SPLC, once a valued organization fighting for civil rights of minorities, refocused some time ago. Part of that “refocusing” resulted in the group’s publication of a “hate map” several years ago. James Wright, head of D. James Kennedy Ministries, is very familiar with the hate map.

“Initially it was related to the question of marriage and the gay agenda,” he shares. “[But] these days if you’re on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate map, it might be anything from your stand on immigration, to radical Islam, to the sanctity of human life, to marriage, to whatever.”

GuideStar has re-published the hate map and Amazon’s charitable contributions don’t go to those groups listed thereon. That includes D. James Kennedy Ministries, which has filed suit in Alabama federal court alleging discrimination and libel against all three organizations.

Wright argues that SPLC, GuideStar, and Amazon have labeled his organization and many others as hate groups for one simple reason: “To try to silence us,” he says. “They don’t want to deal with us on the issues. They want to silence us and make us a marginal voice in the culture.”

He goes on to say “their definition of hate is both morally and intellectually dishonest, unjustifiable” – and that the only way to deal with it is to have the three groups prove their definition of hate before a jury of peers. Thus, the lawsuit.

Apple’s profits going to the SPLC

A spokesman for another group on the “hate map” says it’s dangerous when people are so blinded by their ideology that they finance organizations such as the SPLC. That comment comes in the wake of Apple Corporation CEO Tim Cook announcing his company is donating $1 million to the SPLC and the Anti-Defamation League.

Abraham Hamilton III, general counsel and policy analyst for the American Family Association, responds to the donation.

Hamilton offers a solution to deal with Apple’s announced plan to use profits from the sales of its products to support organizations like the SPLC – organizations he says “encourage hate” and are “radically, ideologically driven” and pro-abortion.

“[When] you see this happening, the best way to respond is to vote with your pocketbook,” he tells OneNewsNow.

In other words, consumers will decide whether Apple’s move is good for public relations.

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).

In the wake of the Charlottesville melee, the mainstream press is citing the disreputable Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and its “hate” groups list ad nauseum with nary a peep about the repeated criticism of the SPLC as a bastion of anti-Christian bigotry.

The Illinois Family Institute (IFI) is included on the “hate” groups list alongside white supremacist and white separatist groups for no reason other than our biblical view of marriage as a sexually differentiated union and our biblical views of sexual morality—views that are shared by the Roman Catholic Church, many Protestant denominations, many non-denominational churches, Orthodox Judaism, 2,000 years of church history, and the Bible.

It’s not just IFI that finds the SPLC and its leaders unethical. The avaricious founder of the SPLC, Morris Dees, and the dishonest editor-in-chief of the “Intelligence Report” which is responsible for the corrupt “hate” groups list, Mark Potok, have come under sustained criticism from many people for many years. (Click here, here, and here  to read more.)

Several months ago, one such critic, Real Clear Politics writer Carl Cannon, wrote an exposé of the SPLC, to whom Cannon attributes blame for the anti-free-speech assault on political scientist Charles Murray at radical Middlebury College in Vermont.

Civil rights attorney Dees co-founded the lucrative non-profit SPLC in 1971, ostensibly to combat the racism endemic to the South, and on the way, he’s made a boatload of money that has enabled him to live the luxurious lifestyle to which he and his five serial wives had become accustomed. His clients? Well, they didn’t fare quite as well financially.

Cannon explains that when the Ku Klux Klan’s power waned and racism diminished, the SPLC had to find new ways “to frighten people into still donating.” He says that “Scaring the bejesus out of people requires new bogeymen, and lots of them.” Further, Cannon claims that “mainstream conservative groups” are among the bogeymen.

Cannon reports that the “most scathing assessments of Dees and his group have always come from the left” like “Stephen B. Bright, a Yale law professor and president of the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights,” who describes Dees as a “con man” and a “fraud.”

Even the far-Left magazine The Nation indicts Dees as “the archsalesman of hatemongering,” accusing him of stuffing “mailbags…with his fundraising letters, scaring dollars out of the pockets of trembling liberals aghast at his lurid depictions of a hate-sodden America in dire need of legal confrontation by the SPLC…. Dees and his hate-seekers scour the landscape for hate…it’s their staple.”

While useful idiots in the mainstream press disseminate the SPLC’s propaganda, thus smearing Christian organizations and lining the pockets of Dees, the FBI has stopped using the SPLC as a resource.

