts for politics, [xxi] and through “shadow banning” [xxii] blocks posts from being viewed. The “banned” user thinks things are OK, but the account may as well be dead.

• YouTube bans conservative videos, or labels them as restricted. For example, the conservative site Prager University sued YouTube [xxiii] because they labeled its videos as “your videos aren’t appropriate for the younger audiences.” [xxiv] As this label is also applied to violent or pornographic content, the net effect is to both hide the videos and slander the poster.

Posts with Christian content have also been blocked:

• Facebook banned many Catholic pages, [xxv] apparently for speaking against the homosexual agenda. Even an ad containing a crucifix [xxvi] was too much for them.

• Facebook banned many [xxvii] different [xxviii] Christian [xxix] pages [xxx] for reasons they won’t explain.

Facebook is spinning the idea that it can be “a force for good in democracy,” [xxxi] and that it will soon ban “fake news” from its feeds. Since this change would be done by the same people who currently do the banning, Facebook must have an odd definition of “good.” [xxxii]

You can’t say that: Censoring the message

When Ben Shapiro’s February 2016 event at Cal State University was canceled [xxxiii] the protestors said “…it would promote ‘racist, classist, misogynist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, ageist, sizeist, neocolonial, neoliberal and oppressive ideologies.’ ” [xxxiv]

Ben wasn’t the real target of these protestors. Their invective is against our culture, which they think is all of those things. But they dare not debate whether the culture really *is* those things, as they’d lose that debate on the facts alone. Instead, the protesters use intimidation, calling our defense “hate speech.”

Hate Speech

The American Bar Association defines hate speech [xxxv] as

“Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits.” [xxxvi]

The homosexual community regards criticism as hate speech. So does the Islamic community, which has sought to silence all anti-Muslim criticism through international law. [xxxvii] In some places stating Christian doctrine out loud is already considered a hate crime. [xxxviii] Could criminalizing Christian speech occur in America? Martin Castro, at the time the chairman of the US Commission on Human Rights, has thinks it should: [xxxix]

“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance,” [xl]

The concept of “human rights” is being rigged against Christians, and not just in the United States. Apparently society can tolerate anything except Christians? [xli] So groups of homosexuals, Islamists, Marxists find us offensive, and seek to criminalize Christian belief and behavior.

Alienating our youth from our culture

In the novel 1984 the government kept changing old books and newspapers, [xlii] so the past always reflected current political reality. Much the same is happening with our school curricula and textbooks.

• The Illinois legislature presumes to introduce mandatory emphasis on “LGBT history.” Since a school day isn’t increasing, other things will be omitted to provide time for teaching this. Ralph Rivera, a lobbyist with Illinois Family Institute, said [xliii] “adding LGBT education to public school curriculums would promote ‘a value system counter to the value system that those students have.’ ” [xliv]

• A new high school history textbook claims that people who voted for Trump are “angry xenophobes.” [xlv] This claim is more suited for a newspaper editorial, but there it is in the book, ready to be taught to students who don’t yet know better.

These books don’t teach the world as it is, but rather about the world as the authors would like it to be. Then our students become disenchanted because the real world isn’t familiar to them – it isn’t like what they learned from their texts. No wonder that so many college students are ready to abandon things like free speech. [xlvi]

Denormalizing Christianity

The goal of these attacks is to make Christianity to seem odd, even dangerous. If the highest values in America have become “inclusion” and “diversity,” then Christians, who insist that there are right and wrong behaviors, must be considered enemies to society. Once Christianity is no longer a mainstream philosophy then Christians can be ignored, even persecuted, without qualms. What happens to America from that point only God knows.

What does the Bible say?

These activists aim at trashing our culture, changing its definitions of right and wrong. Is this culture worth defending? To answer that question we need to understand what role Christianity has, and can have, in American culture and its political life.

First off, God is true to Himself. He doesn’t change his mind on what is right and wrong (Numbers 23:19). No matter what people think is the “right side of history,” [xlvii] God is faithful to his own word.

If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself. (2 Timothy 2:13).

Christians aren’t to adapt to the society, but hew to obeying God (Romans 12:2).

Second, Christians are called to witness to our society, including instructing our leaders. As I wrote in a prior article on government: [xlviii]

• God cares about having righteous civil government everywhere.

• His concern isn’t limited to Old Testament Israel, but continues to this day.

• We are to honor the governing authorities (Romans 13:1), but the authorities must also honor God (Luke 12:42-48; 1 Corinthians 4:2).

• The authorities are God’s ministers for good (Romans 13:4).

• How will they know what good God requires of them unless they are told?

