This is a story that illuminates the critical importance of sound church leadership informed by unequivocal, courageous commitment to biblical truth.

No Protestant denomination will be spared attacks on theological orthodoxy by apostates and heretics who view Scripture as a means to their pernicious ends of normalizing sexual sin. The attacks will come in fits and starts, and the victories for wolves in sheep’s clothing will be incremental. True Christ-followers need to be steeped in Scripture, led by pastors who know and boldly teach truth, discerning, and committed to suffering for Christ and his kingdom.

The recent Evangelical Covenant Church (ECC) annual meeting called the Gathering, at which delegates vote on leadership and doctrinal positions, serves as a sad example of what is going awry within Christendom.

IFI has a personal connection to the ECC Gathering—a connection that led to a deeply troubling revelation in the days preceding the late June event. Pastor Lance Davis, until recently an IFI board member, resigned on June 12, just nine days before the start of the ECC Gathering. In March, Davis had been nominated by the ECC Board of Ordered Ministry for the position of Executive Minister for Develop Leaders/Ordered Ministry. The vote for his nomination took place at the Gathering on Friday, June 22.

As mentioned, Davis resigned from the IFI Board on June 12, citing his desire to focus on the upcoming election, specifically emphasizing the critical importance of getting elected in order to retain the ECC’s theologically orthodox positions on matters related to homosexuality—positions that have been under sustained attack in the ECC for several years.

IFI learned that on June 19, the heretical ECC group called “Mission Friends for Inclusion” (MF4i), whose chief goal is to undermine theological orthodoxy on homosexuality, published a blog post that says this:

We did have some concerns about Rev. Davis’s history, including his involvement with the Illinois Family Institute (IFI), which has been categorized as an anti-LGBT hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center for the last nine years. He told us that he was involved with them during the same-sex marriage legislative debate in Illinois years ago, but disassociated himself from them after they published an “egregious” and “mean-spirited” blog about some Covenant clergy. He noted that he was “deeply offended” and reached out and apologized to the clergy for this blog.

We also asked Rev. Davis about the involvement of Illinois Family Action (the legislative arm of IFI) at an event at his church in March 2016.

…

Rev. Davis ended his email with the following message,

“My church hosted a town hall meeting during the last presidential campaign in response to my community’s displeasure with Ted and Raphael Cruz’s dismissive stance regarding the plight of the African American and Hispanic communities. IFI, Freedoms Journal and other conservative organizations ‘invited’ themselves to the meeting. This was the beginning of the end of my relationship with IFI.”

To say we at IFI were shocked would be an understatement. Here are the factual errors in Davis’ response to the MF4i—errors which IFI shared with Pastor Mark Pattie, head of the nominating committee, two days before the election:

1.) While Davis said the beginning of the end of his affiliation with IFI was March of 2016 after the Rafael Cruz event at his church, Davis did not end his affiliation with IFI until June 12, 2018—one week before the MF4i blog post was published and over two years after Davis told MF4i that his affiliation had begun to end (whatever that means). He was an active board member who consistently indicated he supported our mission—including our positions on matters related to homosexuality.

2.) While Davis claimed Illinois Family Action (IFA)—our 501(c)4 sister organization—invited itself to a townhall meeting at his church, the truth is IFA organized the event.

3.) While Davis said the Cruz event organized by IFA was “in response to” his community’s “displeasure with Ted and Raphael Cruz’s dismissive stance regarding the plight of the African American and Hispanic communities,” it was, in fact, organized to support the candidacy of Ted Cruz.

4.) While Davis said he disassociated himself from IFI after I wrote an article critical of some ECC leaders in January 2018, the truth is he was an active board member until June 12, 2018 and had consulted with us a number of times in the two weeks before the election on matters related to it.

Moreover, he had generously complimented me on and thanked me for the article he described to MF4i as “egregious” and “mean-spirited.”

Finally, how could Davis disassociate himself from IFI in Jan. 2018 when, according to him, he had begun ending his affiliation almost two years earlier in March of 2016? Oh, what a tangled web….

During the Q & A with Davis prior to the vote at the Gathering, a pastor expressed his appreciation that Davis had ended his relationship with the Illinois Family Institute, which he referred to as a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated hate group. Davis—who sat on our board and asked for our help as recently as two weeks before this comment was made—spent not even 15 seconds to defend IFI against the false characterization. Following the Q & A, Davis was elected.

Although this experience was the most personally dispiriting incident at the Gathering, it wasn’t the only dispiriting one.

Once again, heretics within the ECC persisted in trying to change the ECC position on homosexuality, with Peter Hawkinson, pastor of Winnetka Covenant Church—about whom I have written—making yet another play for heresy. He’s nothing if not persistent in advocating for the enemy.

And then there was Mark Nilson, pastor of Salem Covenant Church in Worcester, Massachusetts, and until 2015 pastor of North Park Covenant Church in Chicago. Nilson, rather than appealing to Scripture in his comments, tugged on the unreliable heart strings of fallen people, telling them that one of his two sons affirms a homosexual identity and, therefore, Nilson can’t officiate at his wedding. Since Nilson can’t officiate at a faux-wedding between his son and another man, he refuses to officiate at a true wedding between his other son and a woman. That’ll teach the church a lesson it won’t soon forget.

At least as problematic is that Nilson’s wife Robin has a rainbow flag as her Facebook profile picture. A prior profile picture of hers was the symbol of the Human Rights Campaign—a deep-pocketed, homosexuality-affirming, anti-Christian hate group. It should be shocking to all ECC members and leaders that both a pastor and his wife who serve in this denomination that affirms theological orthodoxy on homosexuality publicly affirm heresy.

A denomination cannot rationally maintain both the position that God detests homosexual acts and relationships and that he approves of them. Former evangelical and current heretic David Gushee wrote this about the irreconcilable nature of those two theological positions:

I now believe that incommensurable differences in understanding the very meaning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the interpretation of the Bible, and the sources and methods of moral discernment, separate many of us from our former brethren…. I also believe that attempting to keep the dialogue going is mainly fruitless. The differences are unbridgeable.

