The disordered desires of a gender-confused teenage boy who wishes he were a girl have divided another community. On Monday, the efforts of this boy, who calls himself Lila Perry, to use the girls’ restrooms and locker room resulted in a protest of over 200 students at Hillsboro High School in Hillsboro, Missouri. What’s surprising is that most of the protesting students supported the privacy rights of girls. These students demonstrated more wisdom and courage than most adults in America.

Perry, who cross-dresses to school, is a sad victim of the deceitful manipulations of adult homosexual activists who will resort to any tactic to pervert the culture. Perry, deceived by stupid, exploitative comparisons of homosexuality to race, now compares gender confusion to race. In an interview, Perry compared girls who oppose sharing bathrooms and locker rooms with boys to bigoted whites who once opposed sharing bathrooms with blacks. While it’s easy to excuse the lousy reasoning of this confused and troubled young man, it’s not so easy to excuse the activists who, motivated by selfish desires and political expediency, advanced such stupid reasoning.

For the beguiled among us, here goes:  There exist no ontological differences between whites and blacks, and, therefore, white opposition to sharing locker rooms or restrooms was clearly motivated by racial bigotry. In contrast, there exist objective, substantive, and meaningful differences between males and females, which even homosexuals acknowledge when they claim they are romantically and erotically attracted only to their same sex, and which gender dysphoric people acknowledge when they insist on using only opposite sex restrooms and locker rooms.

Question for “trans-activists” and their ideological accomplices: If gender-dysphoric people should not have to use locker rooms and restrooms with those whose “gender identity” they don’t share, then why should “cisgender” people (i.e., non-dysphoric people, also known as normal people*) be compelled to use restrooms and locker rooms with those whose objective sex they don’t share?

Hillsboro High and every other high school, middle school, and elementary school should preemptively establish policy that makes clear that restrooms and locker rooms correspond to objective, immutable sex—not desires about objective, immutable biological sex.

School boards and administrators claim to respect diversity while scrambling fearfully among the thorny, incoherent, irrational ideological weeds sown by sexuality liars and promoted by the National Education Association; the Southern Poverty Law Center’s educational arm “Teaching Tolerance”; the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network; and “progressive” teachers who view themselves as “agents of change.” Well, in the service of respecting diversity, here are some sound ideas worthy of deep respect and accommodation:

• The belief that biological sex is objective and immutable is inarguable. Even the Left agrees with that statement. Such a belief deserves respect.
• The belief that males and females are inherently different deserves respect.
• The belief that maleness and femaleness are inextricably linked to objective, immutable biological sex deserves respect.
• The belief that objective, immutable biological sex has profound meaning deserves respect.
• The belief that objective, immutable biological sex is good deserves respect.
• The belief that modesty regarding the bodily manifestation of objective, immutable, biological sex is profoundly important deserves respect.
• The belief that if there is misalignment between a healthy body and desires, the error rests in the desires deserves respect.
• The belief that cross-dressing, cross-sex hormone doping, and bodily mutilation undermines truth and human flourishing deserves respect.
• The belief that it is fitting that language-users have a way to identify objective, immutable biological sex deserves respect.
• The belief that pronouns should continue to correspond to objective, immutable biological sex deserves respect.

Another remarkable aspect to this story is that those who are committed to reporting facts—that is to say, news reporters—have caved completely to the doctrinaire and imperious commands of aberrancy activists who demand that even grammar be transmogrified in accordance with deviant desires. Every reporter now uses cross-sex pronouns which correspond not to fact but to subjective desire.

One’s sex cannot change, which is a fact with which even leftists agree. Bruce Jenner is not now, nor ever has been, nor ever will be a woman. He can pretend and with enough money the mask and costume he wears to the cultural masquerade may become increasingly convincing. But to aid and abet his delusional desires, he needs to eliminate all glimmers of truth. He needs everyone to affirm his mock female beauty, his outlandish sartorial choices, and his moniker “Caitlyn.” He needs to use women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and dressing rooms. He needs to mutilate his male body. And he needs our grammar changed.

Every intentional use of the correct pronouns or even clumsy slips of the tongue from disciples of deviance on whose hearts the truth is written mark a painful encounter with the immutable truth that Bruce Jenner is a fearfully and wonderfully-made man. If love were to win, Bruce Jenner and Lila Perry would affirm as good the bodies God gave them and resist the father of lies who confuses.

Since the imperious demands of “LGBTQQIAP” activists—which are  untethered from reality and rationality—are becoming increasingly ubiquitous, schools should also establish policy affirming the historical use of pronouns: Pronouns correspond to objective, immutable biological sex.

We can either continue rationalizing our accommodation of the incremental changes sexual deviants demand, or we can establish a red line over which we will not step. So far, conservatives have been unwilling to establish and hold that line. And so incrementalism in the service of pagan sexuality wins, and true love loses—big time.

*I am using “normal” in the sense of “conforming, adhering to, or constituting a typical type,” and “free from physical or emotional disorder.”

Illinois Family Institute
Faith, Family and Freedom Banquet

Friday, September 18 , 2015
The Stonegate Banquet & Conference Center (Map)
Click HERE for a banquet flyer.

Secure your tickets now – click here or call (708) 781-9328.

