File this under, “Oh, for crying out loud.”

There was a time when planning a family was a relatively straightforward process. A young wife might ask her new hubby, “How many children should we have?” To which he might reply, “Let’s just try for one of each.”

A few years later – and with a bit of luck – little Timmy and Tammy are at each other’s throats, contesting rightful possession of the Fuzzy Wuzzy Brown Crayon.

And all is well in the time-space continuum.

Not so in today’s “progressive” land of make believe. Political correctness now requires that objective reality sit the bench while subjective silliness takes the field. For today’s uber-”tolerant” mom and dad – ahem – “mom and mom” or “dad and dad,” having a child of each “sex” (or acquiring one as biological limitations may dictate) apparently means a “family” that looks more like the bar scene from “Star Wars” than “The Donna Reed Show.”

Yep, it’s a brave new world.

The Washington Examiner reports that “The 60,000-strong Thomson Reuters media empire, in an effort to determine its diversity success, is asking its staff of reporters, researchers, marketers and others to pick their sex from nine choices, including ‘genderqueer,’ a category for identities other than man or woman.”

“Identities other than man or woman?” You mean like turnip? And only nine choices? Why not 10, or 37, or 3,654?

“According to the company’s annual employee survey, choosing a sexual identity doesn’t have to be based on a worker’s actual sex, but instead ‘a person’s innate, deeply felt psychological identification,’” notes the Examiner.

The survey “asks employees to choose from male, female, transgender, genderqueer/androgynous, intersex, transsexual, FTM (female-to-male), MTF (male-to-female), and prefer not to say.”

Reuters proffered the questionnaire to achieve a 100 percent rating in the “Corporate Equality Index,” a political extortion scheme created by the so-called “Human Rights Campaign” – a Washington-based sexual extremist outfit launched in 1980 for the sole purpose of pushing the radical “LGBT” political agenda.

OK, first, the smaller question. How can anyone now be expected – as if anyone ever did – to take Reuters seriously? How can we trust this media giant to objectively report the news without bias when, as a matter of course, its “diversity” policy is rooted in hopeless absurdity?

How can anyone ever again depend on Reuters to accurately and impartially report on matters of human sex and sexuality when it can’t even pass a second-grade biology exam and, more importantly, has clearly chosen sides in an ongoing and highly contentious sociopolitical debate?

But there remains a larger question still. If a person’s “actual sex” needn’t be rooted in biological reality, then why should anything be rooted in biological reality? If we’re playing relativist Texas Hold’em, let’s go all in. As long as we’re tinkering with scientific and moral truth, why stop at a person’s biologically determined and fixed sex? Why stop at “gender identity”?

I’ll wager that next year Reuters scores a 150 percent on HRC’s “equality index” if it offers a category for “species identity.” If “a person’s innate, deeply felt psychological identification” is all that matters, then who is Reuters – who are any of us – to discriminate if an employee wants to get in touch with his inner horse and run the Kentucky Derby?

For that matter, what about “racial identity?” Again, why the intolerant and arbitrary “gender-identity” narrow-mindedness? Roseanne Barr is a short, obnoxious white woman today, but who’s to say that tomorrow she won’t develop an “innate, deeply felt psychological identification” as a seven-foot black man? Watch out, NBA. (I think we can stipulate that, as regards Ms. Barr, “obnoxious” remains a fixed variable under any conceivable scenario).

Merriam Webster’s defines “reductio ad absurdum” as “disproof of a proposition by showing an absurdity to which it leads when carried to its logical conclusion.”

You’ve just experienced reductio ad absurdum. “Species identity,” “racial identity” and, to no lesser extent, “gender identity” each represent comically absurd contrivances.

But only one of these comically absurd contrivances is actually taken seriously by an alarming number of at least superficially intelligent people.

Really, today’s “LGBT” activists, along with their sycophantic allies (like the frightened little toadies at Reuters) signify the embodiment of reductio ad absurdum. When one objectively contemplates the logical conclusion of each their “progressive” propositions, one is left contemplating the absurd.

It’s a brave new world, indeed. And “progressivism” sets the bar absurdly low.

Three Important Upcoming Events:

–> October 10th – A & M Partnership’s Banquet with Dr. Erwin Lutzer in Palatine
(Click HERE for more info)

–> October 12th — Iron Sharpens Iron Conference for Women in Moline
(Click HERE for more info) 

–> October 23rd – IFI’s Defend Marriage Lobby Day in Springfield 
(Click HERE for more info)

The Illinois General Assembly overwhelmingly agreed this spring that it should be illegal for any minor 17 years or younger to use a tanning bed in Illinois, even if their parents approve. Why? Tanning beds can overexpose sensitive skin to harmful ultraviolent rays and increase the likelihood of melanoma—a deadly form of cancer.

The state isn’t shy about protecting minors from other potentially-harmful activities. Minors under the age of 18 are banned from purchasing tobacco products. They need parental permission to be tattooed or pierced. And in Illinois, no one under the age of 21 can legally purchase alcoholic beverages.

But when it comes to sexual health, so-called “reproduction rights” advocates have successfully organized and pressured Illinois lawmakers to uphold children’s privacy over parental rights and responsibilities. Indeed, Illinois law allows minors age 12 and above to seek counseling and medical treatment without parental notice or permission, if the 12 year old thinks he or she may have been exposed to a sexually-transmitted disease. And that so-called “treatment” now allows medical personnel to give HPV and Hepatitis B shots, without parents knowing.

The same activists vehemently disagree with Illinois’ newly-implemented parental notification law. Within days of the Illinois State Supreme Court forcing into effect an 18-year-old state law requiring medical personnel to notify parents of underage girls of their abortion intentions 48 hours prior, pro-abortion forces set into motion a counter offensive to undermine parents and repeal the law.