The SPLC has perfected the tactics espoused by homosexuals Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen who in 1989 wrote what they deemed a “gay manifesto for the 1990’s” titled After the Ball, in which they urged “progressives” to utilize the mainstream media in a campaign to eradicate conservative moral beliefs—what they call “homohatred”—or “silence” the expression of such beliefs in public:

[L]ink homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary…. Gays must launch a large-scale campaign…to reach straights through mainstream media. We’re talking about propaganda…. Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection…. Make victimizers look bad…. The public should be shown images of ranting homohaters whose associated traits and attitudes appall and anger Middle America. The images might include: Klansmen… Hysterical backwoods preachers… Menacing punks, thugs, and convicts who speak coolly about the “fags” they… would like to bash… [or] A tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.

The SPLC employs all of these propagandistic tactics to stigmatize and marginalize Christian organizations like the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, Liberty Counsel, and the Illinois Family Institute for our beliefs about sexuality and marriage that derive from Scripture and for our willingness to express them publicly.

These are a few of the organizations that have not fallen prey to ravenous wolves or been taken “captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ” (Colossians 2:8).

For their faithfulness, Christ-followers will be hated, but enduring such trials brings blessings:

“Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12).

The cost of discipleship has been minimal in America for over two hundred years, but the cost is rising due to the unholy efforts of “LGBTQQAP” activists.

While Jesus says, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me,” many Christians—entire denominations—are choosing instead friendship with the world, ignoring the words of James:

“Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore, whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” (James 4:4).

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

Busy schedule? Valid reason. Don’t know the couple? Valid reason. Watching football? Still a valid reason. Violates your conscience? You’re fired. Or so goes the logic of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

In December 2014, a reporter asked Judge Ruth Neely whether her faith would allow her to perform a same-sex “wedding” in her official capacity as a local municipal judge. Citing her belief in the Biblical definition of marriage, Judge Ruth Neely said she could not. Judge Neely had not been asked to do a same-sex ceremony. In spite of the fact that many other judges in the district were willing to do such ceremonies, a mere comment to a reporter was enough to bring judgment on Judge Neely.

In March 2015, the Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics filed a complaint against her, alleging that her comments about marriage constituted judicial misconduct, and sought to remove her from both her roles as a judge.

Judge Neely appealed to the state’s Supreme Court, arguing that her removal based on her comments to the reporter would violate her First Amendment free-exercise and free speech rights. The Supreme Court disagreed and publicly censured Judge Neely and forced her to stop solemnizing marriages. Within a week she lost her magistrate position.

Wyoming Supreme Court said that it had to punish Judge Neely to uphold “judicial integrity” despite “no evidence” of Judge Neely’s beliefs harming “respect for the judiciary” or “any person.”

Wyoming law gives municipal judges wide discretion in deciding who they will marry. Judges are allowed to refuse to perform a wedding if they will not marry strangers, if they would rather go to the big football game, or even if they simply don’t feel like marrying the couple. It is only a religious reason that brings legal hostility.

Judge Neely receives no state compensation for performing weddings nor was it argued that she would not recognize a same-sex marriage in acting in her official capacity.

On August 4, 2017, Judge Neely, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys, petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case. The Court has not made it clear whether it will grant the petition.

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

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

A Federal District Court has granted a preliminary injunction in a right-of-conscience case, the controversy of which the Illinois Family Institute has been following for several years.

The religious liberty defending law firm of Mauck & Baker, LLC is reporting some very good news out of that Federal District Court regarding an Illinois law mandating that pro-life medical personnel provide their clients with positive information about abortion services:

CHICAGO— Wednesday a Federal District Court granted the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) and several pro-life pregnancy centers a preliminary injunction against an Illinois law that forces pro-life healthcare professionals to make abortion referrals. The injunction prohibits the State from enforcing the law against healthcare facilities or physicians who have a conscience objection to performing abortions or making abortion referrals.

In their news release, Mauck & Baker provided background on the state statute and the challenge to it:

In 2016, Illinois amended its Healthcare Right of Conscience Act to require pro-life doctors and medical staff to provide referrals to abortion clinics and to speak of the “benefits” of abortion as a treatment option.

Late last year, another group of pregnancy centers obtained an injunction in state court.

The words of the opponents of the legislation were echoed in the court’s opinion, which questioned “why Illinois would require the very individuals who object to abortion services to become a source of information about them.”

In yesterday’s order, the federal court wrote, “It is clear that the amended act targets the free speech rights of people who have a specific viewpoint.”

