Last Thursday night, District 211—the largest high school district in the state with 12,000 students and five high schools—held a board meeting to discuss Superintendent Daniel Cates’ boneheaded proposal to allow students who “identify” as the opposite sex to have unrestricted access to the locker rooms of opposite-sex peers. Expecting a large crowd, the district moved the meeting to Palatine High School. The Daily Herald reported that 25 speakers were randomly selected, 16 of whom opposed the proposal, which is well over 50 percent.

Several years ago, when the district was first sued by a biological boy who was self-“identifying” as a girl, Cates allowed him to use the girls’ locker room as long as he changed clothes behind a privacy curtain. Cates steadfastly opposed this boy’s request for unrestricted access to the girls’ locker room. That was then, this is now. Now Cates proposes allowing boys and girls who pretend to be the sex they aren’t to have unrestricted access to the locker rooms of their opposite-sex peers. Perhaps Cates is spineless and follows the path of least resistance, which now leads into darkness. Perhaps he has morally devolved as so many school administrators have. Or perhaps his retirement at the end of this school year has freed his authentic inner corrupt self to emerge.

Cates couldn’t do this dirty work alone. It takes a village and at least four board members to indoctrinate children with an incoherent, irrational, and harmful ideology. One of those sorry villagers is the newly elected, morally corrupt, and unpleasant District 211 board member Kim Cavill, who is a sex “educator” when she’s not promoting feckless locker room policies.

If her name rings a bell, it’s because I mentioned her in an article about former District U46 school board member Jeanette Ward, a fearless, wise, and gracious woman who endured egregiously disrespectful treatment from fellow board members Traci O’Neal Ellis, Veronica Noland, and Melissa Owens. In an online post, Cavill referred to Jeanette Ward as the “High Priestess of the Order of Moron.” Oddly, that comment has been scrubbed from the Internet. Maybe she thought such a comment wouldn’t help her get elected to the District 211 board. Sounds a wee bit intolerant and hateful.

The curious story of the April 2019 election of Kim Cavill actually goes back to the even curiouser story of the 2017 school board election. Three well-qualified people who opposed co-ed private spaces for minors were running against three people who supported co-ed private spaces for minors. The three well-qualified challengers were,

Jean Forrest, a Chinese-American woman with an MA in economics who works as an actuary

Katherine Jee Young David, a Korean-American woman with a BS in Business Administration from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Ralph Bonatz who has a degree in electrical engineering and is a global quality control manager for an international corporation

On March 22, 2017, just 13 days before the 2017 election, LaSaia Wade, a 29-year-old “black trans woman” (i.e., a biological man), and Daye Pope, another biological male who passes as a woman, set up a Super PAC called Trans United Fund Illinois. Pope is the organizing director for a 501(c)(3) called Trans United Fund.

Two days later, on March 24, 2017—11 days before the 2017 election—Kim Cavill and her sister Lindsay Christensen set up a Super PAC called Parents and Neighbors for Quality Education (PNQE).

Just days after the founding of Trans United Fund Illinois, donations from some surprising people came pouring in:

• Matrix Director “Lana” Wachowski, a biological man who pretends to be a woman and lives with his dominatrix wife in Chicago, donated a whopping $10,000.

• Far left Illinois State Senator Heather Steans (D-Chicago) also donated $10,000.

• Homosexual Clark Pellet, a retired attorney and development chair for the “LGBTQ” Center on Halsted who lives in Chicago, donated $5,000.

• Executive director of Gender Rights Maryland, Dana Beyer, a man who pretends to be a woman and lives in Chevy Chase, MD donated $1,000.

• Eliza Byard, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) who lives in Brooklyn, NY donated $500.

• Homosexual Douglas Hattaway, president and CEO of a Washington D.C. strategic communications firm who lives in D.C., donated $500.

• Architect Kira Kinsman, a biological man formerly known as Kyle Kinsman who lives in Wilkes Barre, PA, donated $250.

The more than $26, 000 in donations for a school board election from donors who don’t live in District 211 then went to—you guessed it—Cavill’s Parents and Neighbors for Quality Education.

Enquiring minds may wonder why Cavill and her sister set up PNQE, since Trans United Fund Illinois was already established. Why the extra step to fund the defeat of conservatives? The answer to that question might be found in mailers and yard signs. State law requires that campaign mailers and yard signs identify the groups that pay for them. Signs must say “Approved by….”

Which sounds better—and by “better” I mean less likely to arouse suspicion: “Approved by Trans United Fund Illinois” or “Approved by Parents and Neighbors for Quality Education”?

Flush with filthy lucre, the Cavill sisters got busy smearing good people with nary a backward glance.

As reported by the “LGBTQ” newspaper Windy City Times, a local mom (Who could that have been?) reached out to Trans United Fund, “a national trans-led advocacy group,” who agreed to help them defeat the three candidates who supported single-sex locker rooms:

Trans United Fund (TUF) and a group of local parents, youth, and allies, worked together to launch the first trans-led, trans-focused independent expenditure in history. TUF assembled a powerful team of thoughtful allies to quickly build and execute a research-informed and strategic plan to help the parents and youth get their message out. TUF supported the parents’ efforts through digital, mail, phone banking and helping to train volunteers to reach their neighbors at the door.

The Windy City Times made clear this campaign was a smear campaign in which good people who believe locker rooms and restrooms should correspond to biological sex were vilified. District 211 community member Tracey Salvatore, spewing venomous lies said this about the good people who were defeated:

We are fed up with this small group of vocal, transphobic people guided by a national hate group [Alliance Defending Freedom] wreaking havoc in our community…. Our District 211 community will not tolerate adults bullying kids or intimidating us for one more day. The ADF-inspired slate of candidates ran with the agenda of inserting a hate-based, national agenda into our schools. They didn’t care that their policy changes would increase bullying and violence against kids…. So we reached out to Trans United Fund and they helped us to get our message out to our neighbors and community members. (emphasis added)

Neither Salvatore nor anyone affiliated with PNQE felt the ethical obligation to provide evidence that the three candidates feared or hated “trans”-identifying students, or that they bullied kids, or that they intimidated community members, or that ADF has a “hate-based agenda,” or that single-sex private spaces for minors increase “bullying and violence.” Why try to provide impossible-to-find evidence when hate-mongering rhetoric does the job.

The belief that biological sex is the source of feelings of modesty and the right to privacy when undressing does not constitute hatred of persons no matter how many times people like Salvatore and Cavill spread their repugnant lies.

I wonder if Salvatore spreads these same ugly and false lies about feminists—including lesbians—who oppose biological males in women’s private spaces. Perhaps Salvatore is unaware of the growing schism in the “LGBT” alliance. Just a week ago, a group of influential supporters of the “LGB rights” movement in the United Kingdom, including Stonewall UK founder Simon Fanshawe, published an open letter in the Sunday Times in which they criticize Stonewall and suggest it’s time for the formation of a new organization that is “committed both to freedom of speech and to fact instead of fantasy.” Here’s an excerpt from that letter that Salvatore, Cavill, and Cates should ponder:

Last October a group of LGB rights supporters asked Stonewall to “commit to fostering an atmosphere of respectful debate rather than demonising as transphobic those who wish to discuss, or dissent from, Stonewall’s transgender policies.” Since then, Stonewall has refused repeated requests to enter into any such dialogue…. We believe it has made mistakes in its approach that undermine women’s sex-based rights and protections. The most worrying aspect of this is that all primary-school children are now challenged to review their ‘gender identity’ and decide that they may be the opposite sex if they do not embrace outdated gender stereotypes.

Does Salvatore demonize teens as hateful transphobes if they don’t want to undress in the presence of male peers? What about female teachers who don’t want to undress in front of male colleagues? Does she accuse them of hate-based bullying?

Almost immediately after the school board election and defeat for all three good candidates, Cavill and her sister deactivated their Super PAC. Malignant Mission Accomplished.

And now we return our story to the school board election of April 2019. Kim Cavill, the person who orchestrated the ugly and deceitful campaign smear of three good people by creating a Super PAC front for a Super PAC financed by “LGBTQ” donors from out of the district, ran for the District 211 board and won. Is she really an emblem of good government and transparency?

If you are not yet convinced of her unfitness for serving on a school board or her unfitness to serve as a role model for children, here are just a smattering of quotes from her sex ed podcasts for children and teens.