The StopPNA.org campaign, organized by the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health and the ACLU, is urging calls to state lawmakers and is meeting to discuss moving forward legislation that would repeal Illinois’ parental notification law.

The group argues that parental involvement in their minor daughters’ reproductive health care is intrusive and obstructive. Contemplate this anti-parent statement on their website:

“Due to the stigma and shame of abortion, along with troubling parental/home/abusive circumstances suffered by at least a third of youth, it is imperative that young people have unfettered access to abortion. We need to ensure that young people access safe procedures performed by medical providers.”

Up until August 15, Illinois was the only state in the Midwest not requiring parental notification (However, the U.S. Supreme Court required states to provide a judicial bypass to all underage girls). Among the shrinking number of states without parental notification, Montana is now the nearest to the west, and New York the nearest to the east. 

At this point, 37 state legislatures have recognized that notifying parents before a minor accesses abortion is simply common sense. Who, besides the child, deals more with the consequences of medical treatment gone awry? Who knows more about a 12-year-old child’s medical history? And who is more entitled to know if a crime has been committed against their underage daughters?

The National Abortion Federation reports that 70 percent of girls 13 years old and younger who have had sex say that sex was forced on them. Sexual acts with children 17 and under are felonies in Illinois, whether the perpetrators are adults or minors.

What sexually-assaulted 12-year-old facing pregnancy and considering abortion would fully comprehend the potential legal and physical complications without a trusted family member or concerned adult counseling them? Abortion clinics are not known for being protective of their clients’ welfare. On several occasions, citizen journalists have documented Planned Parenthood staff counseling minors how to avoid reporting sexual assaults.

In contrast, imagine what would happen if a tanning bed operator offered backroom tans to kids.

Abortions on minors are not rare. In 2009, 251 girls under the age of 14 and 2,734 15- to 17- year olds underwent surgical abortions in Illinois. The numbers remained fairly consistent in 2010 and dropped slightly to 2544 underage abortions in 2011. Estimates are that 67,928 documented underage abortions have occurred in Illinois since 1995, when the law was signed but challenged and paused by pro-abortion activists.

It remains to be seen whether the law will prevent abortions, but abortion clinic owners are likely to have growing concerns about diminishing profits now that they must contact a parent of an underage girl 48 hours before she is scheduled to have an abortion

In the meantime, rest assured parents, whether you approve or not, your kids will not be getting artificial tans in Illinois, because they are outright banned.

Three Important Upcoming Events:

–> October 10th — A & M Partnership’s Banquet with Dr. Erwin Lutzer in Palatine
(Click HERE for more info)

–> October 12th — Iron Sharpens Iron Conference for Women in Moline
(Click HERE for more info) 

–> October 23rd — IFI’s Defend Marriage Lobby Day in Springfield
(Click HERE for more info)

Public Discourse has just published a remarkable piece of eloquent, incisive, and bold truth-telling by the remarkable Dr. Anthony Esolen, Providence College English professor and Touchstone Magazine senior editor.

Esolen makes the case that society has largely appropriated a revolutionary idea about sexuality that undermines any rational argument against pedophilia. Yes, we retain some vestigial sentiments against pedophilia but have deracinated any reasons to oppose it. We have eradicated in Esolen’s words “the moral structure” that renders opposition to pedophilia rational. According to Esolen, the moral structure that supplants the historical moral structure and makes possible pedophilia is this: “the welfare of children is subordinate to the sexual gratification of adults.”

All that motivates or animates society’s current opposition to pedophilia is some sort of antiquated and ultimately useless sentiment left over from a time when people understood true moral reasoning and held true moral reasons. But sentiment cannot long stand.

Esolen argues that the Left proclaims consent (or lack thereof) as the red line that separates moral sexual acts from immoral acts, and since children cannot consent, pedophiliac acts are ipso facto immoral (The Left fails to explain why lack of consent is the great moral evil and fails to explain the  origin of that transcendent, eternal, objective moral absolute regarding consent).

Esolen exposes the flimsiness of the consent argument in a brief discussion of the Jerry Sandusky and Raymond Lahey homosexual pedophile scandals:

It may be argued that the boys were too young to give genuine consent. They were dupes….But the horror, the disgust, is out of all proportion to a memory of being duped. If somebody tricks a boy into giving him fifty dollars for a lump of fool’s gold, the boy now grown will look back on the incident with irritation and contempt for the trickster, but not with any horror. The shame of Sandusky’s victims arose not from the trickery, but from the act itself into which they were tricked.

Besides, the fact that a child cannot give genuine consent is not in itself morally decisive. We compel children to do plenty of things for their own good—or for what we say is good. A public school teacher in Toronto has written a set of lessons requiring young children to imagine wearing clothes appropriate for the opposite sex. He’s been congratulated, not by the wary parents, but by a school board that insists that teachers are “co-parents.” What he’s doing, of course, is subjecting naïve children to an exercise that promotes his own sexual aims.

Esolen expands the argument beyond the relatively small population of pedophiles to our “progressive” pedants. If harm to children is closely and honestly examined, the creepiness of, for example, Planned Parenthood dogmatists, whom Esolen describes as “planned predators,” can be seen as analogous to the creepiness of Jerry Sandusky. Esolen warns that all child predators share in common a method of grooming children that involves undermining the parent-child relationship:

[A]long come the Planned Predators, with a cadre of—what shall we call them? What would we call them if they had no “credentials,” no initials after their names? What would we call the old man down the street, wheezing and giggling, who likes to show little kids pictures of people masturbating? I believe the technical term is “creep.” So then, along comes Planned Predators with their creeps, lubriciously introducing children to the delights of meaningless sex, with cartoons of talking penises and vaginas, of a girl bending over with a mirror to inspect her anus, or a boy in his bedroom abusing himself.