And despite what ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing say while they await their next tasty meal, unity never trumps truth.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Trouble-in-the-Evangelical-Covenant-Church.mp3

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

If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI, please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.  We need your support, and are deeply grateful for those who stand with.

We often hear the question, “How does _____ (fill in the blank with some sexually deviant activity) affect you?” Such a question reveals an all-too-common degree of ignorance about how ideas affect culture. Such a question ignores how much time it takes for ideas to percolate through culture. Let’s look at the most recent deviant ideology to capture the dulled imaginations of foolish, self-indulgent people: the “trans” ideology. Despite its relative newness, we’re already seeing the effects of the science-denying, reality-denying, nonsensical assumptions of the “trans” cult, which have been spreading like wildfire, torching everything decent in their path.

Here are some of the ways people are being affected:

• Women and men are being forced to share private spaces with opposite-sex strangers.

• Teachers in public schools are being commanded to use incorrect pronouns when referring to children and teens who pretend to be the sex they are not. In other words, the government is forcing citizens to lie.

• All children and teens who attend schools that allow students to use restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to the sex they are not are being implicitly and explicitly taught the lie that to be compassionate, inclusive, and loving, they must be willing to relinquish their privacy. They are being taught that objective, immutable biological sex per se has no intrinsic and profound meaning. They are being taught that objective, immutable biological sex must be subordinated to the subjective, fluid, and disordered desires of those who wish they were the sex they are not.

• Parents are raising babies to have no “gender identification.” They’re concealing their children’s sex—a fundamental and profoundly meaningful anthropological fact—from family, friends, and even the toddlers themselves.

• Children are being raised by men who pretend to be women and women who pretend to be men.

• There’s been an explosion in the numbers of teens who identify as “gender non-conforming,” “gender non-binary,” or “transgender.”

• The medical community is facilitating the chemical sterilization and surgical mutilation of physically healthy children and teens.

• Delusional people who masquerade as the sex they are not are obtaining falsified birth certificates and driver’s licenses. In other words, the law has been enjoined to facilitate a science-denying, reality-denying fiction.

• Children are seeing cross-dressing men in public who, in times when proper shame about shameful behavior prevailed, would have restricted their peculiar habit to closets, basements, and late nights.

• Women’s athletics at all levels is being ruined by the participation of objectively male athletes, also known as men.

• Objectively male “trans” activists are threatening and assaulting lesbians who don’t want them in women’s private spaces.

• Homosexuals and heterosexuals are being told that if they care about the genitalia of their sexual and romantic partners, they are “transphobic.” So, if you heterosexual men don’t want to have date, marry, or have sex with a “transwoman” (i.e., a man with a penis who pretends to be a woman), you are “transphobic.”

• Women prisoners are being forced to share cells with men, who have on occasion sexually assaulted them.

• College and university health plans subsidize harmful chemical and surgical interventions for mentally delusional, physically healthy students.

As usual, conservatives fail to think deeply about the effects of ideas. Here are two effects that are a’comin’:

1.)  It will become impossible to enforce public decency laws in our depraved new world in which “women” with XY chromosomes have fully functioning congenital penises and “men” with XX chromosomes have naturally grown breasts. How will police respond to a woman who pretends to be a man, has a falsified birth certificate and driver’s license that identify her as a man, keeps her natural female breasts intact, and decides to play topless frisbee in a park like actual men do?

2.)  If we are prohibited from “discriminating” based on sex and on “gender identity,” there will remain no rational justification for maintaining sex-segregation anywhere for anyone.

Let’s say a delusional, anarchical, or iconoclastic man who pretends to be a woman is permitted to use a women’s locker room. Then a non-delusional, “cisgender” man—who may also be an anarchist or iconoclast—requests use of the women’s locker room. A high school, university, or private health club can’t say to the “cisgender” man, “No, you can’t use it; you’re not a woman,” because they’ve already allowed someone who’s not a woman to use it. And they can’t say, “You can’t use it; you’re not transgender,” because they can’t discriminate based on “gender identity.” Voilà, co-ed everything for everyone, which means no private spaces for anyone.

Left unchallenged and unopposed, “trans”-cultic beliefs will result in the end of all public recognition of sex differences. If separate restrooms, locker rooms, showers, and shelters for objectively male and female persons are analogous to separate drinking fountains for blacks and whites, as former attorney general Loretta Lynch and many other “progressive” fools assert, it would be profoundly immoral to maintain even one. Would we permit a single racially segregated drinking fountain to remain in existence?

It boggles the mind that there remain conservatives who believe that, for example, tax and immigration policy are more important than the reductively called “social issues”—you know, those trifles like the rights of the unborn and the born, marriage, and the reality and meaning of biological sex.

Conservatives should be talking about this issue at least as volubly and boldly as “trans”-activists and their ideological accomplices do. To self-censor out of fear guarantees that we bequeath to our children and grandchildren a less safe, more oppressive world in which to raise their children. Is that what conservatives want? Hasn’t our silence done enough damage already?

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Is-ANYONE-Affected-by-Trans-Deviance.mp3

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

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

Written by Peter Heck

This article was originally published at TheMaven.net

IFI is asking for help from supporters in moving forward an important lawsuit against the state of Illinois. In light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of pro-life crisis pregnancy centers in California (NIFLA v. Becerra) and with the encouragement of IFI and others, Mauck & Baker, a Chicago-based law firm committed to protecting religious liberty, is considering a lawsuit against the Illinois law that bans counseling for children and teens who experience unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria.