From her podcast for tweens and teens on anal sex titled “All About Anal”:

Before trying anal sex, people need to talk about their own and their partner’s boundaries like any other type of sex. It should be preceded by a conversation about what the people participating in sex are consenting to, what they aren’t consenting to, how they’re expecting sex to go, and how they’re going to communicate during sex to make sure everyone’s still on the same page. Anal sex also requires a lot of lube.

From her podcast for “tweens and teens” titled “Let’s Talk About Porn”:

Porn can certainly cause relationship problems but so can a lot of other things. Porn causing relationship problems isn’t inevitable, it depends on the relationship and it depends on how the people in that relationship feel about porn…. [T]he evidence says that if you think porn’s bad, it is, and if you think porn’s fine, then it is.

One thing notable from sexpert Cavill’s podcasts is how studiously she avoids the words boy, girl, man, and woman. Even in her podcast explaining how babies come into existence, she never mentions men and women. Instead, she describes a “grown-up with a penis” and a “grown-up with a vagina.” Huh. I wonder what those are.

There are two lessons to be learned from this incredible story:

1. Local communities no longer control their own school boards and, therefore, their schools.

2. Cultural regressives are targeting the hearts, minds, and bodies of other people’s children—your children—and they’re using your money to do it.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Incredible-Story-of-District-211-School-Board-Elections_AUDIO.mp3

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

-and, please-

Written by Annemarie Lange

According to Google Analytics, pornography searches increase by 4,700% when kids are using the internet in the hours after school ends.

Like it or not, teens are using their devices to access pornography on a regular basis in today’s technology driven society. Where previous generations were cautious of a stolen Playboy magazine, current parents are looking for guidance on how to shield their teens from the ever available, internet pornography.

The average child is now accessing pornography at the age of 11 – and that is much younger than the legal age for viewing such material. Unfortunately, the access to adult content is easy and is available in a couple clicks. Even though most mature and pornographic sites have a pop-up warning away minors, there is nothing to stop them from clicking the ‘over 18’ button and viewing inappropriate material.

Pornography is a massive problem in America, and likely around the globe as well.  To understand the $97 billion industry in average daily terms, porn sites get more visits each month in America than Netflix, Amazon and Twitter combined.

The pervasiveness of this corrosive material has all sorts of societal ramifications for everyone.  It plays a role in the coarsening of our culture. It leads to relationship problems. It drives an immoral demand that has now made America one of the top sex-trafficking nations in the world.

One must wonder how there could be any good news about this topic.

In a recent interview in The New Yorker, sociologist of religion, Samuel Perry said:

“What I found is that, whatever we think pornography is doing, those effects tend to be amplified when we’re talking about conservative Protestants. It seems to be uniquely harmful to conservative Protestants’ mental health, their sense of self, their own identities—certainly their intimate relationships—in ways that don’t tend to be as harmful for people who don’t have that kind of moral problem with it.”

As you might imagine, many reviews of Dr. Perry’s new book Addicted to Lust: Pornography in the Lives of Conservative Protestants, have liberals grinning over what they think is a huge hypocrisy.  Of course, when liberals talk about hypocrisy they don’t do so as a defense of the moral standard but as a means of discarding that standard.

One might think that given the title of this book, and Perry’s quote above, that he has researched and written about how Christian men are destroying their marriages with their angst over porn, while those who have no problem with porn use do not have similar relational problems, (because it’s no big deal to them).

That may be an interesting theory, but what his book and research actually point toward is much different than the sensational overviews.   According to the Institute for Family Studies, Perry’s research shows that protestant men, who regularly attend church, are actually about the only men in America still resisting the normalization of the use of porn.

As the Institute points out, “across all religious groups in America, people who attend religious services more frequently are far less likely to view pornography. Nominally-Protestant men are nearly five times more likely to view pornographic films as men who frequently (weekly) attend religious services.”

They also remind us that, “adherence to the sexual norms promoted by conservative Protestants— delaying sex until marriage and monogamy within marriage, including (for most) avoiding porn — is consistently associated with greater marital happiness.”

There are a lot more detailed findings on this subject from the Institute which can be read HERE.

This article was originally published by AFA of Indiana.

Attacks on the virtue of modesty are everywhere and include the easy availability of porn; plays, movies, network television shows, and streaming shows; fashion magazines; and advertising. Too often overlooked are the in-your-face assaults on public decency in our communities. Today, in ascending order of offensiveness and importance we’ll look at five attacks on public decency that receive too little attention: 1. The annual No Pants Subway Ride, 2. The annual World Naked Bike Ride, 3. Shame parades, 4. The promotion of female toplessness, and 5. The “trans”-cultic revolution.

Annual No Pants Subway Ride (which includes Chicago’s CTA): This event asks passengers to ride subways pantless. While this event, which takes place every January, doesn’t involve nudity, it does, nonetheless, constitute an assault on modesty and decency. It began in New York City in 2002 as a comedy stunt by an improv collective, and has metastasized to cities around the world, including Chicago; Dallas; Hartford; Los Angeles; Phoenix; Portland; San Diego; San Francisco; Seattle; and our nation’s swampy capital, Washington D.C.

Click here to see photos. WARNING: Offensive photos.

World Naked Bike Ride: This obscene event began in 2003 to “celebrate freedom from oil and the beauty of people.” It takes place around the world during high tourist season. In Chicago, it takes place in June. The event begins at 6:00 p.m. at a public location revealed several days before the event. Creepy people, many fully naked, bike 14 miles around the city (including in the past, the Mag Mile), exposing unsuspecting Chicagoans and visitors, including families with young children, to gross displays of public indecency committed by hundreds and hundreds of exhibitionists (WARNING: Obscene photos. Don’t complain to IFI about making these images available with more than ample warnings. Complain to city officials who permit this event.) The police do nothing.

“LGBTQQAP” celebration parades: Shameful “pride” events pollute the streets of cities around the United States every June. Thousands of people attend, including children who both attend and march in these celebrations of sexual perversion.

Go Topless Day/Free-the-Nipple Movement: Both efforts promote the false idea that commitments to Equal Protection and equality demand that neither society nor law recognize that men’s bodies and women’s bodies are different. While leftists argue that treating men’s and women’s bodies as identical makes women safer, it, in fact, makes women less safe and less respected.

Most men and women know intuitively that women’s breasts are different from men’s breasts. It is not cultural indoctrination that creates that understanding. Rather, it’s cultural indoctrination with doctrinaire feminist theory that undermines it. Cultural regressives presume that all ideas with which they disagree are “socially constructed” from the detritus of an antiquated, puritanical society, whereas their beliefs emerge from some wellspring of pure truth, untainted by forces of “social construction.”

Yeah, riiight, no social conditioning (or legal oppression) required to get people to believe (or pretend to believe) that men get pregnant and women have penises.

If it were true that women’s breasts are no different from men’s chests, then it wouldn’t matter if teenage daughters walked around their homes topless in the presence of their fathers, their fathers’ friends, their brothers, or their brothers’ friends. And it would make no difference if high school girls played “shirts” and “skins” in co-ed P.E. classes.

In an article published in the University of California, Irvine Law Review in 2017 titled “Female Toplessness: Gender Equality’s Next Frontier,” then-law student Nassim Alisobhani (female, of course) made the intellectual argument in favor of the legalization of female toplessness. In addition to arguing that both male and female breasts are “erogenous zones” and that men too can lactate if exposed to the “right hormonal cocktail of progesterone, estrogen, oxytocin, and prolactin,” Alisobhani argues this:

Female topless prohibitions are the embodiment of gender discrimination. It is one of the remaining laws that blatantly treat men and women differently on the basis of how society views their bodies and the biological differences between the sexes…. It is a modern example that a woman’s body is deemed lesser than a man’s. [Actually, these laws embody the idea that women’s bodies are deeply valued]…. Just as the Defense of Marriage Act and state prohibitions of sodomy and same-sex marriage demeaned, degraded, and humiliated our fellow human beings who are homosexual, prohibitions of female toplessness demean women and degrade men. These laws humiliate men and women. They strip every person of his or her humanity. These laws tell women that their bodies are obscene, while at the same time telling men that they are unable to trust their ability to control themselves around persons of the opposite sex…. A woman’s body is her vessel, just like a man’s is his. If the law cannot treat this fundamental part of her as equal to her male counterparts, she will not be able to expect the law to treat her equally in other ways. This is the first step in the long fight for true equity.