Program advertisements & banquet sponsorships available.

For those who have eyes to see, it’s evident that an age of persecution of the church is upon us in America. Warnings have been long issued and for the most part ignored.  Ignorance, complacency, intellectual sloth, cowardice, and lukewarm faith have conspired to create fertile soil within the church and without for the sodomy-as-identity juggernaut to spread its body and soul-destroying poison.

In the days to come, Christians will face challenges as they seek to submit their lives to Christ. Individual Christians will face persecution and so too will Christian institutions.  Those whose faith is weak may come to embrace heresy, and once the authority of Scripture on marriage, “gender,” and sexuality is rejected, it will be rejected on other issues as well. As we’ve already seen, there will be schism within churches and within denominations.

But God is faithful even when those who claim to love Jesus are not. He has given us his Word and preachers and teachers to light our path in the midst of a darkening cultural. Yes, there are pastors who are preaching truth about sexuality and marriage, and despite what the liberal press reports and perhaps believes, some of these pastors are young.

As an encouragement and source of clarity on homosexuality, “gender,” and marriage, IFI will be posting sermons from some of these pastors. Please listen to them. You will be emboldened and equipped to go and share truth with a suffering and confused culture. Those who love God and love their neighbors as themselves must never affirm homosexuality as good. Learn from these wise men how to truly love those who experience same-sex attraction and how to respond to lies in the culture and false teaching in the church.

The first of our posts is a brief sermon from Dr. Rob Rienow, pastor of Gospel Fellowship Church in Wheaton, Illinois:

By Charles Butts

A pro-life leader believes a letter from Planned Parenthood attacking The Center for Medical Progress proves the abortion giant is guilty of violating federal law.

The 11-page letter from Cecile Richards to members of Congress tries to explain away The Center’s secret videos of dealings between Planned Parenthood and organ procurement organizations to harvest aborted baby body parts.

But Judie Brown of the American Life League (ALL) tells OneNewsNow the letter actually admits the abortion giant is breaking the law, as the Planned Parenthood Federation president admits, among other things, that its affiliates have accepted payments ranging from $45 to $60 “per tissue specimen” from abortions.

“I think the letter was, [Richards] thought, written in such a way that it would defend and protect Planned Parenthood from any kind of assault, because the purpose of the letter was, of course, to attack The Center for Medical Progress,” Brown asserts. “But quite the opposite has occurred when you read the letter with a clear head.”

Brown points out that pro-lifers, including U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), have said all along the videos prove criminal wrongdoing.

“The whole purpose of The Center for Medical Progress’ campaign and all these videos has been focused on getting somebody to indict Planned Parenthood for committing crimes against humanity by the brutal way that they have not only taken the lives of preborn babies, but then made a profit on selling their body parts,” the ALL spokesperson notes.

She feels the public needs to continue pressuring Congress to take action.

“I am so proud of David Daleiden and all the people at The Center for Medical Progress, because they’ve given a face to this horrific practice, and they’ve given it a name — it’s murder,” the pro-lifer concludes.

Originally posted at www.onenewsnow.com

By Michael Foust

Every time I begin watching a new movie by filmmakers Alex and Stephen Kendrick, a thought crosses my mind.

Will this be the one that bombs?

My fears are always eased after about 10 minutes, at which point I begin contemplating another question.

Have they topped their most recent film … again?

Such questions are inevitable for the Kendricks, who up until this year had four faith-based movies to their credit: “Flywheel” (2003), “Facing the Giants” (2006), “Fireproof” (2008) and “Courageous” (2011) – each of which was widely considered better than its predecessor.

This week the Kendricks release their fifth movie, “War Room,” which is rated PG and stars Priscilla Shirer, T.C. Stallings and Karen Abercrombie, three people you probably don’t remember ever seeing on the big screen but three you won’t ever forget, for all the right reasons.

So, is “War Room” better than “Courageous,” a film that opened in the Top 5? In my view, yes.

“War Room” tells the story of Tony and Elizabeth Jordan, a middle class married dad and mom heading for a likely divorce when a prayer-filled elderly widow – Miss Clara – enters the picture. Elizabeth is the real estate agent trying to sell Miss Clara’s house, but she soon learns that Miss Clara’s abode is not the typical home. Sure, there is a kitchen, a bathroom and a bedroom, but there’s also a room reserved only for one thing: prayer. Dozens of hand-written notes line the walls, listing everything for which she takes to the Lord.

“This is where I do my fighting,” Miss Clara says. “This is my war room.”

And so Miss Clara begins discipling Elizabeth, trying to help save her marriage and encouraging her to pray for Tony even when he’s a jerk (which he is a lot).

“If you give me one hour a week, I can teach you how to fight the right way with the right weapons,” Miss Clara says.

“War Room” succeeds as a film for the same reason that “Fireproof” and “Courageous” did: It has a great story, something that is lacking in so many Hollywood films today that give us multi-million-dollar special effects with 10 cent plots. It succeeds because, unlike those same Hollywood films, it does more than just entertain us. “War Room” moves us, convicts us, inspires us. I walked out of “Fireproof” wanting to be a better husband, “Courageous” wanting to be a better dad, and “War Room” wanting to be a prayer warrior. It also succeeds because it has just enough funny moments to allow you to catch your breath between the emotional scenes.