Is that unfair? Some people want to have their sexual flings, but are discreet enough to try to keep children away from them; not that they ever succeed entirely, but at least their hypocrisy pays vice’s tribute to virtue. But Planned Predators do not believe in that tribute. There are pedophiles of the body, and pedophiles of the soul. Planned Predators happily enlist the latter among their troops.

One wonders how Sandusky managed to do what he did for so long, without getting caught by parents. Well, the abuser separates the child from the parents. “This is our secret,” says the creep. “Don’t tell your parents,” sibilates the lizard. “They won’t understand.” “Your parents haven’t treated you right,” hisses the snake. “Your parents are old-fashioned. Your parents are selfish. Your parents have their own agenda. You don’t have to submit to your parents. You can be your own person,” wheedles the weasel, meaning: Submit to me.

That is the same strategy that the credentialed spiritual pederasts use. Parents are the enemy. The parents are kept in the dark. The parents are too benighted to know what is best. The parents—even such sporadically responsible parents as our generation has produced—wouldn’t know about how happy it is to be sexually free.

One begins to wonder whether it is not the harm done to the child that counts, in our world of advertising-as-truth, but the style with which it is done, or the class to which the child-destroyer belongs. It is hard for those who do not think about the essences of things to judge actions and not actors.

The sibilating lizards and hissing snakes are now accessing our children in public schools, and we pay their salaries. What chumps we are.

But Esolen is not letting anyone off the hook. He forces us to expand further the cultural ramifications of the sexual revolution that holds as sacred the commandment to “fulfill thy desires”:

If we altered the question, and asked not how many people have done sexually abusive things with children, but how many people have done sexual things that redounded to the suffering of children, then we might confess that the only thing that separates millions of people from Jerry Sandusky is inclination. Everything that was once considered a sexual evil and that is now winked at or cheered, everything without exception, has served to hurt children, and badly.

We might point here to divorce. Unless it is necessary to remove oneself and one’s children from physical danger and moral corruption, the old wisdom regarding divorce should hold, if children themselves have anything to say about it. Parents will say, “My children can never be happy unless I am happy,” but they should not lay that narcissistic unction to their souls. Children need parents who love them, not parents who are happy; they are too young to be asked to lay down their lives for someone else. It is not the job of the child to suffer for the parent, but the job of the parent to endure, to make the best of a poor situation, to swallow his pride, to bend her knees, for the sake of the child.

Esolen urges us to see that the pretentious trappings of urbanity that society cloaks itself in to conceal its evil are as insubstantial as the Emperor’s new clothes:

[T]he welfare case who, at her wits’ end, takes a whip to the boy who can throw her to the floor… is led off to family court, she with the tobacco stains on her fingers and the voice ground down into tenor. But the sophisticated “single mother,” with her degree in Women’s Studies from Wellesley, living in the high-rent belt around Boston, dresses her daughter up as a neuter, and turns a cold shoulder when the child begs to be treated like an ordinary girl. No time in jail for her; rather a date for the savante nouvelle to lecture at the local library, one week after her friend lectures on the cruelty of treating dogs as if they were not dogs, and one week before her other friend lectures on gluten-free wheat and yolkless eggs.

Esolen teaches that it’s not substance that differentiates the affluent feminist from the impoverished, welfare mother: It’s style.

If we cared less about style and more about substance, the bodies and souls of children would flourish.

Everyone should read Dr. Esolen’s article, and then reread it slowly.

Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.

“I do not want to drive across a bridge designed by an engineer who believed the numbers in structural stress models are relative truths.” – R.C. Sproul

I was delighted to speak on Sunday at Faith Christian Center in Arlington, Texas. I joined that community of believers in celebrating the 25th anniversary of the church’s affiliated school, St. Paul’s Preparatory Academy. The topic of my discussion was “How to Raise Christian Children in Today’s Culture.”

As I was preparing my remarks it occurred to me that raising children to both love and faithfully serve the Lord and Creator of the universe, Jesus Christ, is not unlike a primary goal of the late Dr. Jerry Falwell, founder of Liberty University.

In 1971, Dr. Falwell launched LU – now the world’s largest Christian university – and quickly got about the business of “training champions for Christ.”

I submit that “raising Christian children in today’s culture” and “training champions for Christ” are one in the same, and that both fruitful endeavors stem from the same rich soil.

Truth.

But what is today’s culture exactly? What is a champion for Christ? And, perhaps most importantly, what – or Who – is truth?

Merriam Webster’s defines “champion” as “someone who fights or speaks publicly in support of a person, belief, cause, etc.” It is not merely a passing suggestion that Christian parents and educators train champions for Christ. It’s a command given us by God Himself: “Start children off on the way they should go (train them), and even when they are old they will not turn from it” (Proverbs 22:6).

We faithful are additionally tasked with an unambiguous calling on the way we (and our children) should go: “[Jesus] said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned’” (Mark 16:15).

The Apostle Paul admonishes in Romans 1:16 that we should not be “ashamed of the gospel,” but, rather, should “Do [our]  best to present [ourselves] to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

In addition to leading by example, this means steeping Christian children and young people in the “word of truth” – the Holy Scriptures – and equipping them, in love, to champion (to “fight or speak publicly in support of”) the infallible, unchangeable and absolute truths found therein.

This is so even when the absolute truths of Scripture have become unpopular in a world that prefers the absolute lie of relativism.

Indeed, though some may wander the prodigal’s path for a time, and still others may remain lost, we can only then – having obeyed the command to train our children in the way they should go – release, hope, pray and have faith that the Holy Spirit will be that eternal light to illuminate temporal life’s perilous path – that Christ will be a lamp unto the feet of our beloved.

Jesus commands His followers to be His hands and feet – to be salt and light in a rotting world that loves darkness (Matthew 5:13-16).

True, salt preserves, but in an open wound, it also burns. Today’s relativist culture is an open wound.

True, light’s bright glare can be illuminating to those eager to see. But it is also blinding to those whose eyes have become adjusted to darkness.