The first step in the fight for true equity for women is legal toplessness? Seriously?

Alisobhani refers to a (successful) legal challenge to a Fort Collins, Colorado ordinance banning female toplessness—an ordinance about which Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom also wrote:

The 10th Circuit’s ruling assumes that perceptions of and sexual responses to particular body parts are socially constructed, and when anti-nudity laws differentiate between men’s and women’s bodies, it is solely because of social stereotypes.

Under the 10th Circuit’s opinion, girls just emerging into womanhood can now walk around in Fort Collins topless. Allowing a 10-, 12-, or 14-year-old girl to walk to school topless tells her a lie about her own body. It tells her that her breasts are no different than a man’s—and, therefore, that she shouldn’t feel any more delicacy about exposing her breasts than a boy would. That puts her in grave danger both physically and emotionally…. It also means that women who experience trauma from harassment targeting their breasts are just buying into harmful, regressive stereotypes about their own bodies….

No one has even considered the possibility that there is something different—fundamentally, biologically, essentially different—about women’s bodies that merits protection…. Women’s breasts are not the same as men’s. Women have the unique, inimitable ability to create and nurture life with our own bodies. Our breasts are a vital part of that work—a work that is intimately connected with sexuality. Men’s breasts, on the other hand, aren’t involved in creating or sustaining life. In that sense, they are not special.

The photo featured above is visual evidence of what the circuit court’s decision has wrought.

“Trans”-cultic revolution: The “trans” revolution posits that biological sex has no intrinsic meaning relative to sexual activity, marriage, childbirth, parenting, modesty, or the desire for privacy. To “trans”-cultists, maleness and femaleness have nothing to do with biological sex, and body parts are interchangeable. Those who care about the body parts of their romantic/sexual partners or who don’t want to share privates spaces with opposite-sex persons are deemed hateful, bigoted “transphobes.”

If this ideology becomes deeply rooted in American culture, there remains no way to retain laws that recognize women’s bodies as different from men’s, that protect women’s privacy and modesty, and that preserve the public good by prohibiting female toplessness. How would such laws be applied to biological women who pretend to be men, are viewed as men by the law, but choose not to have “top” surgery?

Despite what “progressive” libertines allege, modesty in dress is wholly unrelated to hatred of the body, or to puritanical shame of the body, fear of sex, or the radical Muslim requirement that the entire female body be enveloped in a tent. Such claims are manipulative tools to shame those who view modesty as a virtue that contributes to human flourishing and the public good. When our children are little, we tell them that certain parts of their bodies are private and that no one should view or touch them. Either that is a lie or we’re violating in practice a fundamental truth about humans, which is that parts of our anatomy are, indeed, private. The thousand and one ways bodily decency is daily assaulted and the assaults ignored and tolerated are a thousand and one ways our children and grandchildren are harmed.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Public-Nudity-and-Other-Assaults-on-Decency.mp3

IFI Fall Banquet with Franklin Graham!
We are excited to announce that at this year’s IFI banquet, our keynote speaker will be none other than Rev. Franklin Graham, President & CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Christian evangelist & missionary. This year’s event will be at the Tinley Park Convention Center on Nov. 1st.

Learn more HERE.

Written by NetNanny.com

Social media today is seemingly inescapable and the same holds true for Snapchat. As one of the top contenders of most loved social media platforms for teens, it is important for parents to understand this photo sharing app before deciding if it’s appropriate for your own kids.

While YouTube and Instagram still dominate the social media space among teens, Snapchat comes in a close third place with 69 percent of U.S. teens using the platform according to a 2018 Pew Research Center study. Snapchat isn’t inherently dangerous right off the bat, but parents will want to ensure that their teens are safe and responsible while using the app.

WHAT IS SNAPCHAT?

Snapchat is a photo and video sharing app that allows users to communicate with friends, family, and followers by snapping and sharing photos in an instant. Photos and videos can be shared with selected friends or can be posted to your Story, both disappearing after a set amount of time.

Some of the most popular features include Snapchat filters, stickers, and Bitmoji integration that grant users even more fun ways to express themselves. The app encourages users to keep snapping by using Snapchat emojis, streaks, and trophies.

Learn more about all of Snapchat’s features:

• Filters: Snapchat automatically updates facial filters that can be used while taking photos and videos. These do everything from smoothing your skin to giving you a flower crown or turning you into a dog. Snapchat has now even created filters that can be used on your pets.

• Stickers: Stickers can be added to photos and videos as well to add the time, temperature, how fast you’re moving, or any number of cartoons or GIFs.

• Bitmoji: Connecting Snapchat with your Bitmoji allows you to use your personal emoji as your avatar and use it to decorate your Snaps.

• Emojis: Snapchat emojis appear next to the names in your friends list, telling users which friends they snap with the most.

• Streaks: A streak fire emoji and number also appear next to the names in your friends list, showing you how many consecutive days in a row that you’ve snapped each other.

• Trophies: Trophies are earned and kept in your virtual case for doing any number of tasks or using features such as sending a video without sound, using the zoom feature, or sending a Snap with a temperature filter.

• Chat: Users have the option of chatting with friends either one-on-one or via a group chat. Parents should know that chats, like photos and videos, are self-destructing once a user navigates away from the chat unless saved beforehand. Users have the option of updating their settings so that unsaved chats do not delete immediately, but after 24 hours.

• Snap Map: In Snap Map users can view public Snaps for major events as well as see the exact location of friends. The Snap Map option can be turned off by switching to Ghost Mode in settings.

• Memories: Memories is a personal album of Snaps and stories that you save for easy sharing in the future or for year-to-date flashbacks. Users wishing to save a Snap will need to manually save them to Memories but Stories can be saved to Memories automatically by adjusting your settings.

• Discover: The Discover page lets users watch their friends’ Story as well as public Stories and Shows.

• Shazam: By pressing and holding on the camera screen, users can enable Shazam to pick up what song is playing to include in their Snap.

FIVE THINGS EVERY PARENT NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT SNAPCHAT

1.) Set Privacy Settings Ensure that your kids utilize the privacy settings available on Snapchat. Users are able to determine who can contact them, view their story, see their location, or if they appear in quick add. Parents may want to edit these settings to only allow friends access to this information as this will significantly limit any contact with strangers.

2.) Talk About Sharing and Screenshots Discuss with your children the significance of screenshots and what is and is not appropriate to share. Even though Snaps posted to Stories disappear after 24 hours, that won’t stop someone from taking a screenshot of a Snap and saving that photo to their own camera roll.

3.) Keep Chats Clean Screenshots are not limited to only photo and video Snaps but can be taken of chats as well. Encourage your kids to keep comments PG.

4.) Monitor Use and Take Part It is ok to monitor your kids’ Snapchat activities. The nature of this app doesn’t make it easy to monitor use but parents are able to keep an eye on account passwords, contacts, private messages, and memories. Parents may even consider creating their own account to snap with their kids and keep an eye on their Stories.

5.) Take a Tech Timeout Snapchat can be a lot of fun but social media in general needs an occasional timeout. Set offline boundaries that work for your family such as limiting phone use during family activities, mealtimes, or before bed.

WHAT HAPPENS TO A SNAPCHAT PHOTO?

When users send Snapchat photos they are able to select for how long they want their photo to be able to viewed before they disappear. Users can make viewing time 10 seconds and under or allow their photo or video to be viewed for an unlimited amount of time.

It is worth noting that users can replay received Snaps once more before they disappear. Once recipients leave the photo and their friends list, the received photo cannot be accessed again.

Stories are viewable to all of your friends and last 24 hours before disappearing. Snapchat stories can be deleted prior to this 24-hour time period ending; after deletion your friends will no longer be able to view them.

Despite it’s disappearing nature, Snapchat users are able to take screenshots when viewing photos and videos. Senders are notified when someone takes a screenshot of their Snaps but they have no control over recipients doing this and can’t stop them from taking a screenshot or sharing it with others.

IS SNAPCHAT SAFE FOR KIDS?