The Kendricks, you see, get it. They know how to make a great movie because they know that story is king. They also get it because they’re always working to improve their craft. They’re well aware of the “cheesy” label many moviegoers have placed on Christian films, and they understand that even before their next movie hits theaters, a large segment of the Hollywood population already has written it off.

But it’s becoming harder and harder to disregard them. For example, “Courageous” in 2011 finished first among four opening weekend films, outperforming a Universal film that had a $50 million budget (“Dream House”) and a Fox movie that had a $20 million budget (“What’s Your Number?”). “Courageous” had a budget of $2 million – pennies by Hollywood standards. And 2008’s “Fireproof” was the top independent film of the year, opening in the Top 5 and ending its run with a $33 million gross – far beyond its $500,000 budget.

It’s also becoming harder to disregard them because their movies keep getting better. Stallings’ performance in “War Room” is outstanding, and Shirer – who took acting classes for the film — does incredibly well, too. In fact, they’re involved in two of the most powerful scenes I’ve ever witnessed in a movie – scenes that had me in tears.

All five Kendrick movies are the culmination of a life-long dream Alex Kendrick had to make films to impact the church and culture – which they’ve certainly done. He and his brother recently calculated that they would have to preach to 1,000 people every Sunday for the next 100 years to reach the same amount of people they reached with “Fireproof” back in 2008.

“We have been surprised at what God has done, in the midst of all our inadequacy,” Stephen Kendrick told me recently.

That humility perhaps is one reason God has blessed their ministry so much. I’m not sure they’ll ever make a bad movie. But I do know this is another good one.

Entertainment rating: 5 out of 5 stars. Family friendly rating: 5 out of 5 stars.

“War Room” is rated PG for thematic elements. It contains no sexuality or coarse language. Post-movie discussion topics: the power of prayer; the need for a scheduled daily “prayer time;” what Scripture says about prayer; the shallowness of our prayers.

This article was originally posted at www.christianpost.com

Mauck & Baker is a well-respected Chicago law firm committed to protecting religious liberty through the application of biblical principles. In the service of this commitment, they have issued a statement regarding Republican Governor Bruce Rauner’s deeply troubling abandonment of conservative principles through his enactment of a controversial, anti-autonomy law that prohibits mental health professionals from helping minors who seek assistance in resisting unwanted, unchosen same-sex attraction, rejecting a “gay” identity, and/or accepting their physical embodiment:

Rauner Signs Bill Restricting Sexual Orientation Counseling for Minors

(Chicago, Illinois) Late last Friday, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law the deceptively titled “Youth Mental Health Protection Act,” becoming one of only three states to make it illegal to counsel minors on how to cope with or overcome unwanted same-sex attraction. The Act further provides that “no person or entity may, in the conduct of any trade or comer… represent homosexuality as a mental disease, disorder, or illness.”

The law is written broadly enough to put at risk not only licensed counselors but also pastors and others  who are in “commerce” (compensated for counseling) and refer to homosexuality as an illness or “disorder” (i.e. sin) to any counselee, minor or adult, with the purpose of helping the counselee be free from same-sex attractions. Those who continue to provide such counseling and care will face disciplinary actions by the state and are subject to suit under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.

Attorney John Mauck, partner at the law firm Mauck & Baker responded, “According to Scripture, it is possible for all of us who have sinful tendencies and compulsions to change and become holy in God’s sight. The Apostle Paul indicates this is also true for those involved in homosexual conduct. In 1 Corinthians 6:11, speaking of ‘homosexual offenders’ and others, Paul writes, ‘such were some of you.’”

Licensed counselors, minors who struggle with same-sex attraction, or pastors, are encouraged to contact Mauck & Baker to discuss their civil rights and join with others interested in challenging the law. Also, the full length documentary, “Such Were Some of You” from Pure Passion Media is a valuable resource for testimonies of ex-gays and how Jesus helped them leave the gay lifestyle. To purchase the DVD for $15, call (312) 726-1243 or email info@mauckbaker.com.

By Anugrah Kumer

Several members of the Denver City Council have stalled a lease for a Chick-fil-A restaurant at the city’s international airport due to the fast-food chain’s opposition to same-sex marriage.

If the committee, which is scheduled to meet again on Sept. 1, chooses to reject the lease, any member can introduce it in the full council.

Robin Kniech, the council’s first openly gay member, was quoted as saying she didn’t want a local franchise generating “corporate profits used to fund and fuel discrimination.”

The Atlanta-based company, which is known for its commitment to employing biblical beliefs in its business practices and has a very loyal following in the South, has restaurants in approximately 1,775 locations.

The company’s founder, S. Truett Cathy, died at 93 in September 2014.

The fast-food chain received criticism and calls for boycott after the founder’s son and Chick-fil-A CEO Dan T. Cathy, in a 2012 interview on “The Ken Coleman Show,” said of the company: “We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.”

Though Dan Cathy later pledged the company would not champion any political agendas surrounding marriage or family, the Cathys stood firm on its Christian values.