When the light of Christ is shined, it sends lovers of evil scurrying for the shadows.

For this reason, Christ warned, “You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved” (Matthew 10:22).

In a culture that slaughters the unborn, mocks purity, celebrates sexual sin and makes a joke out of the institution of marriage by imagining sin-based counterfeits, it remains a daunting task for Christian parents to raise children with both the courage and conviction to stand unashamed for God’s truth. From an earthly standpoint, it seems counterintuitive to both welcome and find joy in being hated by the world.

Even more, for young people who might prefer popularity over principle – at least for now – the prospect of being “hated by everyone” lacks a certain level of appeal.

That’s OK. Stand strong, parents. Persevere.

Because, ultimately, that’s the price of admission.

It boils down to instilling in our children a biblically orthodox Christian worldview – that is to say, absolute truth. Anything else is nothing at all. Anything else is relativism, which holds that there is no absolute truth and imagines, absolutely, that, as theological giant Francis Schaeffer often described, “Man is the measure of all things.”

As history has proven, when man is the measure of all things, all things can, and usually do, go horribly wrong. Consider, for example, the hundreds of millions killed under the relativist regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al.

Indeed, train your children in “the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.” They will use God’s Word, the true measure of all things, as they endeavor to actually measure all things.

Funny thing, absolute truth. It’s absolute. It’s like a buoy pulled beneath the lake’s surface and fixed tight with rope. With time, and against the tide of Christ’s love, that rope – the lie of relativism – eventually rots. It snaps under its own weakness, hurling the buoy, truth, from cold darkness to warm sunlight.

If steeped in scripture, children – even the prodigal child – may be pulled under and tied down for a time by relativism’s glittery allure. But when the relativist rope rots, fear not, for those who have been fastened to “the way, the truth and the life” – who is Christ – will burst back into the light.

And then what champions they will be.

Twelve year old Kristin had a secret she wanted to keep from her parents. They just wouldn’t understand if she told them about what she and a 17 year-old neighbor had been doing before their parents got home from work. 

But Kristin remembered her health teacher talking about things to watch out for after fooling around – and she feared she was in trouble. 

“I think Ms. Wilson called them ‘genital warts,’ or something gross like that,” Kristin thought after discovering some unusual bumps in her private area. “I wonder if that’s what I’ve got.” 

When she got off the bus that morning, Kristin headed to the school clinic, where the school nurse advised her what she should do. She could get the treatment and advice she needed, and she could also get the first of three shots that would be a protection against cancer from contacting HPV. 

And she could do it all without her parents ever finding out. 

While Kristin’s story sounds like a far-fetched horror story for parents, the whole scenario is realistic and is perfectly legal in Illinois. 

In 1995, the Illinois legislature set into effect a public policy that says “A minor 12 years of age or older who may have come into contact with any STI may give consent to the furnishing of medical care or counseling related to the diagnosis or treatment of an STI.” [410 ILCS 210/4] 

In June 2013, the Illinois General Assembly’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) added three words after “treatment,” – “or vaccination against.” 

Minors in Illinois are now giving consent for vaccinations protecting themselves against four types of human papillomavirus (HPV) and against Hepatitis B.  HPV is a virus transmitted only through direct sexual contact, while Hepatitis B, according to a FAQ page on the Center for Disease Control’s website, “is most commonly spread through sexual contact and accounts for nearly two-thirds of acute Hepatitis B cases.”   Hepatitis B is also spread by blood and other body fluids.

This expanded public policy involving the treatment of minors’ sexually-transmitted infections (STI) is contradictory and deceptive.    

For example, if a 12 year-old like Kristin fears she may have been exposed to an STI, a crime has been committed. Illinois law places the age of consent at age 17. Any sexual activity with a child 12 yea- old  (or younger) through the last day of being 16 is a felony in Illinois. 

Also, mandated reporters like school clinic nurses and medical personnel are normally required to report suspected criminal activity, but are allowed to treat, counsel and vaccinate without parental consent Illinois minors concerned they may have come into contact with an STI. 

Gardasil can be harmful. Over 30,000 adverse reactions have been reported to the federal government’s reporting system after being vaccinated by the Merck Company’s  HPV vaccine. At least 140 Americans have died and over 900 have been disabled after getting the Gardasil series. 

Japan’s parliament recently lifted their country’s Gardasil mandate after teenage girls in wheelchairs testified how the vaccine had permanently detrimental effects. The country of Australia is considering following Japan’s lead. 

Experts say 12 year-olds are unable to make informed consent medical decisions. 

“Informed consent is the only humane way to administer vaccinations to anyone,” Barbara Loe Fisher, the president of the National Vaccination Information Center said. 

“Twelve year-olds are not mature enough to object morally or ethically and are unable to be responsible for any negative reactions,” she said. “This policy is stunning, and very dangerous.” 

Illinois parents should be made aware that their children can be getting secret STD vaccinations, Fisher said. 

But no one in the state is taking that responsibility on. 

Schools are not informing parents about the rights their children have to make medical decisions concerning sexually-transmitted infections. 

The state is not informing parents. Indeed, the Illinois Department of Public Health spokesperson was adamant when she said, “It isn’t our job to tell parents about this.” 

So, if it’s not the school’s nor the state’s job, the weight of telling parents what their children may be doing falls back on the very kids that are doing it, like 12 year old Kristin. 

Perhaps Illinois parents learning about their state’s anti-parent policy should take on the task by telling other parents what’s going on – and then talk to their lawmakers.

Read more at IllinoisReview.com.

Three Important Upcoming Events:

–>  September 14th – IFI’s 3rd Annual Fun. Run. Walk in Joliet 
(Click HERE for more info)

–> October 1st — Open Debate on Homosexual “Marriage” sponsored by the Chicago Tribune
(Click HERE for more info)

–> October 23rd — IFI’s Defend Marriage Lobby Day in Springfield  
(Click HERE for more info)

Written by Nancy Campbell

The morals of this world are going downhill,
Against God’s Holy Word and His divine will,
No longer black and white, it’s now mushy gray,
God’s eternal absolutes many shun today.