Even though Snapchat is wildly popular, not all of Snapchat’s features are appropriate for younger users. This app is recommended for mature teens but knowing the facts, parents should be able to decide if this app is right for their child.

Photo sharing and disappearing photos and texts can be risky when it comes to safety and transparency. Snapchat isn’t made specifically to hide things like vault apps that create secret folders for hiding photos and sensitive content are, but rather to promote living and sharing in the moment. Because of this, parents will not be able to monitor sharing and communication effectively.

Parents who believe their children are ready to use this app should discuss with them what sort of photos and videos are appropriate to send and receive and remind them that even though Snaps will disappear, this does not prevent another user from taking a screenshot.

Snapchat also features Snap Map, allowing users to view the exact location of their friends; a feature that will be unsafe for most kids and teens. A user’s status on the Snap Map can be turned off in settings by switching to Ghost Mode.

Snapchat is a great way to for your kids to stay in touch with their friends and share what they’re up to but unfortunately there are no Snapchat parental controls available.

Monitoring your child’s app usage and online activity can be overwhelming at times but using a parental control software like Net Nanny can support your efforts in keeping your children safe online. Snapchat can be a lot of fun, however it is important for parents to understand the app and know what they can do to make the app a safer place for their children. By utilizing some of these safeguards your teens cans start snapping away with less worry.

This article was originally published by NetNanny.com.

Like so many other institutions birthed out of noble intentions, America’s public libraries were founded as a Christian endeavor. In fact, the earliest libraries were part of the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel — a mission-minded Church of England entity.

A missionary priest, the Reverend John Sharpe, noted while visiting New York City in 1713:

Another thing which is very much wanted here is a public Library, which would very much advance both learning and piety. Such there are at Charles Town in Carolina, Annapolis in Mary Land, at Philadelphia and Boston. Some books have been formerly sent to New York but as parochial they remain in the hands of the Incumbent.

Like universities and hospitals, faith was an integral part of public libraries in our nation’s past. The intent being the advancement of literacy which might help spread the Gospel.

Now, a mere three centuries later, what began as a good work is being turned on its head and every parent and grandparent must be made aware and vigilant!

Not that many years ago libraries in America were a safe place for children to check out Make Way for Ducklings, Mike Mulligan and His Steam Shovel, The Boxcar Children and Little Women. Parents smiled at the mere thought of their kids whiling away hours at the local library.

But no more.

America’s libraries have become one more progressive tool to dismantle Judeo-Christian values, and every responsible mother and father, grandparent or guardian must understand how perverts use the library’s policy of unfiltered Internet to access obscene and illegal content.

This is nothing new. For more than 15 years now we have been sounding the alarm about the dangers of pornography and sex crimes in our libraries. It isn’t hyperbole to say that library officials, by refusing to use filtering technology to block graphic obscene websites, are fostering a clear and present danger in our neighborhoods and for our children. We have numerous examples on our YouTube page.

Recently, WGN Channel 9 News revisited this issue, and what they found on the third floor of Chicago’s Harold Washington Library is stunning. Their initial undercover report aired 10 years ago and was alarming.

Watch their most recent report:

The surrounding article is highly disturbing with excerpts such as this:

In 2019, if someone has a problem with another user’s obscene screen images, that person can move or ask a staffer or security to move the user viewing indecent images. Guards are stationed in the room, but they do not watch what viewers are calling up on their screens. They are instructed to only act when there’s a disturbance.

First of all, what kind of disturbance are they referring to? Well, not to shock you, but it is often men fondling themselves as they watch pornography. Why is the onus on the innocent to either move or ask a library staff person to ask someone viewing obscene images to move?

Moreover, the WGN report doesn’t challenge the notion that a library patron has some new First Amendment “right” to view illegal pornography in tax-funded public library. This is utterly false. First of all, taxpayers do not have an obligation to provide free smut to perverts in our neighborhood libraries. Secondly, much (if not most) of the pornography being viewed on the taxpayer dime would be found illegal if the U.S. Supreme Court test for obscenity were applied.

This is a public library, not an adult XXX bookstore! Shouldn’t one have an assumption of safety from obscenity and perversion at a library?

Psalm 101:3 instructs us:

I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me.

The New Living Translation makes it even more clear:

I will refuse to look at
anything vile and vulgar.
I hate all who deal crookedly;
I will have nothing to do with them.

God knows mankind and our hearts. He made us and our minds with a marvelous connection between our creative imaginations and our behaviors. But with the fall came the propensity to, in our regenerate state, hunger after harmful things. Things which destroy.

Pornography is one such destructive thing.

Proverbs 6:27-33 warns of the end result of chasing wicked and vile things:

Can a man scoop fire into his lap
without his clothes being burned?

Can a man walk on hot coals
without his feet being scorched?

So is he who sleeps with another man’s wife;
no one who touches her will go unpunished.

People do not despise a thief if he steals
to satisfy his hunger when he is starving.

Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold,
though it costs him all the wealth of his house.

But a man who commits adultery has no sense;
whoever does so destroys himself.

Blows and disgrace are his lot,
and his shame will never be wiped away.

God’s Word is so clear about “seeing” vile things. The New Testament uses the word “fornication” from the Greek word “πορνεια” οr transliterated, “porneia,” from which we get the word pornography.

And what exactly does the Bible say about such behavior?

The apostle Paul tells us in his letter to the church at Corinth:

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. 1 Corinthians 6:18

Earlier in chapter 6 Paul admonishes:

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Clearly, both the Old and New Testament decry the dangers of sexual sins, which begin with setting that “vile” thing before your eyes.

How should believers deal with such activity at their local library? Should we speak up? Should we boycott?

No matter our course of action, the first matter of importance is to safeguard our children! Protect them from the images AND those viewing these images. As harsh as it may sound, do NOT allow your children free access in the library.

Once upon a time parents could leave their kids unattended to study and read at the local library.

But this is not that time. Romans 1 has come to fruition and, though they claim not to “approve” of the pornography being viewed on public library computers, the librarians and American Library Association (ALA), appear to do nothing to stop this scourge.

The ALA mission being:

To provide leadership for the development, promotion, and improvement of library and information services and the profession of librarianship in order to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all.

It would seem “access to information” is sacrosanct, RATHER than the protection of children and others!

That free access of ALL information sounds vaguely like another argument once made in a garden:

Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?

“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Let us choose that better thing, and to remember that, “children are an heritage of the Lord.”

We must actively protect our children first, then make our voices heard! After all, our tax dollars pay for those libraries!

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

Stay in the loop by texting “IFI” to 555888 or click here to enroll right away.

Written by WeZift.com

Are you unsure which apps are safe for your kids and teens to use? Screen time can be difficult to manage for families and the biggest question is which apps are appropriate for kids to download onto their smartphones and tablets. Not to worry – we’ve compiled a list of over 30 dangerous apps that kids and teens are using. Take a look at some of the most popular apps that are not recommended for kids:

Dangerous Messaging Apps for Kids

Messaging apps are a good way for kids to stay in contact with friends, families and peers. If there are not strong privacy settings enabled or content moderators, there is a possibility of kids being exposed to strangers and possibly mature content.

• GroupMe
  GroupMe is a group messaging app where users can chat with large numbers of friends or strangers.

• Chatous
  The Chatous app randomly matches users to strangers across the world.

• Oovoo
  Oovoo is a free messaging and video calling for one-on-one chats or group chats with up to 8 users.

Dangerous Live Streaming Apps for Kids

Live streaming can be a fun way for kids to express themselves and see what their friends are doing. However, it can also be intrusive and unsafe for children and teens who may come into contact with online strangers or mature content. Live streaming apps are best used with parental supervision.

• Tik Tok
  Similar to the popular (and now defunct) Musical.ly and Live.ly apps, Tik Tok has rolled the most popular features from those apps into this new live streaming video app.

• Live.Me
  The Live.Me app allows users to connect with people all over the world to live stream, watch videos and chat.

• Bigo
  Bigo is another popular live streaming app where users connect through live video.

Dangerous Hookup Apps for Kids

Dating and hookup apps are not recommended for teenagers or kids. In fact, most dating apps require their users to be 17 years of age or older in order to use their services, however most dating apps have little or no age verification and many rely on location tracking to pair up matches. For kids, this can be dangerous because strangers can easily be aware of your child’s location and can have access to view/share photos and chat with them directly.