According to the company’s website, “Truett Cathy, made the decision to close on Sundays in 1946 when he opened his first restaurant in Hapeville, Georgia. He has often shared that his decision was as much practical as spiritual. He believes that all franchised Chick-fil-A Operators and Restaurant employees should have an opportunity to rest, spend time with family and friends, and worship if they choose to do so. That’s why all Chick-fil-A Restaurants are closed on Sundays. It’s part of our recipe for success.”

After the founder Cathy’s death, megachurch Pastor Perry Noble described the-late restaurateur on Twitter as “a great man who built a great business, has a great family and kept your eyes on Jesus, you will be missed!”

Billy Graham Evangelistic Association CEO Franklin Graham posted on Facebook, “I knew Mr. Cathy for many years and had the privilege of riding motorcycles with him. He was a fine Christian gentleman that carried his Christian business principles throughout life. His restaurants were never open on Sunday out of respect for the Lord’s day. He was kind and extremely generous and used the profits from his business to help others. He will be greatly missed.”

Originally Posted on www.thechristianpost.com

“Judge not, lest ye be judged” is among the most frequently-uttered passages in the Bible, particularly by those who wish to shut down any discussion on some objectively immoral behavior.

Even so, this opening verse from Matthew 7:1-3 is also among the Scriptures’ most misrepresented and, consequently, misunderstood passages. As verses 2 and 3 conclude, “For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”

The “judge not” passage is in no way an admonition against casting judgment upon sin. It is, rather, and clearly so, a warning against another sin – the sin of hypocrisy. In the eyes of the moral relativist left, and when applied exclusively to Christians, hypocrisy, incidentally, is the only sin that matters.

Still, this is the one thing – literally the one and only thing – that moral relativists have right.

Hypocrisy is sin.

It is hypocrisy, for instance, to run around cheating on your wife, and to then self-righteously rebuke others for the sin of adultery or some other sexual depravity. But the sin being rebuked remains sin nonetheless, even when he who rebukes it is a hypocrite.

Indeed, we don’t have to judge sin, because that which is sin has already been judged so, irrevocably, by the final Judge Himself, Christ Jesus. To call sin sin is not to judge, but, rather, is to merely state a fact.

Here is a fact: Adultery is sin.

Here is another fact: “[Y]ou may be sure that your sin will find you out” (Numbers 32:23).

And how.

Some 32 million paying customers of the vile adultery website Ashley Madison, which makes a fortune off the backs of families it helps to destroy, have just learned this truth the hard way. The site, which boasts of being the “most successful website for finding an affair and cheating partners,” was hacked by a group calling itself the “Impact Team.” The hackers published the identities of Ashley Madison “customers” online for all to see.

Their sin found them out.

And “the wages of sin is death” (see Romans 6:23). That includes death of marriages and families.

Evidently, one of the site’s adultery-seeking clients was former reality star and pro-family activist Josh Duggar. In a statement released Thursday, Duggar seemed to admit guilt, saying, “I have been the biggest hypocrite ever. While espousing faith and family values, I have secretly over the last several years been viewing pornography on the internet and this became a secret addiction and I became unfaithful to my wife.”

Duggar, who earlier this year was caught up in another scandal when it was revealed that he had apparently fondled five minor girls while a young teen, concluded, “I humbly ask for your forgiveness. Please pray for my precious wife Anna and our family during this time.”

I don’t mean to kick Josh while he’s down. Having been a serial fornicator myself as a young man, before I surrendered my life to Christ, I think I’ll drop my stone in the sand. Still, I can, we all can, rightly judge as sin the adulterous and hypocritical behaviors of both Josh and the millions more busted cold in this heart-wrenching scandal.

We “judge not” when we call sin sin, because God has already passed judgment. As Proverbs 6 rhetorically asks: “Can a man carry fire next to his chest and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk on hot coals and his feet not be scorched? So is he who goes in to his neighbor’s wife; none who touches her will go unpunished … of his house. He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself.”

Our nation watches in shock as these timeless truths become manifest. As the media’s hungry eyes comb over the now revealed identities of Ashley Madison clients, there can be little doubt that other high profile names will emerge in coming days. More importantly, more marriages and families will be torn apart.

Indeed, our hearts must grieve for Josh Duggar, his wife Anna and their four children. We must also mourn the millions of other families devastated by the willful sins of both wayward family members and Ashley Madison employees. They all need our heartfelt prayers and they certainly have mine.

We are sinners all, you see – lost, selfish and in desperate need of a Savior. Absent the saving grace of Christ Jesus, Creator of the heavens and earth, we are each destined to get exactly that which we deserve.

But there is redemption available.

There is redemption available for Josh Duggar.

There is redemption available for these Ashley Madison tools of their father, the devil.

And there is redemption available for the millions of our fellow sinners who, tragically, chose to avail themselves of this sick site’s sinful “service.” While they have become fully exposed, utterly humiliated and, for many, even ruined by a most selfish and lustful ambition; total redemption is yet within reach.

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).

Redemption is available.

Eternal life is available.

But they are available through Christ Jesus alone.

Former Arkansas Governor and current 2016 Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee has some strong encouragement in keeping social conservatives active in the upcoming elections. Governor Huckabee spoke at the Freedom’s Journal Institute’s recent RISE Initiative conference.

Illinois Family Institute
Faith, Family and Freedom Banquet

Friday, September 18 , 2015
The Stonegate Banquet & Conference Center (Map)
Click HERE for a banquet flyer.