Will you stand against this tide when others are crumbling?
Will you stand on God’s Word when many are stumbling?
Will you stand against sin and the devil’s deceptions?
Making no excuses or subtle exceptions?

Never be intimated, never be fooled…
Neutralized,
     Fraternized,
          Mediocre-ized
               Or your fire be cooled!

When there’s no justice and only confusion,
And God’s people are hiding their light in seclusion,
Will you rise up and be counted, open wide your mouth,
And proclaim God’s truth to the north and the south?

Will you be strong in the Lord and the power of His might?
Always standing up for that which is right?
Rich in discernment, wisdom never ignored,
And walking daily in the fear of the Lord?

When you are tyrannized, never cower…
Patronized,
     Victimized,
          Or terrorized,
               Before the enemy never bow!

Will you stand the test when you are wronged and hurt?
When you are persecuted and treated like dirt?
Will you have backbone when the pressure comes on?
Or be a spineless jellyfish with purpose all gone?

Will you keep on standing if you’re the only one?
Lifting up the name of Jesus, God’s only Son?
Will you stand true now, holding on to the end?
No matter what it costs, God’s truth to defend!

Never be wimpy or crumble at the knees…
Normalized,
      Traumatized,
          Luke-warmized,
               And the devil never appease!

 Nancy Campbell is the Editor of Above Rubies, a magazine to bring strength and encouragement to marriage, motherhood and family life.  Printing since 1977, Above Rubies continues to spread across the world to be a life-line to mothers, marriages, and families.  Nancy and her husband, Collin are enjoying their 51st year of marriage and the blessing of many grandchildren. 

Written by Joe Kaiser

Freedom’s Journal Institute will hold the Black Conservative Summit Aug. 29-31 at the Pheasant Run Resort in St. Charles, IL, with the tagline for the summit being “Defending the Natural Family: R.I.S.E to Rebuild the Foundation of Black America.” R.I.S.E. is an acronym for responsible government, individual liberty & fidelity, strong family values and economic empowerment.

Confirmed speakers to the summit include U.S. Reprepresentative Peter Roskam (R -IL 6), former Cincinnati mayor and Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, Ben Kinchlow, Star Parker, Armstrong Williams and various church and community leaders, among others. 

Dr. Eric Wallace, the Editor-in-Chief and publisher of Freedom’s Journal Magazine, said the purpose of the summit is to unite black conservatives and discuss issues affecting the black community.

“(Black conservatives) are a minority of the black community, but we are also a minority of the white conservative movement,” Wallace said. “The idea to do this is bringing black conservatives together.”

Wallace named out of wedlock birth, black on black crime, abortion and low high school graduation rates as some of the major problems in the black community, which he said are often ignored by leaders in both parties, including black leaders.

The summit will have multiple seminars designed to address many of these issues, particularly many on marriage and family and their importance in the black community. Wallace highlighted in particular a few seminars on the second day: “What is the Role of government in the 21st century?” Public Policy and why it matters to you, your family and community” and a round table with church leaders toward the end of the night.

Wallace said the emphasis on social issues at the summit is linked to economic concerns as well.

“You can’t divorce (social and economic issues),” he said. “When the social issues fall apart, that’s when the government steps in economically.”

Going back to recent election cycles, some observers have noted that there is a distinct fertility gap between the Bush/Kerry, McCain/Obama election maps.  “Red” states that tend to vote for Republicans have fertility rates that exceed replacement, whereas many Democratic blue states do not.  This has led some to conclude and worry that “conservatives are outbreeding liberals.”
 
The difference is rather profound.  According to one analysis, “conservative non-Hispanic women have 26 percent more children than liberal white women.”  Moreover, very conservative families have 45 percent more children than the very liberal.   One interesting analysis, written before our current debate over amnesty and immigration, notes repeatedly that the only thing which can counter these numbers for Democrats over time is the influx of minority voters.
 
Not long ago, liberal alternative media sites made a big deal out of what they saw as hypocrisy of family values in red states. They tried to make a big deal out of red states having higher rates of out-of-wedlock births.   They claimed that blue state families walked the walk of values better than red state families who just talked the talk because liberal states had fewer teen pregnancies.  These liberal media sites also used this disparity as an example of the failure of abstinence education as opposed to the liberal approach of passing out contraceptives to children.
 
A deeper look at the Red State/Blue State out-of-wedlock birth numbers has a different reality than the drive-by approach taken by most liberal commentators.  It seems that in many blue states, teen pregnancies are up to 50 percent less likely to come to full term.  For example, the abortion rate in New York is twice as high as it is in conservative Texas.  Liberal Massachusetts has an abortion rate three times higher than conservative Utah. 
 
While some red state numbers may appear to betray family values, what is really happening is that in a sex-saturated culture, with all of its influence and consequences, red state residents are still much less likely to rely upon abortion.   

Lamentablemente, el 26 de Junio, 2015 la Suprema Corte de los E.U. decidió que el matrimonio es un derecho civil, legalizando el llamado “matrimonio” entre personas del mismo sexo en todos los 50 Estados.

Como ustedes saben, en Noviembre del 2013, la Asamblea General de Illinois y el Gobernador Pat Quinn, decidieron estatuir la redefinición del matrimonio en el estado de Illinois para incluir cualesquiera dos personas sin importar su género.

A pesar de estos retrasos, el Instituto a la Familia de Illinois (Illinois Family Institute), no se esta dando por vencido en la defensa del matrimonio entre un hombre y una mujer. Estar educados en el verdadero propósito del matrimonio es ahora mas crucial que nunca. Debemos ahora trabajar en ver restaurado el matrimonio como Dios lo designó que fuese.