The federal court preliminary injunction broadly protects all “healthcare facilities, health care personnel, or physicians who object to providing information about health care providers who may offer abortion or who object to describing abortion as a beneficial treatment option.”

Here is Noel W. Sterett, co-counsel on the case with the Alliance Defending Freedom:

“The government has no business forcing pro-life doctors and pregnancy care centers in Illinois to operate as referral agents for the abortion industry. A law that targets medical professionals because of their pro-life views and right of conscience is unconstitutional and unethical.”

To read the entire court order, click here.

Click here to learn more about the law firm of Mauck & Baker, LLC, which “was established in 2001 to defend the broken and the religiously oppressed.”

A bold voice for pro-family values in Illinois!

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

Frustrated by its inability to win elections, the left is attempting to silence opponents through intimidation, either in the streets or in the courts.

The latest example is the hijacking of Guidestar USA by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Guidestar is a database of more than 2 million nonprofit and non-governmental (NGO) organizations. It’s considered the foremost authority on nonprofits, and had a self-avowed reputation for “remaining neutral.”

That changed when a left-wing activist, Jacob Harold, came aboard in 2012. Mr. Harold, whose bio boasts of donating to the Obama campaign, extensive activism on behalf of climate change groups, and hosting a NARAL Pro-Choice DC men’s event, tweeted a photo of himself holding a sign protesting President Trump at the radical Women’s March in January.

Apart from Vermont ice cream magnates Ben and Jerry, it might be hard to find a more radically leftist major CEO. So it’s no wonder that Mr. Harold welcomed the Southern Poverty Law Center as an authority on “hate groups.” Using SPLC’s “hate map” as a resource, Guidestar smeared 46 organizations, many of them Christian, as “hate groups.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a long history of abusing nonprofits and individuals with whom they disagree. They tar innocent people and may have inspired at least two terrorist incidents. The SPLC’s “hate map” lumps Christian and conservative organizations with neo-Nazis, skinheads and other violence-prone groups. The most common offenses? Failing to salute the brave new world of sexual anarchy or unlimited illegal immigration.

On Aug. 15, 2012, a disturbed young man, Floyd Corkins II, who later told the FBI that he had been inspired by the SPLC’s “hate map,” attempted to commit mass murder at the DC-based Family Research Council. He had a knapsack full of extra rounds and Chick-fil-A sandwiches that he had planned to stuff into the mouths of his victims. Stopped by Leo Johnson, a courageous guard who was shot while subduing him, Corkins became the first person in U.S. history to be convicted under Washington, DC, law of domestic terrorism.

On June 14, Bernie Sanders follower James T. Hodgkinson, who had “liked” the Southern Poverty Law Center on Facebook, shot up Republican congressmen and their staffs at a baseball practice in Alexandria, critically wounding Republican Majority Whip Steve Scalise, and injuring four others. The Louisiana congressman had been singled out by the SPLC for an alleged connection to a white power group, a charge he denies.

Earlier this month, Guidestar began adding the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate group labels to 46 nonprofits. Last week, Guidestar – and the SPLC by implication – began getting major pushback.

On June 21, a group of 41 Christian and conservative leaders, including former Attorney General Edwin Meese, signed a letter to Guidestar demanding deletion of the defaming labels, which Guidestar did – sort of. The labels were removed but the damage was done and the information is available upon request.

Next, Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal foundation, filed a defamation lawsuit on June 28 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against Guidestar for posting a label on Liberty Counsel’s Guidestar page describing it as an SPLC-designated “hate group.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which built its reputation years ago by monitoring the Ku Klux Klan and other violent groups, still raises money by the boatload with its scare tactics and has a $300 million endowment. That allows it to do things like send a dozen attorneys to New Jersey, where a jury under a liberal judge in a kangaroo court in 2015 found a small Jewish group, Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing (JONAH), guilty of consumer “fraud” for directing people to counselors who aid people in overcoming unwanted same-sex desires.

The Southern Poverty Law Center also listed former Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson in the “hate” category for his stances on marriage and biblical morality before public outrage made them withdraw the label.

Three years ago, the FBI dropped the Southern Poverty Law Center as a source for identifying hate groups. In March 2016, the U.S. Justice Department accused the Southern Poverty Law Center attorneys of “lack of professionalism” and “misconduct” for falsely characterizing the Federation for American Immigration Reform and the Immigration Reform Law Institute as “hate groups.”