God requires a society-wide obedience, and Christians are instructed to inform society concerning God’s commands. Sometimes we’re persecuted for this (e.g, most of the book of Jeremiah), but that goes with the territory.

You should say that: Normalizing Christianity in America

If our enemies have their way, Christians will be effectively barred not only from political speech but also from evangelizing. After all, to them our testimony is hate speech.

Our first defense is to remember that God defines what is right and wrong. He tells us through the Bible how to live. To substitute any other standard, to judge Christianity as being racist or homophobic, is to repeat Adam’s original sin (Genesis 3:5) and say we know better than God.

So don’t be ashamed of the gospel (Romans 1:16). It empowers you, and reminds you that you’re on solid ground, either when admonishing your elected officials or merely responding to someone who accuses you of “something-phobia” and being intolerant.

Don’t have conversations or arguments on your enemies’ terms, on their own definitions of right and wrong. We’re not arguing about how inclusive to be, but about applying the Bible to society’s ills. A debate can be won simply by being able to define the debating terms and language. Don’t be trapped into using their terms or “facts.”

America has a Christian history and heritage. Those defaming you are the intruders and destroyers. Remind them that they’re trying to fight against God.

You should share that: Overcoming message censorship

The internet is a wonderful thing, but something we’ve wrongly learned from it is that everything is free. In reality it takes money and manpower to keep all of those computer servers running. Usually the website owner doesn’t charge the viewer because they hope to make money through advertising or selling collected data about the people who visit the site.

Hosting something like Facebook takes serious money. And since they’re paying the bills, if they don’t want to host Christian content then we can’t legally force them to do so. Besides, this works both ways. Should an explicitly Christian site, paying its own bills, be forced to take posts from Islamic advocates? So Facebook, et.al, will keep your posts only if they want to, or if you’ve paid them money to keep them posted.

Unless you’ve paid them to take your posts, if the social media site blocks your posts then you’ll have to go elsewhere. But this can be a powerful thing if a lot of people can be also convinced to go elsewhere. For example, Facebook makes money off of page views. If total viewership decreases then so does their advertising income. A long term viewership decrease can lead to policy changes, management change, or even going out of business.

Their vulnerability to viewership loss makes social media sites sensitive to a public relations campaign of shaming. A lot of “Facebook hates you” publicity could lead to decreased income for them. What happens next depends on whether these sites desire making money more than they desire to promote ideology.

So Christians should keep the heat on their social media providers. They might end up prevailing, winning a change in policies. In the meantime, the posts could continue to be banned, etc.

If you’re interested in changing to some other provider you do have choices. Here are some suggestions:

• You can host your own website. This is priciest, running to maybe $100 per year, but *you* are in control. You can even have no advertising if you so wish!

• An easier, likely cheaper, way of getting your own website is to do it through WordPress or Blogger hosting companies. Sometimes you can get hosting for free, meaning the host makes money off of advertising.

• Someone may create another site like Facebook for your posts.

You can rally: Overcoming harassment in the public square

Conservatives and Christians have no problem in creating and attending political events. The problem has been dealing with uncivil dissent, and with colleges having biased views of free speech.

Our opponents also have no problem with attending these events. However, they come ready to interrupt and riot. They don’t believe we have a right to speak, [xlix] but go beyond that and ensure that nobody *can* hear.

The police are adequate to handle such disruptions – if they’re allowed to do their job. The disruptions and riots are largest and most destructive where the politicians, or school administrators, actually stop the police from doing their work. Who will hold the politicians and school administrators to account?

When such riots occurred in the Berkeley campus in May 1969 [l] the governor, Ronald Reagan, said in response:

“All of it began the first time some of you who know better and are old enough to know better let young people think that they have the right to choose the laws they would obey as long as they were doing it in the name of social protest.” [li]

He then took action that definitively shut down that protest – called the National Guard to restore order. Once rioters learn that they don’t have “space to destroy” [lii] they’ll learn to behave and protest in a civil manner.

We must insist that our leaders rein in violent protestors. They must learn that uncivil protest is expensive, both legally and to their careers. Once this is established political events, for conservatives and others, will be less hazardous to attend.

Conclusion

Don’t be intimidated by name-calling or labeling. Keep on speaking about Christ, applying the Bible to society and defending our Christian-based culture. Everything else – posting, meetings, etc. – amount to mere details. Remember, if God is for us, who can be against us? (Romans 8:31)

Join IFI at our May 5th Worldview Conference

We are excited about our fourth annual Worldview Conference featuring world-renowned John Stonestreet on Sat., May 5th in Medinah. Mr. Stonestreet serves as President of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. He is a sought-after author and speaker on areas of faith and culture, theology, worldview, education and apologetic.  (Click HERE for a flyer.)