Estos son algunos interesantes artículos y materiales:

Preguntas Y Respuestas

October 23rd Defend Marriage Lobby Day — Bulletin Insert

Redefining Marriage — Bulletin Insert  (Full color)

Un Obstacula Mas 

El “matrimonio del mismo sexo” debe ser derrotado

Lo que el matrimonio homosexual ha hecho a Massachusetts

Por qué los niños necesitan matrimonios naturales

Por qué preservar el matrimonio es importante

Los efectos que el “matrimonio del mismo sexo” tendrá en la educación pública

La Cultura y el Significado del Matrimonio

¿Es el “Matrimonio del Mismo Sexo” un Derecho Civil?

Matrimonio, Iglesia, Estado: Tensiones saludables y negativas

El Derecho al auto gobierno

Consecuencias de Redefinir el Matrimonio para la Comunidad Empresarial y los Negocios

Why Libertarians Should Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

¿Por qué los libertarios deberían oponerse al matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo?

Cardinal Francis George: Matrimonios de “personas del mismo sexo”: ¿Qué dicen la Naturaleza y la naturaleza de Dios?

La Familia Natural: Una Definición Universal

Peticion a favor del matrimonio tradicional

En Conclusión:

El matrimonio tradicional no está pasado de moda. El matrimonio, definido como la unión entre un hombre y una mujer, es algo que interesa a TODOS. Se debería dejar de usar como excusa que Illinois apoya el amor, compromiso y responsabilidad entre dos personas. Por supuesto que un matrimonio saludable contiene esos elementos, pero cuando se trata de que el gobierno se involucre en nuestras relaciones íntimas y personales, debería ser solamente con el propósito de promover estabilidad y un ambiente seguro para los niños, gracias a la unión entre un hombre y una mujer que da lugar a la procreación, y como un beneficio público para todos los ciudadanos. Cualquier otro tipo de involucramiento del gobierno no es más que extender su alcance más allá de lo debido.

I continue to be amazed at the number of people who tell me their pastor never talks about abortion or marriage from the pulpit. As if those topics were not biblical moral issues deeply entrenched in the Gospel. The excuses often given for this refusal to engage these critical issues is even more disturbing.

One pastor said “abortion isn’t essential to salvation and the Gospel” and therefore he didn’t address it. Excuse me? I believe the Bible clearly teaches that murder is a sin, and that unrepentant murderers will spend eternity in hell (1 Jn. 3:15, Rev. 21:8). That seems very Gospel-centric to me.

If Christians truly believe abortion is murder then we have roughly 55 million “legal” murderers among us today. Some of those women have no doubt repented of their sin and turned their back on the atrocious practice of abortion. Others however have remained unrepentant. These post-abortive women are in need of the Gospel in the same way every sinner is, in order to repent of their sin and accept the grace of Jesus Christ. I simply cannot fathom how a pastor finds this to be an issue unrelated to the Gospel.

Perhaps an article by Anna Higgins at Family Research Council commenting on a blog by R.C. Sproul Jr. can add clarity to the discussion: 

“Recently, theologian R.C. Sproul Jr. published a blog post in which he explored reasons why pastors do not preach on abortion. He mentions that pastors often think abortion is a political issue, that discussing it will upset the congregation or that it is not in the Bible, and thus, should not be brought up in a sermon. Sproul carefully dismantles each argument and discusses the fact that pastors are often wrestling with their own guilt on the issue or just have no idea how to preach on the subject. He then notes, ‘Abortion is THE great evil of our day. The preaching of the Word is the great power of any day.’ Finally, Sproul targets the most effective message against abortion – preaching repentance.”

Even conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the fact that he believes abortion is an underlying cause to many of the problems America is facing today:

“I think abortion is at the root of so much that has and is going wrong in this country…but what…it all means, culturally, in terms of the sanctity of life, how that’s crumbled, I think it’s almost at the root of everything. And if it’s not at the root of everything, it’s clearly had a profound impact on our culture, our society, and our politics, I think in ways that people don’t even stop to consider.”

I couldn’t agree more with Rush and Dr. Sproul. Abortion is no doubt at the root of nearly every issue America is facing today. When the sanctity of human life is not respected for the weakest and most vulnerable among us, it is hard to cultivate respect for other aspects of society. Consequently we have seen a breakdown in respect for marriage, family, fidelity, and personal integrity.

Speaking of marriage, Dr. Russell Moore recently led a discussion with prominent pastors during the SBC’s annual convention in which he addressed the need for the church to be prepared to confront the marriage issue. Moore specifically addressed the need for the church to engage the issue of homosexuality from a biblical, Gospel-centric position. He said:

“[W]hat we have to say is, ‘Take up your cross and follow Me, which means that you have to acknowledge part of what it means to repent of sin is to acknowledge what God as Creator has created me to be, which this is not it,’ This is not the picture of the Gospel, which means that we have to separate and we have to start living out a life under the discipleship and accountability of the local congregation and to acknowledge that this is going to be difficult.”

To deny that marriage and the sanctity of life are biblical moral issues rooted in the Gospel is a denial of the clear teaching of Scripture. Marriage is a picture of Christ and His church, respect for human life is a foundational principle of Scripture. The bottom line is that the church should not be shrinking from these discussions. The church has the truth of God’s Word and should be charging into these discussion armed with that truth. If we refuse to speak God’s truth on these topics all that’s left is those without God’s truth speaking for us.

Help Protect the Family Now!
Click HERE to support IFI via our secure online server

Written by Dr. Diane Medved

I can’t decide if it’s retro or radical but traditional marriage is a feminist issue. 

On June 8th, hundreds gathered in Chicago to march in protest to the legislative initiative to legalize same-sex “marriage” in Illinois. The group called “People of Faith Taking a Stand” met at the corner of Washington and Michigan and marched to Harrison.