• Down
  Down is a new dating app where users can connect to find romantic matches or hookups. It is not intended to be used by people under the age of 17.

• Badoo
  Badoo is a chat and dating app where users are connected based on crossed geo-location paths. This app is also not intended for minors, but does not have strict age verification.

• Tinder
  Tinder is a very popular dating app for adults focused on geo-location and a swipe system to match users. This app is also relatively easy for teens to use even though it is rated for users over 17.

Download a copy of the complete list of the most dangerous teen apps that parents should know about for 2019.

This article was originally published at WeZift.com.

Written by Steve Huston

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, …it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us…”

Many of you are probably familiar with these opening lines from the classic Charles Dickens’ story A Tale of Two Cities. Well representing so many areas of our nation and our culture today, I choose to apply these opening words to the vast landscape—or virtual wasteland—of information and entertainment via technology that is only a click away via our devices.

Dickens writes about a time of extreme opposites without any in-betweens; our goal here is to recognize the extreme polarization these devices offer, yet aim at some guidelines that will, hopefully, land us somewhere in-between. That middle ground being a wise use of screens, as opposed to not using them at all or using them without restriction, having no concern for the inherent dangers they bring. While children are my main concern here, adults have also been taken captive by the alluring blue glow of their screens.

On one hand our digital devices offer “wisdom,” “Light, “the spring of hope,” and seemingly hold out “everything before us.” After all, one can read our newsletter, listen to our broadcasts, and receive our emails or those of other ministries on their favorite screen. I often “join” a congregation in Pennsylvania on Sundays, to be encouraged by great messaging. I use screens for research and occasionally to study God’s Word with online resources; what a terrific tool our screens can be.

On the other hand, digital devices also epitomize “foolishness,” “Darkness,” “the winter of despair,” and a great wasteland of “nothing before us.” We seem compelled to waste vast amounts of time with them. Males and females of all ages post or view photos or movies that range from immodest to pornographic; multitudes go from being entertained to becoming addicted; what should be used for good becomes a tool for evil as our baser side is unleashed. We have written about the dangers of hiding behind screens, neither being seen nor seeing, as we respond to others or mention them on social media. After all, who is to see, know, or care? Well, God sees; God knows; and God definitely cares about our smartphone use.

Regardless of how our children are using their smartphones, the amount of time they are on them is an issue in itself. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) reports that nine- and ten-year-old children who spend more than two hours in front of a screen each day score lower on thinking and language tests—the average “tween” spends up to six hours a day on their screens.

Bloomberg reports that “the scans of children who reported daily screen usage of more than seven hours showed premature thinning of the brain cortex, the outermost layer that processes information from the physical world.”

There are studies that show a relation between smartphone use by children and sleep deprivation and poor attention span—two-thirds of children take their devices to bed with them; some even laying their phones on their pillow for fear of missing a text.

Digital addiction is a very real and growing problem.The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation introduces their 2010 study on “Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds,” in part: “Eight- to eighteen-year-olds spend more time with media than in any other activity besides (maybe) sleeping—an average of more than 7½ hours a day, seven days a week…”

In a recent USA Today article we read that over 200 million mostly obsessed people are playing an online game called “Fortnite.” Some of these players are engaging in battle during school instead of paying attention to their teachers. Digital addiction is becoming more commonplace and most parents are at a loss of how to handle it. Other sources warn that victims of digital addiction can experience “destructive dependence, extreme change of personality, isolation, and physical signs during withdrawal.”

Research shows that teens who spend five or more hours per day on their devices are 71 percent more likely to have one risk factor for suicide—regardless of what they are viewing. Half an hour to one hour a day seems to be the ideal for teen mental health in terms of electronic devices. “Kids who use their phones for at least three hours a day are much more likely to be suicidal.” (Businessinsider.com)

None of the above should surprise us; especially considering that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs raised their kids mostly tech free. For that matter, most Silicon Valley parents are strict about technology use—shouldn’t that raise red flags? Shouldn’t that encourage us to set some very definite limits?

Setting limits is very important; but we must also model those limits. Here are some general guidelines to start; more to come at a later date.

Keep certain times and places “screen-free.”  For starters, at mealtimes we should focus on one another instead of our phones. Intentionally set aside device free “family time,” where you can play games, talk, or work on projects together. There are some families that put their cell phones in a basket upon entering their home to intentionally be present with their family. As for places, bedrooms should definitely be off limits and any zone you choose to allow devices should be public and always available for anyone else to view.

As you set limits, help them to understand that there are dangers associated with smartphone use.

As Christians we need to keep in mind that in all we do—including smartphone and other device usage—we are to glorify God and do in the name of Jesus. And let’s not forget Paul’s admonition in I Corinthians 6:12. “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.”

This article was originally published at AmericanDecency.org

No corporation should profit from or facilitate sexual exploitation. 

Unfortunately, many well-established brands, companies, and organizations in America do just that. Since 2013, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation has published an annual Dirty Dozen List to name and shame the mainstream players in America that perpetuate sexual exploitation—whether that be through pornography, prostitution, sexual objectification, sexual violence and/or sex trafficking.

The Dirty Dozen List is an activism tool that gives back power to individuals who want a voice in the culture. People can participate by taking easy online actions, from sending emails to sharing social media messages.

The Dirty Dozen List has a track record of uniting thousands of individual actions and targeting them to create monumental changes, such as policy improvements at Google, Hilton Worldwide, Verizon, Walmart, and the Department of Defense.

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation works for a world where human beings are not bought and sold for sex, whether on seedy street corners or via the modern convenience of the Internet and where sexual violence or exploitation are not tolerated in any industry. They work for a world free from sexual exploitation in all its forms.

One way they do this is through the annual “Dirty Dozen List,” which names and shames those who contribute significantly to the normalization of pornography, prostitution, sex trafficking, and other forms of sexual exploitation. The groups, agencies, businesses (and this year, individuals) named to this list are among the nation’s worst for masquerading as mainstream entities with respectable reputations, while facilitating access to, or pandering and profiting directly from pornography and or prostitution. Others push policy agendas that normalize egregious forms of sexual exploitation. This list ensures that their participation and collusion with the various aspects of the sex trade becomes public knowledge, and equips concerned citizens with information and tools to hold them accountable.

We are grateful for the work of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation and will stand with them until the normalization of sexual exploitation ends and companies and others no longer stand in allegiance with pornographers, sex traffickers, and sex buyers.

Click HERE for a PDF flyer of “The Dirty Dozen List” for 2018.

Founded in 1962, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) is the leading national organization exposing the links between all forms of sexual exploitation such as child sexual abuse, prostitution, sex trafficking and the public health crisis of pornography.

Publicity-hound in sheep’s clothing, Nadia Bolz-Weber, former pastor of a fake church in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) denomination, is in the news again. Last August, Bolz-Weber made the news by proclaiming that “consumption of pornography” shouldn’t be shamed. In her view, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with watching “ethically sourced” porn as long as people consume it in moderation. Her defense of the moderate use of ethically sourced porn is that “People have viewed erotic imagery since we could scratch it on the inside of caves” and that “[o]ur bodies are wired” to respond to porn.

No argument there. Sin has been in the world since that terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day in the Garden. Since then, our bodies have been wired to desire and respond to all sorts of sinful activities. That hardly seems a defense of engaging in them.

Now Bolz-Weber, who stepped down from the adolescently named House for All Sinners and Saints church (HFASS, get it, half-a**) is in the news for asking women to send their purity rings to her, which she is going to melt down and fashion into a golden vagina. Nothing says Christian love quite like mocking virginity in a vulgar piece of fake art.

She announced this campaign via Twitter:

I’m inviting women to mail in their purity rings for a massive art project. @SweetBirdStudio [Nederland, Colorado jewelry maker Nancy Anderson ] is collaborating with me to melt them into a sculpture of a vagina… join in and get your certificate of impurity!

This massive art project will take place at “The Makers” conference , a feminist conference that will take place at some secret location in Southern California with secret speakers in February 2019.

Though this project is offensive, it’s not surprising from Bolz-Weber who praises the bloody work of Planned Parenthood that makes bank on sexual promiscuity and the tiny inconvenient humans that are the disposable products of sexual promiscuity.