Background

The plaintiffs in the NIFLA case (i.e., pro-life crisis pregnancy centers) sued the state of California, which had passed the FACT Act requiring all crisis pregnancy centers in defiance of their beliefs to “notify women that California provides free or low-cost services, including abortions, and give them a phone number to call.” The pregnancy centers sued the state, lost, and then appealed that decision to the radical 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled against the pregnancy centers, claiming the state has the right to regulate “professional speech.” The NIFLA plaintiffs appealed the 9^th Circuit Court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the pregnancy centers. Justice Clarence Thomas writing for the majority said,

Some Courts of Appeals have recognized “professional speech” as a separate category of speech that is subject to different rules…. But this Court has never recognized “professional speech” as a separate category of speech subject to different rules. Speech is not unprotected merely because it is uttered by professionals. 

The appellate court decisions to which Justice Thomas referred included two cases (Pickup v. Brown and King v. Governors of New Jersey) in which state laws banning “sexual orientation change efforts” were challenged.

Lawsuit against Illinois

The argument made by Justice Thomas provides a strong legal rationale for challenging the bill Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law in 2015 banning counseling for minors who experience unwanted same sex attraction or gender dysphoria, euphemistically named the “Youth Mental Health Protection Act.” This law was based on the false assumptions that “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” (i.e., subjective, internal feelings about one’s objective, immutable biological sex) are fixed and unchangeable—assumptions that are disputed even by many in the “LGBTQ” community.

Mauck & Baker believes this law violates the speech rights of mental health professionals in Illinois and is considering a lawsuit to restore to mental health providers their full complement of First Amendment protections. And that’s where IFI supporters come in.

We need plaintiffs, and they need financial and prayer support. If you know any mental health providers who have been unable to counsel minors with unwanted same- sex attraction or gender dysphoria due to Illinois’ unconstitutional, anti-autonomy, anti-choice law, please have them contact Mauck & Baker by calling (312) 726-1243 or by via email HERE. Please share with them that plaintiffs will remain anonymous. The promise of anonymity is desirable because of the vindictiveness of the powerful and oppressive “LGBTQ” community.

The plaintiffs also need funding for attorney fees and expert testimony about the harms inflicted by such unconstitutional bans. This is a critically important lawsuit, which we hope will serve as a model for states, cities, and counties with similar unconstitutional laws (i.e., New Jersey, California, Oregon, Vermont, New Mexico, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Nevada, Washington, Hawaii, Delaware, Maryland, New Hampshire, 40 cities, and 2 counties). Click HERE to DONATE to this important cause.

There are parents across the state in desperate need of proper counseling for their children who suffer from sexual confusion, sometimes caused by sexual abuse. This need is growing because of the pervasive promulgation of the false and destructive “LGBTQ” ideology that has eradicated the stigma associated with immoral sexual acts, poisoned the minds of children with perverse images, lured children into all manner of sexual experimentation, and provided a distorted lens though which children are misinterpreting normal human experiences. Compassionate people who care about the suffering of others—especially children—and who care about truth, must help these parents and children get the care they need.

Please help IFI, Mauck & Baker, professionals who want to counsel, and children and teens who want and need compassionate and sound counseling.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Lawsuit-Against-State-of-Illinois-Unconstitutional-Ban-on-Counseling-for-Minors.mp3

Posted by 2nd Vote

A New Hampshire Planet Fitness did right by its members this week by having police arrest a man who said the company’s “Judgement Free Zone” let him do yoga poses naked. The man is being hit with multiple charges, and will go to trial in September.

A “Judgement Free Zone” shouldn’t be controversial at a gym. Working out, building muscle, getting in better shape, losing weight — all judgement-free. Walking around nude outside of the men’s locker room? Definitely illegal and shockingly inappropriate.

However, it appears that Planet Fitness gender ideology convinced this one man that he could expose himself to who knows how many women — and that would be just a-okay with gym staff.

Planet Fitness has created a reputation for itself as a haven for men who take advantage of the company’s policies which allow men to use women’s locker rooms. In 2015, staff cancelled the membership of a woman who reported to local and corporate staff, as well as members, that a man used the female locker room. Her efforts to raise awareness were problematic, according to Planet Fitness:

“The manner in which this member expressed her concerns about the policy exhibited behavior that management at the Midland club deemed inappropriate and disruptive to other members, which is a violation of the membership agreement and as a result her membership was canceled,” Gosselin said in a statement on behalf of Planet Fitness.

“Planet Fitness is committed to creating a non-intimidating, welcoming environment for our members. Our gender identity nondiscrimination policy states that members and guests may use all gym facilities based on their sincere self-reported gender identity.”

Another woman claims she faced similar treatment earlier this year. The conservative legal group Liberty Counsel is representing a woman whom they say reported a man who was intentionally taking up space and time in a female locker room. The man was asked to finish whatever he was doing — according to Liberty Counsel’s complaint, their client says the man pretended to apply makeup “for at least an hour,” intentionally preventing their client — a prior rape victim who asked him to leave the locker room — from changing, using bathroom facilities, etc. in peace and safety. He then reported her to police for alleged harassment, and Planet Fitness cancelled her membership.

Liberty Counsel’s complaint cites several Florida laws, Planet Fitness’ own policies, and basic human decency. However, none of this would be a problem if Planet Fitness’ policies reflected biological reality instead of its own Starbucks-like decision to put left-wing ideology over running a business.

Leftists frequently say it’s important to avoid “triggering” people — unless it’s women in restrooms and locker rooms who want to feel safe. Little girls and sexually abused women apparently don’t count. Well, here at 2ndVote, they do. And we suspect they do for our readers and members. Be sure to let Planet Fitness know where you stand by going elsewhere for your fitness needs.

This article originally posted at 2ndVote.com.

As back-to-school shopping season nears, I’m asking your family to avoid shopping at Target stores… and to warn your friends about the danger Target presents to women and children.

Together we are making an unprecedented financial impact on a corporation whose policy is to allow men to use women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. Target’s decision is unacceptable for families, and their dangerous and misguided policy continues to put women and children in harm’s way.