All media is from Matthew Medlen.

Written by Todd Martin and David E. Smith

The Illinois House is still dangerously close to passing counterfeit marriage and there is tremendous pressure by the homosexual lobby to pass it by the end of the Spring Session on Friday. Thanks to God’s grace, the voices of Illinois Christians have so far stalled the bill from passing, but much more still needs to be done. The bill’s sponsor, State Representative Greg Harris (D-Chicago), is claiming that he has the 60 votes necessary to call and pass the bill by the end of the week and we believe he is close, having picked up additional votes since last week. (See articles HERE, HERE and HERE.)  The opposition has phone banks running every day, staffed by in and out-of-state volunteers, having their supporters calling “undecided” state representatives every single day.

Take ACTION:   Click HERE to contact your Illinois Representative and tell him/her to oppose SB 10!  Even if you have previously contacted your representative, PLEASE DO SO AGAIN. Tell your representative in no uncertain terms that you want him or her to oppose the radical effort to redefine marriage and family.  

More ACTION:

• PLEASE FORWARD THIS ALERT  to like-minded friends, neighbors and relatives.
• PRAY corporately and individually, repenting for our own failure to be His witnesses, and seeking His hand of mercy for us, His wisdom for our lawmakers, and His grace toward salvation for those caught in the destructive deception of homosexuality. Pray that God would be glorified in everything!
• CALL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE NOW!  Time is very critical. Tell them to vote NO on Same Sex “Marriage” – Senate Bill 10. The opposition has phone banks running every day, staffed by in and out-of-state volunteers, having their supporters calling state representatives every single day. We will have to pray, cry out to the LORD and work hard!  The Capitol switchboard number is (217) 782-2000.
• If you are not sure who your State Representative is, click HERE to look it up or you can contact Illinois Family Institute at (708) 781-9328 and we will be happy to look it up for you. 

Please be encouraged and read this excerpt from a book written by Moody Pastor, Dr. Erwin Lutzer:

We Must Seek God

(from The Truth About Same-Sex Marriage, by Dr. Erwin Lutzer, in the final Chapter,“We Must Seek God,” pp.122-4):

“The average evangelical thinks that God will always be on our side in the battle against same-sex marriage. However, in the Old Testament, God said these startling words to His chosen people:  “Yet they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and He Himself fought against them.” (Isaiah 63:10). In other words, there are times when God no longer takes up the cause of His people .When we refuse to repent of our own sins, God might refuse to come to our aid and let us be defeated. This is why we must turn to Him as families, as churches, and as individuals. Without repentance for our own sins, we cannot expect to win cultural wars. I believe very deeply that only God can save us now.

Of course, we have always believed that only God can save us. But never have we needed His intervention so desperately; never before have we felt so helpless in the midst of a massive national movement that it appears we cannot stop. And millions of middle-of-the road Americans who have nothing to do with gays and the gay movement are lulled by the media rhetoric and misrepresentation. They think that we can “live and let live” as if homosexual marriages can exist alongside of traditional ones, each staying in their separate section of the boat we call America.

Ours is a battle that cannot be won by reason, scientific data, or dialogue. The radical homosexual movement that preaches tolerance will not itself tolerate alternate opinions. Everyone must move in lockstep with their agenda—or pay a price.

One day King Jehoshaphat woke up and was told that a vast army was coming against him. The king consulted God about what to do and proclaimed a fast throughout the land of Judah. The people then gathered from every town in the land to seek help from the Lord. Jehoshaphat then stood in the temple of the Lord and prayed.

…and said: “O LORD, God of our fathers, are you not the God who is in heaven? You rule over all the kingdoms of the nations. Power and might are in your hand, and no one can withstand you. O our God, did you not drive out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel and give it forever to the descendants of Abraham your friend? … ‘If calamity comes upon us, whether the sword of judgment, or plague or famine, we will stand in your presence before this temple that bears your Name and will cry out to you in our distress, and you will hear us and save us.’  “But now here are men from Ammon, Moab and Mount Seir, whose territory you would not allow Israel to invade when they came from Egypt; so they turned away from them and did not destroy them. ….  O our God, will you not judge them? For we have no power to face this vast army that is attacking us. We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you.” (2 Chronicles 20:6-7,9,12)

I wonder what would happen if millions of believers set aside their schedules to seek God on behalf of this nation…

I wonder what would happen if privately and corporately we confessed our sins and turned away from our own idols.

I wonder if perhaps God would intervene so the destruction of marriage and the forces that seek to tear our families apart would be stayed.

Back to Jehoshaphat: “Through a man anointed with the Spirit, the word of the Lord came: ‘Do not be afraid or discouraged because of this vast army. For the battle is not yours, but God’s.’ (v. 15) Then the king commanded that a select group of men walk ahead of the army, singing and praising God for the splendor of His holiness. And God gave the victory!'”

Help us continue the fight for natural marriage by donating 
$15, $25, $50 or $100 or more today.   

Click HERE to support the work and ministry of IFI.
With your support we can continue our vital work!

Gay activists love to point to the changes in public opinion regarding same-sex “marriage,” announcing triumphantly that this is a sign of moral and even spiritual advancement. In reality, it is part of a larger trend toward immorality, a sign of moral bankruptcy and spiritual apostasy.

According to a May 13 Gallup report, “Just three years ago, support for gay marriage was 44 percent. The current 53 percent level of support is essentially double the 27 percent in Gallup’s initial measurement on gay marriage, in 1996.” 

But let’s put that data into a larger, cultural perspective. A May 20 Gallup report is headlined, “In U.S., Record-High Say Gay, Lesbian Relations Morally OK,” with the subtitle reading, “Americans’ tolerance of a number of moral issues up since 2001.” 

What exactly is meant by “tolerance”? 