Maajid Nawaz, a moderate Muslim who opposes jihad extremism, says he is also suing the Southern Poverty Law Center for defaming him and his organization, the London-based Quilliam Foundation.

If there is still doubt as to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s motives, it was laid to rest in an interview with SPLC senior fellow Mark Potok, who said that his group’s “hate group” criteria “have nothing to do with criminality or violence or any kind of guess we’re making about ‘this group could be dangerous.’ It’s strictly ideological.'”

Mr. Potok is also on video stating, “Sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate crimes and so on. I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them.”

And the Southern Poverty Law Center still has a shred of credibility? Sure they do. Ask any “mainstream” journalist.

The Trump administration’s Department for Civil Rights at the Department of Education has issued a memo to schools stating that civil rights investigations will be launched against individuals at schools who refuse to address transgender students by their preferred gender pronouns.

The memo, signed by Candice Jackson of the Office of Civil Rights reads in part:

“OCR may assert subject matter jurisdiction over and open for investigation gender-based harassment… (i.e., based on sex stereotyping, such as acts of verbal, nonverbal, or physical aggression, intimidation, or hostility based on sex or sex-stereotyping, such as refusing to use a transgender student’s preferred name or pronouns when the school uses preferred names for gender-conforming students.”

This directive equates a refusal of a student or teacher to refer to another student by their preferred name as “verbal, nonverbal, or physical aggression, intimidation, or hostility.” A student can decide that one day they want to be referred to by one name and another day an entirely different name, and if a teacher or another student refused to address them by that name, that teacher or student would be penalized.

Practically speaking, this means that the federal government will pressure teachers and students to refer to transgender students as “ze, em, ver, xyr, perself,” or a whole multitude of other gender pronouns. For teachers, the consequences of not complying could easily look like being forced to resign, and students could possibly be expelled for non-compliance.

Don’t teachers and school districts already have enough problems to deal with? The last thing teachers need to be concerned about is whether they could get fired if they forget each transgender student’s preferred gender pronoun or preferred name. The last thing students need to deal with is a multitude of gender pronouns confusing their proper learning of the English language.

Family Policy Alliance notes:

…[P]erhaps the directive shouldn’t have come as a big surprise.  The person who issued the memo, Candice Jackson, is the acting director of the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education.  Given that she was appointed by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos – who has been attacked mercilessly by the Left – some may assume that Jackson is a pro-family conservative.

Yet Jackson, who has been in a same-sex marriage for more than ten years, is known for her vocal support of the LGBT movement. In January, she tweeted an article about the gay community getting an ally in Trump, adding the comment: “Reasonable LGBT citizens (as opposed to the militant leftwing LGBT movement) have reason to cheer POTUS Trump; he’s shifting the GOP.”

This directive must be rescinded or altered or it will continue to pose a threat  to free speech and religious liberty of faculty and students across the entire nation.

In his recent video for PragerU, National Review senior fellow David French illuminates the political buzzword of “transparency” and the Left’s illicit application of the concept to the private citizen. While the government possesses an obligation to be transparent in its exercise of your tax dollars, privacy is an individual right, and no government is entitled to know whether or not you donate to a nonprofit like IFI.

With echoes of Lord Action’s famous “power corrupts” aphorism, French explains the gravity of capitulating to the Left’s demand for citizen transparency—the disclosure of your personal donations to private nonprofits breeds governmental abuse through exposing you to your political opponents. A country where you only possess free speech if you disregard the repercussions is a country that violates your individual rights.

We highly recommend this five minute PragerU video to you and your family:

French concludes, “While government transparency is an obligation, privacy is an individual right, protected by the First Amendment.”

More Americans — even those on the political left — are learning the truth about the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center.

The Christian Post’s Anugrah Kumar reports the latest:

GuideStar USA, which is one of the nation’s leading sources of information about nonprofit organizations, has announced it will remove from its list of “hate groups” dozens of conservative advocacy organizations, many of which advocate for traditional marriage.

The nonprofit world is huge and growing, and to help people navigate through the labyrinth, “nonprofit tracking” companies have been created. GuideStar is one, and this is from its posted mission:

To revolutionize philanthropy by providing information that advances transparency, enables users to make better decisions, and encourages charitable giving.

That sounds great, doesn’t it?

One little problem. Here is Rachel del Guidice writing at The Daily Signal a week earlier:

The nation’s leading source of information on U.S. charities faces mounting criticism for using a controversial “hate group” designation in listings for some well-known and broadly supported conservative nonprofits.