We must keep the pressure on Target by avoiding their stores during back-to-school shopping. Let’s educate Target to the fact that their bathroom policy earns them a failing grade. 

Target is dependent on a large back-to-school sales season. By spending your money with their competitors, you are sending a strong message to Target that their policy is bad for business.

1.) If you haven’t already, sign the #BoycottTarget pledge. Invite your family and friends to sign the pledge too.

2.) Forward this information to friends and family. Invite them to sign the boycott pledge at www.afa.net/target.

3.) Call Target headquarters at 612-304-6073 and personally let them know you are boycotting their stores.

4.) Visit www.afa.net/target for more tools and information on the Boycott Target pledge.

This article originally posted at AFA.net.

I earnestly hope and pray that every child and adult struggling with gender identity issues will find wholeness, peace, and happiness from the inside out. I earnestly hope and pray that we will live to see the day when every person who feels trapped inside the wrong body will find internal resolution without hormones and radical surgery. At the same time, I wholeheartedly oppose the transgender revolution and predict that, ultimately, it will fail. Here’s why.

1) The transgender revolution is oppressive. As reported on July 16 on Lifesite News, “Failing to refer to a gender-confused student, professor, or staffer by his or her ‘preferred’ pronouns could become a fireable or expulsion-worthy offense at the University of Minnesota, according to proposed guidelines currently under consideration.”

It is not enough to allow a biological male to identify as a female. Hardly. Society must conform, or else. If “he” now identifies as “she” (or “xe” or “ze”) and you fail to use the right pronoun, you will be punished.

This is already the law in New York City. And Canada has taken steps to make this kind of enforced speech the law across the country.

This cannot succeed in the long-term. Society will push back.

2) The transgender revolution is irrational. As a result of trans activism, tampons are now available in some college campus bathrooms. After all, we are told, men menstruate as well!

Yes, a woman who identifies as a man but still gets her monthly period is actually a menstruating man.

And we are supposed to believe this nonsense? We are supposed to shake our heads and say, “How quaint”? I don’t think so.

Recently, however, trans activists have taken things to a new depth of irrationality. Men who identify as women have declared that they get their periods too – just differently! So, other biological realities must now be redefined as well, and a monthly cycle is no longer a physical event.

To quote a “trans girl” directly: “Nobody teaches trans girls about our periods. We just get these weird times where we’re moody and crampy and sad and we don’t know why and just chalk it up to another reason we’re not good enough in life.

“So, just so you all know: Trans. Girls. Get. Periods.”

Enough said. This is beyond irrational.

3) The transgender revolution is unhealthy. Trans advocates tell us that failure to diagnose and treat gender dysphoria will result in depression, suicide, or other forms of self-harm. And I’m sure that, in some cases, post-hormone and post-surgery, many individuals are more satisfied with their quality of life.

Others would point to the high percentage of suicides after surgery, along with the substantial number of people who experience sex-change regret.

But there’s more to be concerned about. A recent headline on a gay website announced, “Hormone therapy linked to dangerous health issues in trans women.” Yes, “Researchers set out to examine heart and circulatory health in transgender people, and found that transgender women face a greater chance of strokes, heart attacks, and blood clots compared to their non-transgender counterparts.”

And what about kids who are put on hormone blockers before puberty, then put on a life-long regimen of hormonal therapy? What will the ill effects be?

4) The transgender revolution is extreme. Scarlett Johansson, one of the biggest female names on the big screen, recently felt the wrath of transgender activists, withdrawing from her starring role as a trans man after protests. How dare a female actor play the role of a trans man when there are plenty of trans men who can play the role.

But isn’t this what actors do? It’s one thing for a white man to paint his face in order to play the role of a black man.

But actors act. They play all kinds of roles that are unrelated to their private lives. They play villains and thieves. They play athletes and politicians. They play liars and saints, good guys and bad guys. They play super heroes and super criminals. They play aliens and vampires. And all that is acceptable – unless they play a trans person.

Enough said.

5) The transgender revolution is dangerous. When you insist that a biological male who identifies as a female has the “right” to use a women’s bathroom, locker room, and dressing room, you are asking for trouble.

A headline from England stated, “Transgender prisoner who was put in a female jail despite not having sex-change surgery ‘sexually assaulted four women inmates before being moved to a male prison’.”

So, a biological male with male organs intact (and obviously, still attracted to women) was put in a women’s prison. Should we be surprised by what happened?

In the States, Planet Fitness sided against a female, former sexual assault victim who protested against the presence of a man (identified here as “Mr. Rice”) in the locker room. As explained in the case being brought by Liberty Counsel, “This is not the only incident with Mr. Rice known to Planet Fitness. Another woman reported that he exposed his naked body to her in the women’s locker room at this location. In another instance, he was involved in an argument with another woman over use of the tanning room. Misogynist, anti-woman harassment should have no place in Planet Fitness locations, and violates Florida law.”

6) The transgender revolution is unnatural. There are fundamental, undeniable differences between men and women, which is why there is an increasing pushbackagainst biological males competing against biological females.

Even among some feminists and lesbians, there is resistance to trans women being accepted as females. And it is for good reason. A biological male will never be a female.

7) The transgender revolution is an attack on children. Trans advocates would tell us that they are helping children, that they are saving them many years of grief and pain and confusion. In reality, for every child they might help (and even at that, in a temporary, non-holistic way) they are confusing many more children — innocent, tender kids.

As the Daily Mail asked, “Are children as young as 11 really capable of making life-changing decisions about their gender?”

We are playing with fire here, and there will likely be many, many casualties before we wake up.

There is much more that could be said, but here’s a final reflection. For decades now, billions of dollars have been invested to discover a cure for cancer. Chemotherapy is not sufficient. Radiation treatment only goes so far. Other “cures” fall short of the mark.

In the same spirit, let us continue to pursue better treatments for those diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Surely there is a better way than hormone blockers for children, double mastectomies and sex-change surgery for older teens, and hormones for life.