The report states, “Americans’ views toward a number of moral issues have shifted significantly since 2001. Their acceptance of gay and lesbian relations has increased the most, up 19 percentage points in the past 12 years—to a record high of 59 percent today. Americans’ tolerance toward having a baby outside of marriage is also now much greater, up 15 points since 2001 [actually, 2002], to the current 60 percent.” 

Oh yes, “tolerance” is alive and well! 

So, the America that increasingly deems homosexual relationships to be morally acceptable is the same America that increasingly deems having children out of wedlock (once called “illegitimacy”) to be morally acceptable. And this is supposed to be a sign of progress? 

According to the poll, American approval of fornication—or, as the poll put it, “sex between an unmarried man and woman”—was up 10 percent (from 53 percent to 63 percent), while support for polygamy actually doubled, from 7 percent to 14 percent (keep your eye on that stat in the coming years). This is something to celebrate? 

In 2001, Gallup didn’t even ask the question of the moral acceptability of teenagers having sexual relationships, but in the current poll, only 63 percent found it morally wrong, while 32 percent expressed their moral approval. How enlightening!  

The pollsters used the following script: “I’m going to read you a list of issues. Regardless of whether or not you should think it should be legal, for each one, please tell me whether you personally believe that in general it is morally acceptable or morally wrong.” 

Interestingly, while the word sex was used with reference to “sex between an unmarried man and woman” and “sex between teenagers,” and while the word affair was used with reference to “married men and women having an affair,” no such explicit or derogatory term was used with regard to homosexual practice. Rather, that was referred to as “gay or lesbian relations.”

I wonder if the response would have been different if the pollsters had asked about “two men or two women having sex”—unless, of course, “gay and lesbian relations” are all merely platonic. (Please forgive my sarcasm.) 

But I digress. What is clear is that American sexual morals are in steady decline, and there is very little that shames us these days. After all, this is the nation in which a young woman’s quickest ticket to fame is a best-selling, graphic sex tape. Sometimes the girl’s parents even gush with pride at their daughter’s achievements, and at the risk of sounding trite, we can honestly say that what used to shame us now makes us famous.

It is against this backdrop that public approval for same-sex relationships continues to increase. 

And let’s not forget that the same media that incessantly pushes the cause of gay activism also promotes shows like Teen Mom, glamorizing young women who have children out of wedlock, along with shows like Big Love and Sister Wives, normalizing and even celebrating polygamy. And this has no effect on the public’s perceptions?  

Leading the way in these changing views toward gay and lesbian relations is the younger generation, aged 18-29. According to Gallup, in 1996, 41 percent of them supported same-sex “marriage”; today, that number is up to 70 percent. But this is the same age group that believes that roughly 30 percent of the population is gay or lesbian—an error of 1,000 percent! (The best studies put the number at roughly 3 percent.) Does the media have nothing to do with these skewed perspectives? 

We should also remember that Barna polls conducted over the last 15 years indicate that only 0.5 percent of Americans aged 18-23 held to what Barna defined as a biblical worldview, in contrast with about 10 percent of the population as a whole. Is it any surprise, then, that they are so strongly supportive of same-sex relationships? 

As for our country’s increasing “tolerance,” it is not happening quickly enough for 18-year-old Kaitlyn Hunt and her family. She has been arrested for having a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old girl, one which her father says was consensual. 

The Daily Kos reports, “Florida teen Kaitlyn Hunt, 18, is seeing her young life turned upside down and her future jeopardized simply because she fell in love. Unfortunately for her, she fell in love with a younger girl who has vindictive bigots for parents.” 

Her father, Steven Hunt, wants prosecutors “to drop the two charges filed against his daughter in February. A rainbow-colored ‘Stop the hate, free Kate’ page on the online petition site Change.org had more than 56,500 supporters calling for prosecutors to drop the charges Monday afternoon, and a similar ‘Free Kate’ Facebook group page had more than 30,000 members.” 

Well, just give it a little more time. Soon enough, these things will be accepted too. Immorality is trending. 

How did they vote?

On Friday, May 17th, the bill to legalize marijuana as “medicine” was debated on the Illinois Senate floor and then passed by a vote of 35-21.  This 200+ bill (HB 1) was sponsored by State Senator William Haine (D-Alton), and co-sponsored by Senators Linda Holmes (D-Aurora), Iris Martinez (D-Chicago), and William Delgado (D-Chicago).  

During debate, Senator Kyle McCarter (R-Vandalia) shared a heart-breaking story about the loss of his own child as a result of marijuana as a gateway drug.  Senator Mattie Hunter (D-Chicago), a certified drug and alcohol counselor, also spoke emphatically against the bill.  Senators Tim Bivins (R-Dixon), Darin LaHood (R-Peoria) and Jason Barickman (R-Blomington) also spoke in opposition to this proposal.

Democrats voting against the bill include Senators Bill Cunningham (Chicago), Mattie Hunter (Chicago), Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant (Plainfield), Gary Forby (Benton), Napoleon Harris (Harvey) and Julie Morrison (Deerfield).

Republicans voting for the bill include Senators Dave Syverson (Rockford), Pam Althoff (Crystal Lake) and Jim Oberweis (North Aurora).

See how your state senator voted HERE and how your state representative voted HERE.

This bill will now be sent to Governor Patrick Quinn .  According to various reports, Gov. Quinn is “is keeping an open mind about the issue.”  

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send an email or a fax to your Gov. Quinn today to ask him to veto HB 1.  You can call also call the Governor’s office to articulate your objections to having this bill signed into law.  The toll-free number to Gov. Quinn’s off is Call 800-642-3112.  Please do this today!  

Legitimizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes will encourage and increase destructive behavior, especially among young people. Marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug in the United States. Research has found that adolescent and teen drug use rises as the perception of harm diminishes.

Click HERE to download the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) White Paper on State-Level Proposals to Legalize Marijuana.

Contact Governor Quinn now!

Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.