Secure your tickets now – click here or call (708) 781-9328.

Program advertisements & banquet sponsorships available.

Former Arkansas Governor and current 2016 Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee has some strong encouragement in keeping social conservatives active in the upcoming elections. Governor Huckabee spoke at the Freedom’s Journal Institute’s recent RISE Initiative conference.

by Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

The campaign to put Cosmopolitan magazine behind blinders in stores is gaining momentum.

The magazine, which targets women ages 18-34 with explicit articles and pictures throughout, often also displays explicit images and teaser titles on the cover. Dawn Hawkins of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation brings families up to date on the campaign to hide the magazine cover.

“We got RiteAid and Delhaize America, which is the owner of Food Lion and Hanniford Stores, to put Cosmopolitan magazine behind blinders,” she says. “Then Walmart got back [with us] and said that its stores will do the same thing.”

Still, she explains, the problem is that in many stores the typically racy magazine cover is at eye level where children can see its inappropriate images. Hawkins says their campaign targets 30 companies that do display Cosmopolitan at eye level.

“Target staff wrote us a letter and said that they’re taking it into consideration, but they haven’t moved to change their policy,” she says. “So any help [that the OneNewsNow audience] could be in moving Target to change their policy would be valuable. [The same goes for] any other retailer that they see [displaying the magazine].”

Information on the 30 firms can be found at the group’s website, plus talking points that people can use to approach management and a flyer they can simply hand to management to draw attention to the problem.

Originally posted here

By Mike Spaniola

For all the concern expressed over the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food, we still don’t see the forest for the trees in one major area: that abortion is part of a dangerous global picture—the selective genetic engineering of human beings.

This radical dysfunction is fueled by politically contrived demands for unfettered access to abortion, more specifically, in having us view the mechanical or chemical termination of a pregnancy as a women’s right and, in this country, a constitutional right.

In 2013, genetic researcher Robert Sparrow of Australia wrote that “… in the not-too-distant future, it will be possible to create viable human gametes from human stem cells.” The abstract for the paper discusses how technology could make “in vitro eugenics” possible. If such conjecture becomes reality, then government administered health care and research functions will have great latitude over the genetic traits of future generations and will gain the ability to wield tremendous political power through social transmutation. (Consider that Planned Parenthood claims ignorance as to the use of the human fetus parts it sells.)

People who think this could never happen probably are unaware of California’s “Sterilization Act of 1909,” which Germany used as the basis for the Third Reich’s own such law in 1933 to deal with “the unfit.” (This part of California’s “trendy” history is not taught today.) And how many people know that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld compulsory sterilization laws in 1927 in Buck v. Bell by an 8-1 margin? Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the majority opinion. (The sole dissenter on the court, Justice Pierce Butler, a devout Catholic, did not write a dissenting opinion.) Holmes even went so far as to state that compulsory sterilization was a way to “build a race.” He also noted that achievers were called upon to improve society and, conversely, the less able should not burden society. More than 30 states would enact sterilization laws and 60,000 U.S. citizens were sterilized by 1950.

America’s descent in to the use of such eugenics-inspired reproductive procedures as sterilization, abortion and selective breeding accelerated following women’s suffrage in 1920, as did the politically instigated use of psychiatry and psychology that included insane asylums, electroshock therapy and lobotomy procedures. These are hallmarks of Marxist influence. Yet most young women today are taught Margaret Sanger is an American icon.

Sanger founded the American Birth Control League (now Planned Parenthood) and supported Marxist-originated eugenics based on Darwin’s theory of evolution. Karl Marx, at his burial in 1883, was praised as the “Darwin of political evolution” by Friedrich Engels, author of the highly influential Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (1888) and co-author with Marx of The Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848). Sanger also was an avid supporter of both Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan in the 1930s; and her husband, Bill, was an outright socialist. (She had numerous affairs, including one with H.G. Wells, the British writer best known for his science fiction novels that became Hollywood films. He’s the guy who encouraged people to become “enlightened Nazis.” Wells also coined the phrase “liberal fascism,” selected by Jonah Goldberg as the title of his best-selling book published in 2007 by Doubleday.)

When Sanger was suggested for inclusion in a proposed federally funded women’s history museum in 2014, some lawmakers objected. Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp stated Sanger’s “racist, pro-eugenics and anti-Catholic platform should not be given tribute of any kind—not a single dime of money, nor any Congressional seal of approval.” Huelskamp said his opposition to honoring Sanger was “about honoring the dignity of life in this country, not promoters of abortion, supporters of Hitler eugenics and other assaults on human rights.”  In today’s political climate, she made the cut nonetheless.

Nearly all these associations lead back to Democrats, worthy of note in this context because Democrats passed the affordable healthcare act—and without the support of a single Republican. Democrats used questionable parliamentary procedures and unethical political maneuvering, including some bizarre Senatorial elections leading up to that session of Congress. Yet no major media outlet produced a single program about eugenics’ dark past, and how it might relate to renewed government control of the U.S. health care system. (Shouldn’t 60 Minutes have provided at least one segment on the subject? After all, the program has a sterling reputation for unparalleled investigative reporting.)