Many readers can already figure where this story is going:

GuideStar, which calls itself a “neutral” aggregator of tax data on charities, recently incorporated “hate group” labels produced by the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center.

The decision by the tracker of nonprofits prompted 41 conservative leaders to protest the move in a letter provided exclusively to The Daily Signal. The letter, dated June 21, asks the website to drop the “hate group” labels put on 46 organizations.

Among the signatories is the Illinois Family Institute’s Executive Director, David E. Smith.

The Daily Signal also reported a few details about the Leftist leadership at GuideStar. The organization cannot call itself “neutral,” if they are to use the thoroughly discredited SPLC.

The letter from the 41 conservative leaders made their case:

GuideStar’s use of the “hate group” designation for certain organizations, many of them Christian, unfairly and inaccurately adopts the “aggressive political agenda” of Southern Poverty Law Center, the leaders write.

Among the organizations represented are the Family Research Council, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the Immigration Reform Law Institute, the American College of Pediatricians, the National Task Force for Therapy Equality, the American Family Association, the London Center for Policy Research, and the Jewish Institute for Global Awareness.

The more you learn about the SPLC, the easier it is to call it a “hate group.” Their disdain for Christianity and other social conservative organizations is consistently hostile with the clear aim to do them harm.

The Daily Signal Post spoke with William G. “Jerry” Boykin, a retired Army general who is executive vice president of the Family Research Council: “I think that what GuideStar is doing is another attack on conservative Christian organizations and individuals.”

Why would they do so? The Daily Signal explains:

Foundations, corporations, and other institutions look at listings by such organizations as GuideStar when they determine where to make tax-exempt contributions. They are unlikely to donate money to any organization labeled as a hate group, the conservative leaders argue.

GuideStar responded to the letter by removing those 41 organizations plus 5 others from its list of “hate groups.”

With that, Leftist-run GuideStar has now provided yet another episode that does well-deserved damage to the reputation of the SPLC, while bringing more attention to their nasty agenda.

Click here to read the letter sent by the 41 conservative leaders.

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

-and, please-

Great news!  On June 26th, U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 7-2 ruling in favor of religious liberty!

The High Court ruled  in favor of a church in Missouri that sued the state after being denied taxpayer funds for a playground safety project because of a restriction that prohibited state taxpayer funding for religious institutions.

The case involves a Missouri preschool that was denied a state grant for rubberized playground surface material solely because it’s a church that runs the preschool.

Chief Justice John Roberts summed things up near the end of his majority opinion saying:

“The exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution… It cannot stand.”

Illinois Family Institute praises the decision as a great victory for all people of faith!

This ruling makes is clear that government bodies and public programs cannot and should not discriminate against Christian organizations merely because they are religious. The U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the First Amendment right to freely exercise religious faith in the public square.

Christian organizations throughout the state of Illinois and across the country provide much-needed services to young students, senior citizens, the poor, addicted, and under-served. It’s wrong to treat them differently simply because their service is inspired by the Word of God or their love for Jesus Christ.

Christian Liberty vs. Special LGBTQIA “Rights”

The U.S. Supreme Court also announced they will take up the Masterpiece Cakes case out of Colorado. This case is about whether the government can punish people of faith for not participating in religious ceremonies with which they disagree.

Jack Phillips, who owns Masterpiece Cakes, had a complaint filed against him for not baking a cake for a so-called same-sex wedding ceremony. Phillips had provided countless services to other LGBTQ customers, but simply did not want to participate in a religious ceremony – a wedding – that violated his religious beliefs.

The government should not be punishing Christians who merely want to live and work by the dictates of their faith.

This is the first time the U.S. Supreme Court will take up a case that will decide the conflict between protected class status for same-sex attraction, sexual behavior and religious freedom. Please pray that they will rule wisely in this case.

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

-and, please-

Last October the Illinois Family Institute brought attention to the “Free Speech Fairness Act.” Now faith leaders from around the country, including IFI’s executive director David E. Smith, are signing a letter addressed to U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy calling for the passage of the bill. This letter was delivered earlier this week.

Here is the opening paragraph of the letter:

We, the undersigned, representing hundreds of thousands of Americans, want to thank you for your commitment to preserving the rights secured in the First Amendment of the Constitution, specifically the rights to freedom of religion and speech. Unfortunately, since its passage, the Johnson Amendment has effectively squelched both of those rights in the context of activities that could be construed by the IRS as on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate for public office. That is why we support the Free Speech Fairness Act of 2016 (H.R. 781, “Fairness Act”), introduced by Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Representative Jody Hice (R-Ga.) to protect the speech and religious freedom rights of 501(c)(3) organizations and their leaders. We encourage you to prioritize hearings and votes on this important bill.