Let’s work toward this while firmly resisting the transgender revolution. We owe it to our kids and grandkids.

This article was originally published at Townhall.com.

What is really going on with the “Weinstein women” and the multitude of others who are now coming out and pointing fingers at men who made debauched advances toward them?  Was Harvey Weinstein’s behavior only offensive because the women weren’t interested?  If  the women had been pleased to go along would that mean that his behavior was acceptable?  I have not heard one person even try to suggest such a thing, and I am quite certain I won’t.  No one believes that the only reason Weinstein’s behavior was unacceptable was because these women were a little “prudish.”

The adjectives now attached to the man include “slimy,” “pervert,” “debauched” and, well you get the drift.  In other words, if let’s say a talk show host were to suggest that these women rejected Weinstein’s advances only because they had high moral standards he would be scorned.  If he suggested it was because they were “prudes” he would be out of a job.  It is extraordinarily clear that these women saw Weinstein’s behavior as inherently offensive, and so does everyone else.  Indeed, Hollywood, as an institution, and the Left understand that they have been exposed, pun intended, and have made it abundantly clear that they also KNOW such boorish behavior is objectively offensive.

So, we are led to a very interesting place.  The light finally penetrating the darkness of that community has also exposed something even darker.  If the behavior of Mr. Weinstein et al is inherently offensive, whether the women had welcomed it or not, how can the Left declare that the identical behavior, in the homosexual community, is not only acceptable but to be celebrated?  Just catch their next parade and you will witness the same and much worse, only not in private but before the entire world!

Here is the rub: consider this other pillar of Leftist dogma, that there is no significant difference between the genders.  If certain sexual behavior is right for one gender, it must be right for both, correct?  Is that not foundational Leftist doctrine?  Will the Left now demand that these women “get over it?”  Will they call these women “haters” and “bigots?”  Will they say that it’s only offensive because they are women?  Hmmm.

Are there gender differences after all?  WOW!

The Left is on the horns of an existential dilemma, either their claim that the sexes are the same is wrong, or their claim that common homosexual behavior is normal is wrong, or both!  I vote for both.  But, the Left has never let facts get in their way before, so I have no great expectations of a sudden epiphany now.  For them, on any given day 2+2 may equal 17, 23, 64 or 1, and they see no conflict in affirming this.  We, who know that 2+2 always equals 4?  Well, we’re  just bigots.  The Left, without missing a beat, will, with great hand-wringing, allow these women to call the behavior debauched, but we, calling it debauched, are bigots.

Regardless, for those whose eyes are open it is impossible to miss the fact that the Emperor Left has no clothes.

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

-and, please-

A British doctor has committed the unpardonable sin. He is guilty of medical heresy. He has transgressed the sacred lines of revisionist science. Surely a man like this must be punished.  And punished he shall be.

What exactly was the crime of Dr. David Mackereth, who had worked for the National Health Services for 26 years? He dared to affirm that sex is biologically determined. Yes, that was his terrible transgression.

As the headline in the Daily Mail states, “Christian doctor is SACKED by the Government for refusing to identify patients by their preferred gender because he believes sex is established at birth.”

What in the world was he thinking? How could be so foolish as to believe that a biological male is different than a biological female? How could he not realize that if a man perceives himself to be a woman, then for all medical purposes, “he” is now “she”?

Not only is this doctor a bigot. He is also scientifically ignorant. (I trust you will forgive my sarcasm.)

Ironically, I read this article one day after speaking with a British medical professional. She is responsible for interviewing patients when they come in for treatment, which includes people with life-threatening illnesses.

She told me that some biological males insist on being registered as females, and vice versa. What is she to do?

The doctors are not concerned with how the patient identifies. They’re not interested in knowing if the patient feels at home in his or her body. That is not their concern.

Instead, they must deal with biological realities. Males are different than females, which means that in some cases, males must be treated differently than females. To fail to recognize this is to be unscientific, irrational, and liable to medical malpractice.

So what does this caregiver do? She fills out the form according to biological realities, not internal perceptions. And in doing so, she might just be saving the patient’s life.

The sad thing, though, is that she does this without the patient’s knowledge or approval. Sadder still is the fact that she could be fired for trying to ensure the proper treatment of her patient.

As I have asked in similar contexts many times before, has the whole world gone mad?

What if you truly believed you were blood type A when you were really blood type B? You’ve been in an accident and you’re being rushed to the hospital, needing a transfusion. Thankfully, you’re still conscious, and when the medic asks if you know your own blood type, you say, “Yes, I’m type A.”

As a result, you die on the operating table. You were given the wrong blood. Biology is biology. Perception does not matter.

Israel’s prestigious Weizmann Institute reported last year that, “Researchers Identify 6,500 Genes That Are Expressed Differently in Men and Women.”

Yes, “Men and women differ in obvious and less obvious ways – for example, in the prevalence of certain diseases or reactions to drugs. How are these connected to one’s sex? Weizmann Institute of Science researchers recently uncovered thousands of human genes that are expressed – copied out to make proteins – differently in the two sexes.”

This alone would tell you that, for medical purposes, it’s important to identify men as men and women as women. Yet when a doctor in England determined to do this very thing, he was sacked. This is beyond illogical. This is criminal.

Dr. Mackereth’s new job “would have involved compiling independent reports about the health of those he interviewed who were claiming disability benefits. But matters began to sour when his instructor said reports must only refer to the patient or client by the gender that person selfidentifies [sic] as.”

For him, this was a matter of medical integrity. Of scientific honesty. It was also a matter of his religious beliefs. As he explained, “’I said that I had a problem with this. I believe that gender is defined by biology and genetics and that as a Christian the Bible teaches us that God made humans male or female. I could have kept my mouth shut but it was the right time to raise it.”

And for raising his voice, he was fired. This is political correctness gone totally mad.

As he warned, “I don’t think I should be compelled to use a specific pronoun. I am not setting out to upset anyone. But if upsetting someone can lead to doctors being sacked then, as a society, we have to examine where we are going.”