Republicans passed a bill in 1997 that would have greatly limited the use of despicable late-term abortions, but President Bill Clinton vetoed the measure. Those who think he did so because he saw the procedure as a woman’s right, should think again.

Originally posted from www.aim.org

By Peter Sullivan

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) on Wednesday indicated he’ll oppose a bill backed by Republican leadership to defund Planned Parenthood.

Kirk is up for reelection next year and is a top Democratic target.

“In other states tissue donation programs should be investigated but in Illinois there is no similar program,” Kirk said in a statement to The Hill. “I do not plan to cut access to basic health care and contraception for women, the majority of whom have no other resources.”

Kirk is the second Republican senator to indicate opposition to the bill.

“I’m still looking at the bill, but if it is an immediate defunding of Planned Parenthood before we have more facts in, then I would likely oppose the amendment,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) told reporters Wednesday.

Many Senate Republicans, though, have been touting the bill and pressuring Democrats to support it.

Three controversial undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood officials candidly discussing the price of fetal tissue for medical research have sparked outrage.

Backers are pointing out that the money would be redistributed to other organizations, so there would be no overall cut in funding for women’s health services.

“We introduced legislation last night that would ensure taxpayer dollars for women’s health are spent on women’s health, not a scandal-plagued political lobbying giant,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Wednesday.

“It’s a simple choice,” he added. “Senators can either vote to protect women’s health, or they can vote to protect subsidies for a political group mired in scandal.”

This article was originally found on thehill.com

This is a letter written by a local pastor regarding Same Sex Marriage & SCOTUS.

Since there are some who think “silence gives consent” I would like to voice my opposition to the ruling of SCOTUS on the issue of same sex marriage.

First of all let me say God loves homosexuals.  Always has, always will.  God not only loves the homosexual but He loves all people.  That is wonderful good news for all of us.  We cannot reach a point where God does not love us!  However, God always hates sin which is any violation of his commandments.  This is the nature of God:  He always hates sin but He always loves the sinner.

On Friday, June 26th, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States of America handed down their decision and declared that same sex marriage should be legal in all fifty states.  The homosexual activists and many others are happy with the decision.  It seems that dramatic and sweeping changes will be coming in our nation because of this ruling.

Unfortunately, those who are celebrating this landmark decision are not listening to God’s   commandments that we find in His word.  The Scriptures are clear about homosexual behavior.  I will spare you the sermon but if you are interested to read here are some of the Scriptures that speak directly to homosexual behavior: Genesis 2:18-24; Genesis 18:1-19:29; Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:18-25; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; 1 Timothy 1:9-10, etc.

Even more unfortunate is that those who are celebrating same sex marriage are overlooking the reality that children need both a mom and a dad.  Let me quote just a bit from the Illinois Family Institute:  “Marriage exists for the benefit of children.  Social science research and thousands of years of history show that children do best when raised by their married mom and dad.”

Even though SCOTUS is the highest judicial body in the nation they are not the highest authority in the nation.  The almighty God is, always has been and always will be the highest authority in our nation.  Since God created us and created the institution of marriage it is necessary that we who love God also follow Him in all things.  How can SCOTUS define marriage since they did not create it?

God tells me that I should love my neighbor as myself.  I am trying to do that.  I really don’t I have to hate anybody to embrace God’s wonderful design for marriage.  I will continue to love those that disagree with me.  Sadly, some who disagree with me have called me a bigot and told me that I hate homosexuals.  That is simply not true.

In the wake of the Supreme Court decision this in part is the statement from my denominational leaders:   “We believe a biblical view of marriage involves a monogamous, covenantal relationship between a man and a woman….We pray that God will help us be examples of His truth in a world that needs to see God’s love demonstrated in word and deed more than ever.”

I am not interested in arguments or debates.  Those who favor same sex marriage have spoken loud and clear.  I simply write to let it be known that many do not agree with the logic and judgment of the highest court in our nation.  I have said what I have said to encourage those who, like me, are trying to test all things through the lens of Biblical truth.  Thank you.

Pastor Jim Buchanan, Havana Church of the Nazarene.

By Phillip Holmes

Less than a week ago, a video was released that provided damning evidence that Planned Parenthood was selling the body parts of infant corpses. Christians immediately took to social media calling Planned Parenthood actions “inhumane” and “barbaric.” Many demanded that the government defund the organization and others insisted that they be shut down.

Christians should continue to leverage their influence online to expose the atrocities taking place inside an organization that makes profit by murdering innocents and traffics their body parts under the guise of women’s rights. But that’s not all we should do.

It’s one thing to protest external problems like Planned Parenthood for what it truly is — a baby-murdering machine. It’s another to look internally and ask how we can protest with our lives in faithful and tangible ways. Protesting online is easy, but protesting with our lives will demand more of us.

Whether you’re single or married, young or old, we can all do something for the sake of the defenseless unborn and glorious truth of what we believe. What can we do?

       1. Love Children

More and more, America is becoming a country that loves children less and less. We see them as a ball-and-chain that slows us down in our pursuit of the American dream. Even in the church, Christian couples get strange looks when they say they want to have a lot of kids. Some will even discourage them. “That will change after you’ve had a kid or two.” This response shouldn’t be.