Mr. Stonestreet has co-authored four books: A Practical Guide to Culture (2017), Restoring All Things (2015), Same-Sex Marriage (2014), and Making Sense of Your World: A Biblical Worldview (2007).

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!

Footnotes:

[i] https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/marriage/patriarchy-gender-roles-marxism-educational-campaign-destroy-family/

[ii] https://www.loc.gov/law/help/peaceful-assembly/us.php

[iii] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-trump-protest-scene-20160311-story.html

[iv] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ann-coulter-speech-university-of-california-berkeley/

[v] https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/14/us/berkeley-ben-shapiro-speech/index.html

[vi] http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/12/anti-islam-events-wisconsin-minnesota-shut-down-antifa-splc/

[vii] https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/24/update-barricades-ring-sproul-plaza-as-berkeley-braces-for-milo-yiannopoulos/

[viii] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/opinion/conservatives-campus-speech-wisconsin.html

[ix] https://www.factcheck.org/2018/01/the-facts-on-daca/

[x] http://www.dailycal.org/2017/02/07/violence-helped-ensure-safety-students/

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] http://freebeacon.com/issues/hampshire-college-apologizes-abruptly-canceling-conservative-speakers-event/

[xiii] https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10164

[xiv] http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article167886312.html

[xv] https://www.cjr.org/analysis/breitbart-media-trump-harvard-study.php

[xvi] http://mediaschool.ohio.edu/mdia-professor-explains-how-social-media-impacted-the-2016-presidential-election

[xvii] https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/968321022427652096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[xviii] https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/04/09/california-bill-would-shut-down-free-speech/

[xix] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/04/10/facebook-accused-of-deeming-black-pro-trump-sisters-unsafe/

[xx] Ibid.

[xxi] https://www.dailywire.com/news/25744/bombshell-report-twitter-admits-censoring-ryan-saavedra

[xxii] https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/shadow-banning-how-twitter-secretly-censors-conservatives-without-them-even

[xxiii] http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/03/06/dennis-prager-lawsuit-against-google-youtube-restricting-conservative-videos

[xxiv] https://www.prageru.com/petitions/youtube-continues-restrict-many-prageru-videos-fight-back

[xxv] https://www.christianpost.com/news/facebook-gives-no-reason-blocking-dozens-catholic-christian-pages-192546/

[xxvi] https://blogs.franciscan.edu/faculty/he-was-rejected/

[xxvii] https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/facebook-freezes-out-christian-vlogger-for-quoting-bible-about-homosexualit

[xxviii] http://www.deonvsearth.com/instagram-blocks-users-from-sharing-christian-faith-born-again-follower-of-jesus-christ/

[xxix] https://www.christianpost.com/news/i-am-a-christian-producers-say-facebook-blocked-message-calling-people-to-identify-as-christians-135960/

[xxx] https://barbwire.com/2017/12/12/facebook-grants-free-speech-to-anti-christian-radicals-but-censors-christians/

[xxxi] https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10104067130714241

[xxxii] http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2018/april/christian-posts-blocked-will-christian-speech-be-allowed-in-the-new-facebook-world

[xxxiii] https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/26350/

[xxxiv] Ibid.

[xxxv] https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/students_in_action/debate_hate.html

[xxxvi] Ibid.

[xxxvii] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-islam-blasphemy/wests-free-speech-stand-bars-blasphemy-ban-oic-idUSBRE89E18U20121015

[xxxviii] https://www.christianheadlines.com/columnists/al-mohler/criminalizing-christianity-swedens-hate-speech-law-1277601.html

[xxxix] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/09/09/commission-says-religious-liberty-should-not-top-civil-rights/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d87d7f8c129a

[xl] Ibid.

[xli] https://www.christianpost.com/news/the-irony-of-the-new-tolerance-it-doesnt-tolerate-christians-119964/

[xlii] https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/book-1984-by-george-orwell-why-does-party-rewrite-90507

[xliii] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-met-illinois-legislature-lgbtq-20180412-story.html

[xliv] Ibid.

[xlv] http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/16/anti-trump-american-history-textbook-blatantly-biased-critics-say.html

[xlvi] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/us/college-students-free-speech.html

[xlvii] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/obama-right-side-of-history/420462/

[xlviii] https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/faith/how-to-judge-the-president/

[xlix] https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9964

[l] http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/24/heres-ronald-reagan-college-kids-went-ape-uc-berkeley/

[li] Ibid.

[lii] http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/04/25/baltimore-mayor-gave-those-who-wished-to-destroy-space-to-do-that/