We are facing similar issues here in the States, while in Canada, Prof. Jordan Peterson has sounded the alarm about the dangers of government compelled speech.

Now, the UK has taken things one step further. And it is a dangerous step indeed. Will there be a pushback from the society, including others within the medical profession? Will Christian leaders raise their voices in protest? Or will the madness continue?

To be candid, at the moment, given the climate of things in the UK, I fear for the worst. Nothing less than a national awakening will turn the tide.

This article originally posted at Townhall.com.

While students and teachers every year hold a Day of Silence in solidarity with the LGBTQ agenda; that agenda is silencing licensed counselors as well as Christians who use social media, and it threatens pastors.

You’ve heard the old saying that starts, “Hell hath no fury”? It pretty well describes today’s transgender activists.

If you want to see how far down the slope civic discourse has slid in the land of free speech and “tolerance,” I give you an article in The Atlantic by Jesse Singhal [sic] entitled, “When Children Say They’re Trans.”

Rather than the unabashed cheerleading you might expect in a secular, progressive magazine, the article is surprisingly balanced. And that’s just the problem for transgender activists.

Said one on Twitter: “This guy’s one-man crusade against trans people has gone on for years. It really doesn’t make sense. Sad that the Atlantic gave him a cover story to spread his pseudoscience and bigotry.”

Said another: “This article can and will cause real, tangible harm to the trans community and trans youth.”

And finally this: “[Bleep] off with this transphobia. And on pride month too. This article and cover are an absolute disgrace. You should be ashamed of yourself.”

Two young couples and their young children attended an Independence Day parade in a conservative Illinois town. For the fourth year in a row, a homosexual “pride” float was a noxious presence in the parade. This year one of the fathers gave it a “thumbs down” as it passed by, which resulted in some other onlookers booing him. One man said to him, “think about the kids.”

Surely this man jested.

Was this pudd’nhead thinking about the children who are being acquired by homosexuals who deliberately deny them either a mother or a father? Was he thinking about the boys who will be lost in the spiritual and temporal darkness of homosexuality and will likely end up suffering from sexually transmitted infections? Was he thinking about the children who had to be exposed to this celebration of perversion? Was he thinking about the children who will never be placed in good homes with Christian parents because homosexuals and their ideological allies are forcing religious adoption agencies to close? Was he thinking about the very young children who are being taught in government schools to affirm disordered sexuality?

Why is it deemed socially acceptable for “progressives” to express their views of homosexuality through the symbolism of a float, but it is deemed socially unacceptable for conservatives to express their views of celebrations of deviant body- and soul-destroying sexuality through the symbolism of a barely noticeable “thumbs down”? And is giving a “thumbs down” to a float a more grievous offense than booing a person?

However did we get to a point in America where an Independence Day parade for families includes a float celebrating that which God abhors and everyone sits there like sheeple? If our heads were screwed on right, if our hearts were properly formed, if our spines had been built strong in 12 ways, there would be protests at city halls across the country. But you can’t have an effective protest if no one comes. And so, through incrementalism ignored, the pro-perversion movement metastasizes.

I wonder what the shepherd-less sheeple will do when trannies march in the July 4^th parades and then hightail it over to the library for drag queen story hour for the little ones, or when more public libraries host tranny-training summer camps for 5-year-olds like the Ames, Iowa library is offering at the end of July.

The Ames Public Library—which has for the past two years “hosted drag shows”—is wasting $600 of taxpayer money to host “Camp Drag” for children ages 5-11 and 11-18. At this four-week camp, 5-year-olds will learn about the culture and history of the sick world of cross-dressing “entertainment” as well as participate in workshops on “makeup, costuming, and performance skills.” And all of this is rationalized by slopping the adjectives “inclusivity,” “safety,” “acceptance,” “fun,” and “fearlessness” on the sordid—formally adult world—of “drag.”

I think we all know what the shepherd-less, spineless, heartless, mindless sheeple will do.

Nothing.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Perversion-Poisons-Childhood-in-America.mp3

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

-and, please-

For those not familiar with my use of the term “transanity,” I’m not demeaning the struggles of those who believe they are trapped in the wrong body. Rather, I use the term to describe the denial of biological verities, the idea that reality is whatever you perceive it to be, and the extremist agenda that flows from this mindset.

So, while I have compassion on those who struggle, I stand against the extremist agenda.

For example, I have compassion on a six-year-old boy who feels tormented by his male organ and sees it as some kind of birth defect. How can we not have compassion on such a child?

At the same time, I have zero sympathy for parents who choose to raise their children as gender neutral until the child determines its sex. And I have less than zero sympathy for those who now refer to their littles ones as “theybies” rather than “babies.” (The “they” is because these parents refer to their infants as “they” rather than “he” or “she.”) This is a classic example of transanity.

The Case of Charlotte, North Carolina

I witnessed a pushback against transanity a few years ago in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the mayor and city council were poised to pass a bill effectively declaring all public bathrooms and locker rooms gender neutral.

We knew where the vote was heading, seeing that liberals outnumbered conservatives 6-3, and had the backing of the mayor. But the bill failed to pass that year when two of the liberal members, both males, insisted that the bill be modified. These men were uncomfortable with the idea of their wives sharing bathrooms with biological men or their daughters sharing locker rooms (or shower stalls) with biological boys.

But of course. This is perfectly rational.

The famously liberal Charlotte Observer came under sharp (and well-deserved) criticism when it opined that girls would just have to overcome the discomfort of seeing male genitalia in their bathrooms and locker rooms. Transanity indeed.

Transanity in Sports Competitions

Now, parents and students are saying enough is enough when it comes to sports competitions. Enough with biological males competing against biological females. It is unfair and it is unmerited, regardless of the feelings of the trans-identified boys.

It’s bad enough when an adult male weightlifter identifies as a woman and crushes the female competition, setting records along the way.