Obviously favoring the news over the pews, Bolz-Weber, the inked-up, obscene, viril-ish pastor proclaims herself rather than Christ and his kingdom to the world. Bolz-Weber is mother to two teens; married to Matthew Weber who is the pastor of Holy Love Lutheran Church (ELCA) in Aurora, Colorado; and describes herself as a “dyke.”

As reported in 2016, “about a third of her congregation are in the LGBT community”—and by “in the LGBT community,” the interviewer did not mean experiencing unwanted same-sex attraction but living a celibate life in accordance with Scripture. He meant a third of Bolz-Weber’s congregation affirms homosexuality in defiance of Scripture.

Bolz-Weber spouts the common “progressive” tripe that because Jesus spent time with the marginalized, the church should affirm homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation. She conveniently omits the rest of the accounts of the time Jesus spent with the marginalized. He spent time with them—not chewing the fat, going to amusement parks with them as she does, and affirming their sin. He called them to repent and follow him, to deny themselves and take up their crosses daily, to live “no longer for human passions but for the will of God,” to put off old selves which belonged to former manners of life that were corrupted through deceitful desires,” to be renewed in the spirit of their minds, and to put on their new selves “created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

Bolz-Weber, who has two books on the New York Times bestseller list and a huge idolatrous fan base, has left her church but not her hellbound ministry. She is on a world tour of heretical churches to promote her newest book Shameless: A Sexual Reformation. In an interview, she expressed her goal for the book:

I want people who read this to re-think their ideas about sexual ethics, gender, orientation, extra-marital sex, and the inherent goodness of the human body. We are reaching for a new Christian sexual ethic that’s not based on a standardized list of ‘thou shalt nots,’ but on concern for each other’s flourishing, letting go of shame.

Bolz-Weber is not encouraging sexual holiness and letting go of pathological shame that derives from an inadequate understanding of or refusal to accept God’s forgiveness. Rather, she seeks to lead Christians to let go of biblical standards of sexual holiness and desensitize them to the work of the Holy Spirit that leads Christians to feel guilt or shame when they sin. Her devilish work is to eradicate conscience, so people are free to live lives of sexual sin. Her pursuit of hedonism marks a return to paganism.

While she claims she resigned in August because the church she built no longer needs her (a truer thing was never spoken), this suspicious mind speculates that it was either greenback pastures or the lure of being worshiped on a larger stage or both that led her to resign.

Unfortunately, she left her sheep to be led further astray by homosexual shepherd Reagan Humber who is a man “married” to drag queen “Fruit Bomb,” one of whose performances is of him bad-lipsyncing while performing fake abortions.

Leading people astray is Bolz-Weber’s business. She recently gave a Facebook shout-out to “my girl,” Rev. Emily Scott, a graduate of Yale Divinity School who is starting a new ELCA church in Baltimore, Maryland called “Dreams and Visions” where “false binaries are left behind” and “queerness is holy.”

Bolz-Weber admits to having been mercilessly bullied at school during childhood because of bulging eyes, a result of Graves’ disease, an immune-system disorder that wasn’t diagnosed until age 12. She attributes her “rage and cynicism,” and high school drinking and drug use to the bullying. This should serve as a cautionary tale to parents. If your child is being bullied at school, find a way to pull him or her out. Bullying can lead to all manner of emotional, psychological, social, relational, sexual, and spiritual dysfunction.

Pray for Bolz-Weber. Pray for healing and for an end to her ministry that undermines human flourishing and puts at risk the eternal lives of those who follow her. She leads them not to freedom but bondage.

And be vigilant. Watch for wolves stealthily creeping into your church. Some are harder to discern than Nadia Bolz-Weber.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Another-Wolf-in-the-Church1.mp3

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois! 

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.

Written by Alex Chediak

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

Smoking Pot

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

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

Same Sex Relations

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

Sexual Ethics

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suicide

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

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

Our Response

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

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

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

This article originally posted at Stream.org.

Aly Raisman, former Olympic gymnast and one of the many victims of serial abuser Larry Nassar, offered this troubling defense of her appearance the in Sports Illustrated (SI) soft-core porn “swimsuit” issue wearing nothing but dumb slogans written on her body:

Women do not have to be modest to be respected–Live for you!… The time when women are taught to be ashamed of their bodies is OVER.

She’s right. Women don’t “have to be modest to be respected.” We should respect humans because they’re human. But not all behavioral choices should be respected. Choosing to be immodest—like appearing nude in a men’s magazine—is a choice that ought not be respected.

I’m not quite sure what Raisman means in tacking on the words “Live for you” to her first statement. I guess she lives to be immodest.

Modesty is not synonymous with shame. Modesty in this context means “regard for decency of behavior or dress.” Shame refers to “the painful feeling arising from the consciousness of something dishonorable, improper etc.”

Modesty is a virtue to be cultivated, and women should feel shame over stripping for SI. (Men too should feel shame for stripping, but we’re discussing female SI strippers.)

I’m not sure who Raisman thinks is teaching women to be ashamed of their bodies, but I’ll tell you who I think is: advertisers, the modeling industry, women’s magazines, pornography, and the soft-core porn issue of Sports Illustrated—all of which depict images of a very narrow segment of the female population. They depict young, beautiful, well-proportioned women with dewy, flawless skin—you know, like Aly Raisman.

Raisman and other strippers shouldn’t feel ashamed of their bodies. They should feel ashamed of choosing to expose their bodies to the public for the sexual pleasure of strangers.

Journalist Britt Henry offered this tepid criticism of the SI stripper issue:

Why does a woman have to pose nude to feel “empowered”? Isn’t it more empowering to keep your clothes on, go into an office or classroom like everyone else and excel? 

In response to Henry, former pro-golfer Paige Spiranac defended stripping for SI:

Different women feel empowered in different ways and it’s not right to tell someone what they can and cannot do.

Didn’t Spiranac just tell Henry what she ought not do? What if Henry feels empowered by criticizing stripping?

And what about women who feel empowered by starving or cutting themselves? What about women who feel empowered by being naked at public pools? What about women who feel empowered by their sexual relationship with their brothers or fathers?

(BTW, Henry did not tell anyone what they “can and cannot do.” She asked questions that implied stripping isn’t a good thing to do.)

What SI strippers are saying is that there should be no moral evaluation of any action they autonomously choose. No questions asked about whether stripping is a moral act or not. No questions about whether stripping contributes to the objectification of women or encourages male lust. No questions about whether strippers serve as good role models for young girls. No questions about whether stripping for SI contributes to women feeling ashamed of their average, imperfect bodies. Nope, all that’s permitted in response to purportedly autonomous choices is affirmation.

Empowerment seems to mean nothing more than “I feel good.” These strippers probably don’t want anyone to ask why they feel good about exposing their bodies to strangers who use those images to engage in onanistic activity. And they surely don’t want anyone to suggest it’s shameful to facilitate the poisoning of the minds and hearts of boys and men.

As porn of the soft- and hard-core varieties proliferates, young men who began being exposed to porn starting in middle school are finding themselves unable to perform sexually with real women, and marriages are being destroyed. The “autonomous” choices of “empowered” women to be immodest for money play a part in this mess. And for that, they should feel shame.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Sports-Illustrated-Strippers.mp3

RESCHEDULED: IFI Worldview Conference May 5th

We have rescheduled our annual Worldview Conference featuring well-know apologist John Stonestreet for Saturday, May 5th at Medinah Baptist Church. Mr. Stonestreet is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “Making Sense of Your World” and his newest offer: “A Practical Guide to Culture.”

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

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

From the National Center on Sexual Exploitation

No corporation should profit from or facilitate sexual exploitation. Unfortunately, many well-established brands, companies, and organizations in America do just that. Since 2013, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation has published an annual Dirty Dozen List to name and shame the mainstream players in America that perpetuate sexual exploitation—whether that be through pornography, prostitution, sexual objectification, sexual violence and/or sex trafficking.

The Dirty Dozen List is an activism tool that gives back power to individuals who want a voice in the culture. People can participate by taking easy online actions, from sending emails to sharing social media messages.

The Dirty Dozen List has a track record of uniting thousands of individual actions and targeting them to create monumental changes, such as policy improvements at Google, Hilton Worldwide, Verizon, Walmart, and the Department of Defense.