A lot has been written about the existing and growing threats to religious liberty for the past couple of years, and the infamous “Johnson Amendment” even became an issue during the presidential campaign.

H.R. 781 would restrict enforcement of the Johnson Amendment against churches and other non-profit groups for whom the law was never intended. You can find more information about that legislation by clicking here, as well as a great deal more information on the Johnson Amendment here.

In addition, both the Family Research Council and the Alliance Defending Freedom have information posted outlining the details of the legislation and why it is needed. FRC has published a one-page outline that answers the following questions:

• What Does the Bill Do?
• Why is the Bill Needed?
• What’s The Background on the Johnson Amendment?
• Has the IRS Gone After Nonprofits For Speaking Out On Political Issues?
• Who Supports the Bill or the Policies Represented in the Bill?

At their website, the Alliance Defending Freedom lists “5 Things to Know about the New Johnson Amendment Fix“:

1. The bill fixes but does not repeal the Johnson Amendment.
2. The bill applies to all 501(c)(3) entities, not just churches.
3. The bill does not turn churches and charities into political action committees.
4. The bill is constitutionally sound.
5. The bill is the first step in getting Congress to fix what it created in 1954.

Both FRC and ADF have videos posted that also outline the facts — here is ADF’s 3-minute video:

So many moral issues in the political arena must be addressed by church leaders inside the church – and not just by Christians outside the church. We must reclaim our God-given First Amendment right of free speech. It doesn’t just belong to those on one side of the debate.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to ask him/her to support or even co-sponsor this legislation. Speak up for free speech by telling them you want the Johnson Amendment repealed. Tell them they can start the process by cosponsoring H.R. 781, the Free Speech Fairness Act.

As of this writing, H.R. 781 has 57 Republican co-sponsors, including Illinois’ U.S. Representatives Randy Hultgren (Campton Hills) and John Shimkus (Effingham).

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

A recent federal court ruling gives pastors in Illinois the go-ahead to counsel children about their unwanted same-sex attraction, but the state’s ban on counseling youths regarding their same-sex attraction is still a roadblock to licensed mental health professionals.

 Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for serious Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

A proposed rule – a copy of which was leaked on Wednesday – would protect groups like Little Sisters of the Poor from being forced to provide contraception and abortion-causing drugs. The interim rule would honor constitutional guarantees of religious freedom, not protected by Health and Human Services under ObamaCare.

Attorney Mark Rienzi of The Becket, which represented Little Sisters of the Poor, says the rule is fine – as far as it goes.

“Congress did not impose this requirement in the first place, the agency [HHS] did,” he explains. “And there’s nothing unreasonable or wrong about the government saying … We’ve got a requirement that we’ve already chosen not to impose on big corporations and we’ve also decided we’re not going to crush Little Sisters of the Poor for their unwillingness to comply with it.”

Rienzi says the proposed rule would be only the first step in correcting the problem.

“And the second part,” he adds, “would be an order from the court making clear what I think the interim final rule essentially acknowledges, which is that the federal government doesn’t have authority to force religious groups to do this.”

Otherwise another “progressive” president in the future might order HHS to reverse the rule and impose it on religious organizations once more.

This article was originally posted at OneNewsNow.com

The Left, drifting further and further into unreality, insists on denying that conservative Christians are being persecuted in America despite unequivocal evidence to the contrary. But I guess if they’re able to deny that persons with congenital penises are male, anything is possible.

Leftists, so busy celebrating the emperor’s new gown, may not have noticed that a Catholic family smack dab in the heartland of America is being persecuted for their belief that marriage has a nature that the state cannot change.

Steven and Bridget Tennes, both military veterans and Catholic parents of five children who own the Country Mill Orchard and Cider Mill in Charlotte, Michigan, are suing the city of East Lansing, Michigan for banning them from selling fruit at a farmers’ market where they have had a booth for the past six years. The city banned Country Mill because the owners will not rent out their cider mill for same-sex “weddings.”

The Tennes’ do sell their products to homosexuals and employ homosexuals, so Leftists cannot argue that they refuse to serve homosexuals or that their refusal to host faux-weddings grows out of hatred for homosexuals.