But it’s even worse when it happens to school children.

As the Daily Wire reported on June 7,

You wonder how the other runners may have felt.On Monday, when Connecticut had its State Open track and field championships at Willow Brook Park, one person broke the State Open records for girls in both the 100 and 200-meter runs.That person was a biological boy.Terry Miller of Bulkeley, a transgender, won the events. In the 100 meter dash, the runner-up was Andraya Yearwood of Cromwell, also a transgender.

What was the response to this travesty of athletic fairness?

Asked about the two girls who worked for years who got knocked out of the finals by Miller and Yearwood and the two girls who finished seventh and eighth in the finals who were denied a chance to compete in the New England championships, CIAC executive director Karissa Niehoff said, “We do feel for them. Fully agree it doesn’t feel good. The optic isn’t good. But we really do have to look at the bigger issues that speak to civil rights and the fact this is high school sports.”

It’s About Time Somebody Said Something

Thankfully, some of the parents and students were thinking clearly.

As the Daily Mail reported, “Students and parents demand ‘unfair rule’ change after two transgender teen sprinters come first AND second in the girl’s state championship, months after one competed as a boy.”

One of the female runners said, “I think it’s unfair to the girls who work really hard to do well and qualify for Open and New Englands.”

Of course it’s unfair. How could anyone disagree?

The Daily Wire noted that “coach Gary Moore told Hearst Connecticut Media that Miller should be able to compete, but the situation ‘wasn’t fair to the girls,’ adding, something should be done to ‘level the playing field.’” He then said,

I’ve been stopped by at least five coaches, all of them saying they really liked what I said in the paper. How come other coaches aren’t talking? This is a big issue a lot of coaches have, that we’ve got to do something, but how come you’re not saying anything? I’ve said what I needed to say. I’m getting a little annoyed with the coaches that we haven’t been able to get together and do what’s best for everybody.

Mr. Moore, you should be more than a little annoyed. For boys to compete against girls is not fair and not just and not right. It’s about time somebody said something.

Doing the Right Thing

But the one comment that said it all came from one of the girls, Selina Soule, of Glastonbury High. She agreed that in certain areas, boys and girls should compete against each other. “Of course,” she said, “it should be that way for math and science and chorus.”

But it’s different when it comes to sports. As she said, “Sports are set up for fairness. Biologically male and female are different. The great majority is being sacrificed for the minority.”

Let’s repeat that last sentence one more time, since it’s the very essence of transanity: “The great majority is being sacrificed for the minority.”

This will not continue without a pushback.

May the opposition rise up and do the right thing. And may we continue to study the question of transgender identity, working for a compassionate solution to help people find wholeness from the inside out.

This article originally posted at Stream.org.

Earlier this week I reported how YouTube had come under attack from various LGBT websites and YT channels and social media accounts. The internet giant had committed the cardinal sin of playing conservative Christian ads on LGBT channels. How dare they!

To add insult to injury, YouTube had previously demonetized many of these LGBT videos, just as YouTube demonetized hundreds of my videos. They were deemed not appropriate for all advertisers. Now, YouTube had the gall to advertise a video like “Can You Be Gay and Christian?” on these very same channels. This was too much to bear.

The Twitter world was set ablaze, and a number of YouTubers expressed their disappointment and anger. (See my previous article for details.)

In reality, though, this was not really a very big story.

This very week, I received word that an ad encouraging gay men to get HIV testing appeared before one of my videos. These things happen, and I doubt YouTube can be 100 percent sure that an offending ad will never pop-up.

But it’s not the end of the world. No one was raped or molested or tortured or robbed or killed.

And I seriously doubt that the conservative Christian ads were appearing day and night on these LGBT channels. In fact, for the most part, I keep seeing reference to the same one or two ads appearing on the same one or two LGBT channels. What’s the big deal?

But now, this is a story. A big story. A cause for moral outrage. A cause calling for justice. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

Outrage Overkill

Already this week, the story has been covered by Forbes, Business Insider, the Advocate, and the Independent (UK), along with a host of other sites, including LGBTQ Nation, Pink News, and the Verge. (There are too many to link here.) It’s even made it to the Spanish language Posta site. (Perhaps other languages too?)

YouTubers with large followers have weighed in as well, including Phillip DeFranco, with 6.1 million subscribers (his video had more than 1.2 million views in less than two days; and, again, I could cite many more YouTube examples).

Almost every story included clips (or still shots) from our “Can You Be Gay and Christian?” video. And for the most part, interviewers have focused on FTM transgender Chase Ross, one of the most offended parties involved and one of the first to speak out on YouTube.

As a result, our video has been swarmed by angry members of the LGBT community, with one woman rallying others to take over our video feed. (She posted, “Where are all my gay motherf—kers at? We taking over this b—ch.”)

Prager U remains in a legal battle with Google and YouTube over the truly outrageous treatment it received. In contrast, what happened with our ads running on a few LGBT channels is hardly a story at all, let alone a cause around which people should rally.

The negative exposure has been such that we went from a 10-1 positive response (roughly 670 to 70, which would be a typical ratio for videos watched by our subscribers) to barely 2-1 positive (at present, 2,098 to 929).

Of the nearly 1,100 comments (it would be much higher if we didn’t have to delete lots of posts for incredibly vulgar and offensive language), many are quite ugly. They include choice comments like, “die you old bast—d”. And, “oh and some people can’t help being gay it’s just like what paedophiles like you can’t help you dumb a– doctor can’t do jack sh-t no one will miss you when i kill you.” And, “you look like pedophile colonel sanders.” And, “Breeders are f—ing disgusting.” And, “I seriously hope that every single one of you twisted, evil monsters that liked this video are hit by a bus. This isn’t exaggeration. I want the plague you’re spreading wiped off the face of the planet.” (Remember: There are others too vile to print, even while omitting some of the profanity.)

And every day, the outrage grows greater. How dare YouTube do such a monstrous thing!