Amazon: Amazon.com, the world’s largest online retailer, facilitates the sale of materials that sexualize children and normalize the dehumanization and sexual commodification of women. Such products include eroticized child nudity photography books, sex dolls (many with childlike features,) and books with “how to” instructions for sex trafficking. Amazon Prime also produces original content that normalizes gratuitous sexual violence against women and softcore pornography as mainstream entertainment.

Backpage.com: Backpage.com brings the seedy street corners of America’s red-light districts to home computers. As a classified advertising website known as “the hub” for prostitution advertising, Backpage.com serves as a virtual auction block where sex buyers can shop for human beings for sex from the privacy of their home, office, hotel room, or cell phone. Many of those bought and sold via the website are sexually trafficked women and children. The website facilitates this activity by allegedly editing ads to conceal the illegality of underlying criminal activity and remains immune from prosecution due to the Communications Decency Act Section 230.

Comcast: Comcast distributes and profits from sexual exploitation. One way it does this is by providing access to hardcore pornography via its Xfinity television packages. In 2017, Comcast informed NCOSE that it would take measures to hide and deceptively sanitize film descriptions and titles – but Comcast is still defending and profiting off of teen, incest, and racist-themed pornography.

EBSCO: EBSCO Information Services offers online library resources to public and private schools (K-12), public libraries, and more. In its advertising for schools, it promises “fast access to curriculum-appropriate content.” However, its databases provide easy access to hardcore pornography sites and extremely graphic sexual content. In 2017, EBSCO removed some content from their K-12 databases, however there remains an incredible amount of easily accessible sexually explicit material bypassing school filters mixed in with educational material.

HBO: Home Box Office Inc. (HBO) is a premium cable and satellite television network owned by Time Warner. Since the early 2000s HBO has produced a string of original programs that incorporate graphic sex scenes. Examples include G String Divas, CatHouse: The Series,and Hung. Graphic depictions of sex, rape, and brutal sexual violence are also commonplace in The Deuce, Game of Thronesand Westworld. HBO has reached a new low as it turns torture porn into popular entertainment.

iBooks: Apple’s iBooks app is automatically pre-downloaded on most iPhones as an easy way to access audio and written books while mobile. However, this app is filled with erotic literature that supports rape myths, normalizes adult-with-teen-themed and incest-themed exploitation, and reinforces degrading racially charged sexual stereotypes. Even innocent searches auto-populate graphic suggestions. Many stories feature “barely legal,” student-teacher, and “babysitter” sex, “forced sex” (aka rape,) or submission of minority races like Black, Asian, and Indian to white males.

The Poster Boys of #MeToo: This year, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation broke with its tradition of placing only mainstream companies or organizations on the Dirty Dozen List, to include four “Poster Boys” of the #MeToo culture of sexual assault and harassment: Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Woody Allen, and James Franco. These four men have used their power to both harass and abuse others, in addition to shaping America’s cultural acceptance of sexual exploitation through their professions.

ROKU: Roku, a leading media streaming company, provides its users with the ability to stream television programs, movies, music, and more, on their personal devices. Roku also facilitates access to hardcore pornography channels through hundreds of private and hidden channels. This stands in sharp contrast to the policies of other streaming device industry leaders such as Apple TV or Amazon’s Fire TV.

Snap Inc.: Arguably the most popular smartphone app used by Millennials and teens, Snapchat is frequently used for sexting and sharing child sexual abuse images (i.e. child pornography). Snapchat’s “Stories” is a feature which includes public content from media outlets like Cosmopolitan, frequently containing sexually graphic material that cannot be easily blocked by users. Additionally, its “SnapCash” feature enables users to easily monetize and profit from the exchange of sexual content.

Steam: Steam is the Walmart of online videogame distribution, with over 35 million users who are minors. Steam offers categories of “nudity” and “sexual content” video games, which include over 780 video games with explicit content, featuring only mild warnings. These games, for example House Party, Men of Yoshiwara: Ohgiya, Super Star, Porno Studio Tycoon and more, promote the dangerous misconception that sexually exploiting others is harmless and fun.

Twitter: Twitter is a major source of breaking news and boasts more than 300 million monthly, active users. It also serves as a major platform to disseminate hardcore pornography and facilitate prostitution. While the platform removed the ability to search for these terms directly in video or picture tabs, there are still countless pornographic accounts which often serve as advertisements for pornography websites or online prostitution.

YouTube: In late 2017, Google’s YouTube came under scrutiny for hosting disturbing videos that targeted children, often with children’s characters put in sexually charged or violent situations, and searches in the YouTube search bar would autocomplete with suggestions for child sex-themed videos. YouTube states that it removed many of these channels and the autocomplete suggestions, but YouTube is failing to proactively monitor or restrict sexually graphic content and it forces users to go through a rigorous process, which includes watching the material, if they want to report the content for removal.

Originally published at EndSexualExploitation.org.

Written by Dorothy Cummings McLean

A new study suggests that pornography use makes church-going men more tolerant of abortion. For moral conservatives, the news dovetails with another recent study showing porn use increases men’s support for homosexual ‘marriage’.

The study, titled “Does Religious Attendance Moderate a Connection Between Pornography Consumption and Attitudes Towards Women?”,  argues that church-attending men who use pornography begin to tolerate abortion because of their “cognitive dissonance” regarding their sexual behavior.

Kyler R. Rasmussen of Mount Royal University and Taylor Kohut of the University of Toronto said that they “found that those who reported consuming pornography had more egalitarian attitudes than those who did not, but this difference was stronger among those who attended religious services more regularly—those who would be likely to experience dissonance when consuming pornography.”

By “egalitarian attitudes” the researchers mean positive “attitudes toward women in power, women in the workplace, and abortion.” It should be noted that Rasmussen and Kohut assume that it is “progressive” and “egalitarian” to believe in so-called abortion rights.

They write that the “attitudinal shifts” resulting from use of pornography by religious men can be partly explained by “the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.” This theory suggests that attitudes can be changed when people behave in ways that “are in conflict with those attitudes.” When people who think porn is bad use it anyway, their behavior causes “cognitive dissonance” and the resulting discomfort changes their opinions about porn and, “by extension,” other sexual matters.

The authors, who refer to a large-scale survey conducted in the United States to present their findings, state that religious conservatives become less conservative when they use pornography. In their study, they write:

“In the case of religious conservatives, pornography-related dissonance could not only serve to liberalize attitudes toward pornography and, by extension, sexuality, but also other conservative beliefs that support those attitudes, including beliefs about female subservience and dependence [sic]. Because of this, pornography might be more likely to alter egalitarian attitudes amongst those who should feel the most dissonance when consuming it—namely, those whose religious practices imply strong condemnation of pornographic material.”

The study, which was published on November 29 on the online “Journal of Sex Research,” cites a 2007 work by Mark Regnerus, Forbidden fruit: Sex & religion in the lives of American teenagers. Regnerus, who does not conflate abortion support with “egalitarianism”, observed in his recently released Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy that the use of porn erodes religious belief and is a “very significant predictor of men’s support for same-sex marriage.”

“It may be, at least in part, a passive byproduct of regular exposure to the diversity of sex found in contemporary porn,” Regnerus wrote.

The Rasmussen-Kohut research into conservative Christians builds on other published findings regarding pornography’s power to change attitudes. A 2016 study co-authored by Taylor Kohut that also appeared in the Journal of Sex Research, “Is Pornography Really about ‘Making Hate to Women’? Pornography Users Hold More Gender Egalitarian Attitudes than Nonusers in a Representative American Sample,” illustrated that “porn users are more apt to identify as feminists” and support so-called  “egalitarian attitudes” towards women’s employment, leadership and abortion.

In Cheap Sex, Mark Regnerus cited Kohut’s 2016 study and said, “You think technology cannot change people’s minds? It may be time to reconsider.”

This article was originally posted at LifeSiteNews.com

America was founded as a beacon of light, a refuge to those who only wanted to worship the God of the Bible as they saw fit. Our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, were infused with biblical precepts and a presumption of a Creator and His transcendent Truth.

For over 200 years this experiment in liberty flourished, lighting the world with the light of Truth and Righteousness.