The Bible is overwhelmingly positive in its language about children. “Children are a heritage from the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). When teaching his disciples, Jesus uses an illustration of the joy of a mother delivering her baby (John 16:21). Our words and actions should reflect the heart and values of Scripture. The Bible is the heart and values of God, after all.

All Christians should be known as people who love children because we have been graciously loved by a Father. Our love for and joy in children should be evident and contagious, winsomely put on display for the whole world to witness and, Lord willing, want for themselves.

       2. Have More Children

My pastor recently said, “The way to outlast an ideology that’s for naturalism, same-sex marriage, and abortion is to pretty much be anything but that, and have kids.” I couldn’t agree more with this statement. Because we love children and believe they are a blessing from God, able, married couples should have more children. Our desire to build families full of expensive, inconvenient, and precious little boys and girls should powerfully set us apart from the rest of the world.

Now, one of the biggest obstacles to having more children is the financial responsibility. It’s a legitimate concern. Every couple should stay close to the Scriptures and pray about priorities. I think we’re sometimes guilty, though, of being poor stewards of our resources and running away from the sacrifices involved in parenting.

Children are a worthy and eternal investment. “Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them!” (Psalm 127:5). This word “blessed” also means happy. I hope to be cared for by my children in old age and surrounded by a lot of grandchildren. They are a great blessing and should make us very happy. You’d be hard-pressed to find a grandparent with a lot of children regretting their decision. The Bible promises that children can be a gift that keeps on giving — so have them. A large family reflects God’s family to an intentionally barren society.

       3. Adopt Children

Last winter, my wife and I lost our first child when she miscarried at nine weeks. This experience was painful for both of us, and many couples experience it. I’m aware that there are many couples who want children (or more children), but are unable to have them. I would encourage these couples (and those that can have children) to consider adoption.

Adoption is a beautiful way to put our theology to action. The Scriptures remind us of our adoption through Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:5). Now we are viewed as blood-bought, secure, beloved sons and daughters of God our Father. We’re no longer slaves, but sons and heirs through God (Galatians 4:4–7).

Many Christian couples have never considered adoption. I would encourage you to initiate these conversations in your home and with your church family. Pray consistently, and ask if God might have you adopt. Adoption screams to our society that children are wanted and loved.

       4. Instruct Children

Scripture commands us to “train up a child in the way he should go” and to “bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Proverbs 22:6; Ephesians 6:4). We know that there is nothing we can do to guarantee the salvation of our child. Salvation belongs to the Lord. But this truth shouldn’t make us passive in our instruction, nor in the decisions we make about their upbringing and education. The Bible condemns this behavior and warns us that we should never neglect the discipline of our children (Proverbs 23:13–14; 13:24).

As society becomes increasingly godless, parents should be ready to make hard choices about education. Education is never religiously neutral. It’s impossible. Some worldview is at the foundation of every educational institution, program, or curriculum. Few will argue that government schools today even remotely reflect a Christian worldview. Among other ideas contrary to the Bible, government schools will likely teach your children that so-called “same-sex marriage” is legitimate, natural, and courageous, or that a baby boy or girl in the womb is not yet human.

Well-meaning Christians are hesitant to pull out of public schools because they see such community as an opportunity for ministry, a rare chance to be “in the world, but not of it.” This perspective assumes that there are not better options to give our children a full Christian education while at the same time still loving our neighbors.

We need Christians to train their children and love their neighbors well. I think churches should consider building affordable schools for their community. Educating our families and communities guards the minds of our little ones, shows mercy to our neighbors, and shapes future generations of decision-makers in the family and in society. Building Christian schools provides opportunities to more holistically disciple a pregnant teenager considering an abortion.

Education will inevitably lead to change, for good or for bad. We should be thinking, praying, planning, and investing in how to teach children to think and feel and act for the glory of God.

       5. Give for Children

Much of what I’ve mentioned so far requires resources — gross amounts of time and money. You may be in a stage or place in life in which most of the above is no longer an option, but you love children and want to help. Consider giving. Give your time. Give your money. Give what you can to families, organizations, and church funds seeking to love, serve, and teach children.

This investment could include babysitting for a couple, or helping a larger family a few times a week by changing diapers and cleaning. You could give to an organization that provides resources for families that have special needs children. You could support agencies that promote or facilitate adoptions, or come alongside families walking through the challenges of adoption. You could even talk to your church leader about building a team of teachers and donors to start an affordable Christian school that could serve the church and the community. Or if your community already has such a school, you could apply for a job, volunteer, or write them a check.

When the world sees us love little ones in these ways, they will be forcefully and beautifully confronted with the love of God himself. These are the fruits — the offspring — of his adopting love for sinners, welcoming them and all their sin into his family forever. Few things tell the story of the gospel more clearly and more tangibly than our passionate, persistent love for the young and defenseless, those our nation so cavalierly and shockingly discard.

Continue to protest online, but make sure your lifestyle reflects your words.