East Lansing claims that in order for vendors to sell their wares in its farmers’ market, they must abide by East Lansing’s non-discrimination ordinance even if their businesses are not located in East Lansing. Vendors from areas that respect the constitutionally protected right of people of theologically orthodox faith to run their businesses in accordance with their faith are not welcome at the East Lansing farmers’ market.

The issue is not whether business owners should be able to discriminate—that is, make distinctions—when it comes to the type of events they will serve or products they will make. All businesses do that.

The issue is on which criteria is it permissible for business owners to base their decisions.  Many would argue that business owners should be able to take into account the content of the event for which their services are solicited. Business owners should not be able to refuse to serve an event because of non-behavioral attributes of potential customers. They should, however, be able to refuse to serve events that celebrate behavior they view as immoral.

The controversy started in 2014 when lesbian Caitlyn (Martin) Ortis inquired about having her same-sex faux-wedding at Country Mill and was turned down by Steve Tennes. Ortis then took to social media posting this, “‘When choosing a cider mill to go to, please remember that The Country Mill… refused to let Liane and I have our wedding there because of how we identify. Please support a local cider mill that does not discriminate against LGBTQIA+ folks or any folks for that matter,’”

My suggestion to East Lansingans (East Lansingians?) is to boycott this farmers’ market, which discriminates based on religion, a clear violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Despite homosexual New York Times writer Frank Bruni’s claim that people of faith must restrict their free exercise of religion to “pews, homes and hearts,” the Constitution guarantees the right to freely exercise one’s religion—no qualifications, no geographic limitations. That’s why Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. felt free to urge moderate white Christians to take their sorry arses off their pews and into the public square to fight for just laws. And so there’s no confusion about what constitutes a just law, Dr. King told us in “Letter from Birmingham Jail”: “A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God.”

The Tennes family rightly believes that marriage has an immutable, intrinsic nature that no tinkering of man can change. In other words, marriage is something. It has an ontology. Man does not create marriage out of whole cloth. Societies recognize and regulate a specific type of relationship that exists and we call “marriage.” Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. No law can change that reality. The law can no more change what marriage is than a new birth certificate can change the sex of Bruce Jenner.

The Bible is clear that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Biblically illiterate Leftists often claim that since Christians eat shellfish or wear clothing of mixed fabrics—both proscribed in the Old Testament—they should have no problem serving homosexual anti-weddings. These biblically illiterate Leftists don’t understand that the Old Testament contains three types of codes or laws, two types of which (i.e., holiness codes and civil codes) do not apply since Jesus appeared on the historical scene. The universal moral code, however, appertains still.

Theologically orthodox Christians understand and value marriage as a public institution that affects the public good in profound ways, but it is not the word “marriage” that magically confers public meaning and value on a relationship. It is the nature of an intrinsically marital union that renders it valuable as a public good.

For Christians, marriage is a picture of Christ and his church. Christ is the bridegroom and his bride is the church. The marital partners are of different natures. To suggest that marriage can be composed of two partners of the same sex means there is no difference in nature or role between Christ and his church. This constitutes a heresy of the first order. For the government  to command that Christians serve in any way a ceremony that embodies such an abominable heresy is profoundly troubling and should not be tolerated.

As Jesus tells us in Scripture, marriage is a sexually differentiated union composed of one man and one woman, and as Paul tells us, homosexual activity separates man from God eternally. Atheists and cafeteria Christians are free to reject the tenets of theologically orthodox Christianity, but they are not free to prohibit theologically orthodox Christian Americans from freely exercising their religion. Atheists and cafeteria Christians are not free to force theologically orthodox Christian Americans to provide products and services for a ceremony that the God they serve abhors even as he loves those who debase themselves through homoerotic activity and mock-marriage.

The Left understands the political importance of incrementalism. They chip away at truth like a sculptor at a piece of marble. And while they chip away bit by bit, creating their ugly post-modern travesties, cowardly conservatives rationalize their capitulation by saying, “It’s just a small change.”

Well, look where conservative capitulation to incremental change has landed us with regard to all matters “trans.” We’re on the cusp of a sexual revolution unheard of in the history of man: the planned obsolescence of the public recognition and accommodation of sex differences everywhere.

“Progressives” and cowardly conservatives should be ashamed to hear these words from Steve Tennes:

My wife Bridget and I volunteered to serve our country in the military to protect freedom, and that is why we feel we have to fight for freedom now, whether it’s Muslims’, Jews’, or Christians’ right to believe and live out those beliefs.