At times during our nation’s history, Americans en masse veered toward the broad path to destruction. And at every departure from upright and moral living, a preacher or prophet of sorts would proclaim the words of God’s inspired Book, people would repent, and our national character would be righted.

God told Israel the truth, which still applies today:

This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live. Deuteronomy 30:19

But in the twentieth century, culture-changers assaulted our society, teaching people to exchange the truth for lies, with cascading and calamitous results. The following have deceived people to choose death, rather than life.

Margaret Sanger (September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966), a nurse and proponent of birth control and eugenics, inspired the Nazis with her notions of breeding and forced sterilization to weed out the less than desirable races. “Nurse” Sanger was the Founder and first president of Planned Parenthood.

As I wrote in 2014:

…she formed the organization, American Birth Control League [est. 1921], which would eventually become Planned Parenthood [est. 1952].

And like the modern day organization, cloaking its true agenda in palatable verbiage such as “family planning” and “choice,” Margaret’s goal was far more evil than the respectable facade she presented.

. . .

Sanger was a Darwinist who embraced a utilitarian view of human life, and proposed to rid our nation of the criminal element and “inferior races” through abortion and breeding programs.

Thanks to Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood has cruelly slaughtered approximately 300,000 pre-born children a year since Roe v. Wade, or about 13.2 MILLION total.

Thanks to Sanger, life has been cheapened, and sexual intimacy divorced from the God-ordained, relationship of marriage.

Sanger pushed America to sow the seeds of destruction and the devaluation of life with abortion and a utilitarian view of human life.

Subsequently we’ve reaped the harvest of catastrophic and crippling depression in generations of women.

Alfred Kinsey (June 23, 1894 – August 25, 1956) was a biologist, professor of entomology and zoology, and a sexologist. He is known as the “Father of the Sexual Revolution” and founded the famed Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction. Kinsey shook the nation with his books, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953).

These books revealed to a shocked and somewhat titillated population things they had never known about themselves: That between 30-45% of men had affairs, 85% of men had had sex prior to marriage, that a staggering 70% of men had slept with prostitutes, and that between 10 and 37% of men had engaged in homosexual behavior.

Alfred Kinsey’s studies, in retrospect, paved the way for hedonistic depravity. And how did Kinsey obtain the findings reported in his books?

Kinsey himself was a pervert and a sex criminal.

For example, where did he get all of his data on the “sexual behavior of children”? The answer is nothing short of chilling. Dr. Judith Reisman (whose research has since been confirmed time and time again) explained in her groundbreaking work Sex, Lies and Kinsey that Kinsey facilitated brutal sexual abuse to children as young as two months old, to get his so-called research:

Kinsey solicited and encouraged pedophiles, at home and abroad, to sexually violate from 317 to 2,035 infants and children for his alleged data on normal “child sexuality.” Many of the crimes against children (oral and anal sodomy, genital intercourse and manual abuse) committed for Kinsey’s research are quantified in his own graphs and charts.

. . .

The Father of the Sexual Revolution was a sado-masochistic bi-sexual sex criminal who facilitated the sexual torture of infants and children.

Thanks in large part to Alfred Kinsey, sexual deviancy and pedophilia were heralded as normal, and any and all sexual activity divorced from the God-ordained, relationship of marriage.

Kinsey taught America to sow the seeds of depraved sexual activity without the good and protective constraints of the previously held Judeo-Christian worldview.

Subsequently our nation has reaped the harvest of lives ruined, marriages wrecked, and all-time high venereal disease — now called Sexually Transmitted Diseases.

More than two million cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis were reported in the United States in 2016, the highest number ever, according to the annual Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance Report released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“Increases in STDs are a clear warning of a growing threat,” said Jonathan Mermin, M.D., M.P.H., director of CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. “STDs are a persistent enemy, growing in number, and outpacing our ability to respond.”

An epidemic accelerating in multiple populations—impact growing in women, infants, and gay and bisexual men.

Timothy Leary (October 22, 1920 – May 31, 1996) was an American psychologist and writer. He was an enthusiastic advocate of LSD and other psychedelic drugs. Leary’s famous quote “turn on, tune in, drop out” affected a generation of rebellious youth in, for the most part, the 1960’s and 1970’s.

Leary’s disciples turned onto drugs, tuned into sex, rock and roll, and dropped out, in many cases dropped dead, including: Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Brian Cole (The Association), Gram Parsons (The Byrds), Tommy Bolin (Deep Purple), Gregory Herbert (Blood, Sweat & Tears), Keith Moon (The Who), Sid Vicious (Sex Pistols), Lowell George (Little Feat), and more.

Thanks to the influence of Timothy Leary, a generation or more of Americans chose to escape life via drugs, and became enslaved by LSD, heroin, barbiturates, and other dangerous substances. Thousands of young Americans followed Leary’s direction into an untimely death.

Timothy Leary cajoled Americans to sow the seeds of escapism and societal anarchy and substance abuse.

Subsequently America has reaped the harvest of crime, ruined lives, and death.

Helen Gurley Brown (February 18, 1922 – August 13, 2012) was an author, publisher, and businesswoman. She pushed women in America to throw off their sexual inhibitions. Brown’s book, Sex and the Single Girl (1962) “encouraged women to become financially independent and experience sexual relationships before or without marriage.”

Brown gained further prominence as the Editor-in-Chief of Cosmopolitan magazine from 1965 – 1997. Continuing her mantra of sex without boundaries, Cosmo under HGB “set itself apart by frankly discussing sexuality from the point of view that women could and should enjoy sex without guilt.”

To this day Cosmopolitan is known for its edgy (aka immoral) sexual agenda and in September of this year alone reached over 32 million readers.

Thanks to Helen Gurley Brown, millions of young women were led to believe that sexual intimacy can and should be enjoyed without the burden of marriage and fidelity.

Ms. Brown deceived teen girls and women to sow the seeds of wanton, narcissistic sexuality.

Subsequently American women reaped the harvest of babies out of wedlock, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, and ruined lives and marriages.

Hugh Hefner (April 9, 1926 – September 27, 2017) was an American businessman, magazine publisher and playboy. He rejected the Christian faith of his parents in exchange for a life of rampant sexual conquest. “Hef” was Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Playboy magazine. Wikipedia describes Playboy:

Playboy is an American men’s lifestyle and entertainment magazine. It was founded in Chicago in 1953, by Hugh Hefner and his associates, and funded in part by a $1,000 loan from Hefner’s mother. Notable for its centerfolds of nude and semi-nude models (Playmates), Playboy played an important role in the sexual revolution and remains one of the world’s best-known brands, having grown into Playboy Enterprises, Inc.

After his death in September of this year, many in the world were lauding Hugh, such as frequent Playboy model and one-time Playmate of the Year, Jenny McCarthy, who gushed:

[Hugh was] the most good-hearted, caring, generous, supportive friend, and mentor…his zest for life was contagious

McCarthy tweeted:

But what is the truth?

The truth is that Hugh Hefner disseminated the lies that women are playthings (i.e. Playmates), objects of men’s desires and lust, and tools for gratification.

Contrast that with God’s admonition for love within marriage:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Ephesians 5:25

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:33

Thanks to Hugh Hefner, pornography became commonplace in America and women were stripped, not only of their clothing, but of their intrinsic worth. Thanks to Hef, sex became a meaningless pastime, a means to a few moments of physical pleasure, rather than the height of intimacy between husband and wife and a means of procreation.

God created sex to be beautiful and meaningful. Satan, the great liar who loves to offer counterfeits, twists it into a vile, animalistic act.

Hugh Hefner and Playboy magazine led our culture to sow seeds of dehumanizing women, and separating sexual intimacy from the safe, loving environment of true marriage.

And subsequently America has reaped a culture teaming with sexual users and predators. Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey and the other users in Hollywood and elsewhere didn’t happen in a vacuum, or by accident.

The Apostle Paul tells us in Galatians:

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Galatians 6:7

If we repent, as individuals, and as a nation, we can re-light our beacon. But Americans must follow Truth and Life. We must choose Blessing not Cursing. We must reject the false promises and evil teaching of Margaret Sanger and Alfred Kinsey and Timothy Leary and Helen Gurley Brown and Hugh Hefner and others.

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. Proverbs 14:12

If Americans choose Truth, then we’ll reap blessing and life and life abundantly.

But only if we choose Truth.

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

-and, please-