And the more it is reported, the more the story grows, until it has become a cause for social justice. Just look at how unfairly LGBT’s are being treated!

It’s On

Again, as I stated earlier in the week (and as the Advocate fairly quoted me), we never intended for our video to be advertised on LGBT channels, and my preference is that it not be advertised there. I had no desire to go into someone’s own “territory” and present to them something they didn’t want to see. Nor did I ask for a veritable flood of profane comments and negative responses. (On the flip side, we produced the video to be viewed, so we’re thrilled with the day and night publicity, even if it’s negative. Let the message get out!)

Yet all the while, Prager U remains in a legal battle with Google and YouTube over the unfair treatment it received, treatment which really was outrageous. In contrast, what happened with our ads running on a few LGBT channels is hardly a story at all, let alone a cause around which people should rally. But rallying they are, and so the story now takes on a life of its own. We’re watching it unfold in front of our eyes.

But let me not end here by merely observing what is happening. Instead, may I ask for five seconds of your time? I’m simply asking you to click on the link to my video, and give it a thumbs up. (If you haven’t watched it yet, it’s only 6 minutes long, so watch and then respond. You can even leave a comment!)

One viewer said, “It’s a gospel version of a Prager U video.” Sweet!

Your five second investment of time will help us push back against the tide of angry LGBT activists and their allies. If the battle is on, then let it be on. And may truth triumph in the end.

This article originally posted at Stream.org.

Written by Alex Chediak

Americans are becoming more permissive on moral issues like smoking pot, same sex relations, divorce, pornography, even polygamy. That’s according to Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs survey, which was conducted May 1-10 and released this week. The trends are the interesting part.

Smoking Pot

In 2018, support for smoking pot was at 65 percent. That’s really high (no pun intended) when you consider that less than half the country was supportive less than a decade ago. It’s not a perfect comparison, because the question was asked a bit differently in previous Gallup surveys (morally acceptable vs. should be made legal). Still, there seems to be a correlation between the legalization of recreational pot and people finding its usage to be morally acceptable.

Is it just young people? No. Even 58 percent of those 55 and older think smoking pot is morally acceptable. It’s higher (77%) for younger adults (18-34). But the split is even greater when you look at religiosity. Among those who attend church every week, only 41 percent find pot usage to be okay. Among those who seldom or never go to church, it’s 75 percent. Political ideology makes a big difference, too. Among conservatives, support is at 47 percent. Among liberals, 81 percent.

Same Sex Relations

Two-thirds of respondents (67%) said that gay or lesbian relationships are morally acceptable. I wish Gallup had broken this question down by religiosity and political ideology, but apparently they didn’t. Support is up from 40 percent in 2001. It was 48 percent in 2008, when Obama first ran for President. And 54 percent in 2012 when Obama was reelected — having “evolved” on this issue, like his constituents.

Sexual Ethics

Support for divorce has risen from 59 percent in 2001 to 76 percent today. Support for having a child outside of marriage has risen from 45 percent in 2002 to 65 percent today.

Pornography is now considered morally acceptable by 43 percent of adults — up from 30 percent in 2011. That’s a quick increase and one that does not bode well, particularly in the wake of the #MeToo movement. I would hope a renewed interest in the dignity of women would include a consideration that porn cheapens and degrades sex, typically through the objectification of women.

Even more bizarre: Polygamy support now stands at 19 percent. That’s up from 7 percent in 2010. In fact, from 2003 to 2010 there was no increase in support for polygamy. But since 2010, it’s shot up big time. Think of five random people in a grocery store. One of them thinks it’s okay for a man or woman to have more than one spouse.

Many would say that support for polygamy is a logical extension of the Supreme Court’s 2014 Obergefell ruling. We’ve also seen it popularized — or rather, glamorized — on television. In practice, though, polygamy is horrific for women and children.

Sex between teenagers is another issue on which support is still in the minority, but rising rapidly. In 2013, almost one in three (32%) thought sex between teenagers was morally acceptable. Just 5 years later it’s up to 42 percent.

A glimmer of hope: Infidelity is still very unpopular — meaning that concepts like “open marriages” and “polyamory” are not gaining traction. Only one in ten (10%) think it’s morally acceptable for a married man and woman to have an affair. That’s really low when you consider that 76 percent say it’s okay to divorce, 69 percent are okay with sex between two unmarried adults, and 19 percent are okay with having a second spouse.

Suicide

Support for doctor-assisted suicide is at 54 percent. That’s high, but a small increase from 49 percent support in 2003. This one has gone up and down over the years. But support for suicide in general has been rising more steadily and rapidly. In 2003, 14 percent thought suicide was morally acceptable. Today, 20 percent say it is.

Don’t think of that as a 6 percent increase. Think of it as an almost 50 percent increase, because 20 percent is almost 50 percent greater than 14 percent. It’s a significant increase, but a necessary inference from a growing materialistic mindset. If all we are is blobs of flesh, come up from the primordial soup by a meaningless, naturalistic process, taking one’s life is just another act of personal autonomy.

Our Response

Christians have a worldview that promotes human flourishing. We recognize that every person is made in the image of God. Therefore every person has dignity and worth. The God who made us knows how our bodies and minds work best. Recreational drug usage is destructive to the body and the mind. Sexual intimacy is meant to be an expression of lifelong commitment between a husband and wife.

Divorce, pornography, polygamy — these things are destructive to individuals, families and society as a whole. As the gospel is clearly taught in churches throughout the country, may God be pleased to awaken more people to a saving relationship with Him and to the goodness of a biblically ordered life.

Dr. Alex Chediak (Ph.D., U.C. Berkeley) is a professor and the author of  Thriving at College (Tyndale House, 2011), a roadmap for how students can best navigate the challenges of their college years. His latest book is Beating the College Debt Trap. Learn more about him at www.alexchediak.com or follow him on Twitter (@chediak).

This article originally posted at Stream.org.