So, fellow conservatives, IFI pleads again for you to find those dusty spines in the attic where you’ve stored them with other unused cultural artifacts. Or if you’ve been walking around all Gumby-like with bendy spines, stiffen them up. Take some calcium supplements.  Then do what I’ve done: Cook up some thick skin in your basement laboratory to slip over your spanking new spines and DO SOMETHING!

• Become educated so you know how to debate these issues.
• Encourage your spineless, thin-skinned church leaders to preach and teach boldly on marriage, homosexuality, and “trans” issues—all of which are biblical issues.
• Find a new church if your church leaders are embracing homosexuality-affirming heresy.
• Teach your children well.
• Write letters to editors.
• Post your views on social media.
• Discuss these issues with friends, family, and colleagues.
• Contact your lawmakers to urge them to vote rightly on issues related to homosexuality and gender confusion.
• Hold your lawmakers accountable for bad votes.
• Don’t use opposite-sex pronouns when referring to biological-sex rejecting persons—and that means you, public school teachers.
• Become a precinct committeeman.
• Run for office.

Did I miss anything?

Listen to this as a podcast HERE.

Remember learning about the Pavlovian experiment where every time he rung a bell, he gave a dog a treat, resulting in the dog connecting the sound of bell with food? (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, just watch this clip from The Office and you’ll see what I mean).

This experiment best explains what has happened today with the conversation around religious freedom.

Every time the topic comes up, folks on the left immediately cry “discrimination,” regardless of the facts. This has conditioned the media to cover all efforts to protect religious freedom as underhanded ploys of persecution and marginalization.

Case in point: Texas is advancing a bill that ensures state agencies don’t deny funding and licensing to religious adoption agencies because of the agency’s religious beliefs. So for instance, Catholic adoption agencies can’t be forced to place children in single parent homes or in homes with same-sex parents.

Religious adoption agencies in Texas represent 25% of the state’s agencies. This means:

• There are plenty of other adoption agencies that will place children in other homes.
• If the state were to start denying funds or licenses to religious adoption agencies because of their beliefs, the state would be thrown into a crisis, because there is no way they could replace 25% of the state’s adoption agencies.

So here’s the key: Typically when the left talks about “discrimination” in this context, there is an implication of hate and anger towards the LGBT community. And what they left is really trying to do is make this discussion about how the parents/adults feel, not about what’s best for the kids.

But religious adoption agencies have good reasons to want to place children in homes with a mom and a dad, that have nothing to do with any anger or malice towards the LGBT community.

And it’s especially hard to make the case that this is discriminatory when the adoption agencies aren’t investigating the sexual orientation or gender identity of the adults, but rather looking to see what the home situation is like: namely if a mother and father are present.

If we want to truly live in a diverse society, that respects differing view points, then the government has to leave space for Christian and religious groups to serve our community, even if some don’t like their beliefs.

Let’s flash back 10 years ago…

This was a time when a majority of states had constitutional marriage amendments defining marriage s the union of one man and one woman – a time when support for this definition was bipartisan: from John McCain to Barack Obama, most politicians would confess their support for marriage.

As you may recall, at that time supporters of redefining marriage had a favorite talking point: what does my marriage have to do with you? Why can’t we live and let live?

This was a persuasive argument to a lot of people (And at another time, we can get into why this question fundamentally misses the point of why the government is in the marriage business in the first place).

“Live and let live.”

But once the U.S. Supreme Court redefined marriage, we can see they never really meant it.

Just look at the case of Blaine Adamson – a T-Shirt printer in Kentucky. In 2012, the Lexington Gay Pride Parade asked Blaine to print shirts for their event. As a Christian, Blaine didn’t feel comfortable promoting their message, so he declined.

This wasn’t acceptable to the Lexington LGBT community, so they sued Blaine. Blaine lossed his case in front of the Lexington Human Rights Commission, but last Friday, The Kentucky Court of Appeals overturned this decision, protecting Blaine’s first amendment rights.

Make no mistake, this is a significant victory. This is the first time in the country religious freedom has prevailed in a case like this – the first time the court understood our the issues that are truly at hand.  Blaine didn’t decline to make shirts for these clients because they were gay, in fact, he served gay customers all the time. He declined to make the shirts because they were trying to get him to promote a message he disagreed with, or in other words, they were trying to compel speech from Blaine.

If the government can force you to say something or convey a message, then you fundamentally do not have free speech.

Nation wide, the courts are full of these cases today. Here’s hoping this is the first of many “wins” to come.