Original article can be found on desiringgod.com

Written by Dr. Frank Newport

The two major decisions recently handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court have very direct relationships to public opinion. One of the decisions fits well with majority public opinion. The other, in a broad sense, does not. The first corresponds to public opinion that has shifted significantly over the past several years, while the second relates to public opinion that has been more fixed. One of these is an issue that has very much been tethered to or anchored by Americans’ underlying religious beliefs; the other is a purely secular issue unrelated to the usual concerns based on religion. But it is the religiously tethered attitude that has seen the biggest change and that ends up more in line with the U.S. Supreme Court decision, while the secular attitude has remained unchanged and is more out of sync with the court’s ruling.

The first of these two major SCOTUS decisions, of course, is the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling that in essence legalized same-sex marriage across the country. The second — albeit basically a ruling on a technicality — is the King v. Burwell decision that validated the continuation of the Affordable Care Act.

Obergefell falls in line with majority public opinion in the U.S. Americans’ attitudes toward legalizing same-sex marriage have shifted dramatically in recent years, as has been well-documented, with six in 10 in our latest Gallup reading (before the decision) in favor.

This dramatic change in attitudes has occurred despite the fact that the issue of same-sex marriage is one of a cluster of family and reproduction issues that traditionally are strongly connected to religious doctrine, and highly correlated with an individual’s religiosity. Given that religious beliefs are tethered to fundamental beliefs in a Supreme Being and in overall worldviews, one would thus hypothesize that religiously connected attitudes have a very fundamental anchor that would be resistant to change.

But that hasn’t been the case. In fact, attitudes concerning a list of moral behaviors and values traditionally linked to religious doctrines — including same-sex marriage — have shifted quite substantially in recent years, all toward acceptance of what may previously have been more negatively sanctioned behaviors. There are still marked religious differences in tolerance for these types of behaviors, but the shifts have occurred among segments that are both highly religious and not so religious. In short, attitudes connected to the type of family and reproduction issues most highly related to most religions’ normative structures have been the most labile.

We’ve seen relatively little change in terms of attitudes toward the Affordable Care Act, albeit over its fairly short existence and the brief period in which we have measured it. Less than half of Americans said that they approved of the Affordable Care Act in our latest measure, before the SCOTUS decision (we are updating this measure now). And there has been no rapid or significant change in those attitudes in recent years as the provisions of the healthcare law have become operational.

These attitudes about Obamacare are thus the ones that appear to be connected to an underlying anchor or foundation, certainly more so than is the case with same-sex marriage. (While attitudes about the Affordable Care Act are correlated with religiosity, I think that’s more of an artifact of the relationship between religion and politics than it is a representation of religiously driven attitudes.)

If it’s not religion, what is that anchor? One answer to that question is Americans’ fundamental attitudes toward government. It’s quite likely that the healthcare law has become symbolic of the role of government in people’s lives, and that in turn appears to be a very strong and apparently stable base issue in Americans’ minds.

Check out this trend on a core Gallup question asking Americans about their views of the role of government in Americans’ lives:

This trend graph does not show the same type of progressive change seen in moral attitudes since the mid-1990s. The one strong shift in the period immediately after the 9/11 terrorist attacks quickly dissipated, as attitudes fell back into the accustomed pattern shortly thereafter. If Obamacare is bound up with these fundamental underlying attitudes that are relatively stable and fixed, even though secular in nature, that could help explain why views toward Obamacare are not moving a lot. Government and its role in society, in other words, may be the type of bedrock or fundamental underlying attitude we traditionally associate with religion, while moral issues appear much more likely to be built on “shifting sand.”

There has been a good deal of discussion as to how the presidential candidates — particularly Republican candidates — will handle a changing environment in which their positions on moral issues and values are less mainstream than they were even just a few years ago. Many of the candidates will no doubt back off from a heavy focus on these issues, taking account of public opinion, unless they assume that the quickness with which attitudes changed in one direction means they could change back in the other just as fast — an unlikely possibility.

But a campaign focus on the Affordable Care Act is another matter. Unlike same-sex marriage, the healthcare law does not enjoy majority public opinion (unless that changes in new, post-decision measures). And the lack of a major shift in attitudes toward Obamacare or toward the underlying issue of the role of government in Americans’ lives suggests that these attitudes are strongly held.

Some commentators have assumed that expansion of the role of government is the simple and logical next step in the evolution of American society. Others still view government expansion as a strong evil. But if conservatives have the equivalent of a religious underpinning to their opposition to big government — and if liberals have just as strong an underpinning to their support for big government — then the debate has the potential to become a powerfully important fulcrum on which the election could turn.

If candidates on the left are going to focus on their conviction that the role of government needs to be expanded — say, in terms of intervening in the economic system to reduce inequality or create jobs by increased focus on infrastructure — they are going to have to try to understand why this provokes such a strong reaction from those who are more in the center or on the right. Similarly, if Republican candidates are going to focus on a call for reducing the role of government in Americans’ lives, they are going to have to try to understand why this is so strongly unacceptable to those more in the center or on the left.

I’ve pointed out before how these attitudes about government are two-pronged, involving both philosophic and practical concerns. Candidates are going to have to deal with both. The role of government — along with the usual suspects of the economy and international relations — could be the major playing field on which the coming election is played out. Moral issues and values may be less so.

Frank Newport, Ph.D., is Gallup’s Editor-in-Chief. He is the author of Polling Matters: Why Leaders Must Listen to the Wisdom of the People and God Is Alive and Well.

This article was originally posted at the Gallup.com website.