Outrageous!  The Illinois Human Rights Commission has issued a decision in which they fined a Christian business-owner $80,000 for refusing to violate his conscience regarding hosting a same-sex ceremony. And to make matters worse, they are mandating that this Christian citizen offer to do the very thing he doesn’t want to do.

This is the epitome of tyranny.

Do we understand what is happening here? This bigoted decision is the latest strike in the war against religious liberty. Intolerant lawmakers and bureaucrats are now using the heavy hand of government to force citizens to act in accordance with a decidedly liberal worldview.

Six years ago, Leftists in Washington D.C. decided to force all Americans into socialized health insurance whether they wanted to or not.

Last year here in Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner joined with Leftists to pass a law that censors professional counselors and clergy, prohibiting them from helping minors who suffer from unwanted same-sex attraction or gender-confusion.

Today, there is legislation pending in the Illinois House which would quash rights-of-conscience protections for pro-life medical professionals by forcing them to refer patients to abortion-providers. Unfortunately, this freedom-extinguishing bill has already passed the Illinois Senate.

Ironically, Gov. Rauner is aggressively fighting the tyranny of public sector unions who force members to pay fees that are used to promote dubious political agendas, saying to the press that he wants to “fight for the freedom of political expression and the right of free speech for government employees.”

The governor says that this is “a fundamental issue.”  If he truly believes this, why wasn’t he willing to fight for the same freedoms of speech and expression for professional counselors and clergy who are willing and able to help minors who want help?

If Gov. Rauner truly believes that our constitutionally protected freedom is “a fundamental issue,” is he willing to fight for the rights of Christian business- owners who do not want to participate in immoral same-sex ceremonies?

If Gov. Rauner truly believes that freedom of speech is “a fundamental issue,” is he willing to stand up to the despotism of the Left, and tell them to stop pushing legislation that will have government coercing speech for pro-life medical workers?  Will he commit to vetoing such legislation?

How have we come to a place where we allow the government to violate the First Amendment rights of citizens, telling them they must do what their consciences and their faith tells them they must not?

How un-American!

Written by Samuel Smith

The American College of Pediatricians has released an in-depth report stating that the move to indoctrinate children with the idea that they can pick their gender amounts to child abuse.  They are urging legislators and educators to reject all policies that would condition children to accept chemical and surgical distortions allowing people to impersonate the opposite sex.

Some of the points made in their report include the following:

• Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait. “XY” and “XX” chromosomes are genetic markers, not a disorder.

• No one is born with a gender.  Everyone is born with a biological sex.  Gender is a psychological concept, not an objective biological one.

• A person thinking he or she is something they are not, at best, is a sign of confusion.

• Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous.

• When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such.

• People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.

• 98 percent of gender confused boys and 88 percent of gender confused girls accept their biological sex after puberty without any counseling.

• Those who use cross-sex hormones or undergo sex surgeries even in the most LGBTQ affirming countries still have suicide rates 20 times higher than the general public.

• Conditioning children into a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex amounts to child abuse.

• Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

• Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

Read the full report HERE.

Follow IFI on Social Media!

Be sure to check us out on social media for other great articles, quips, quotes, pictures, memes, events and updates.

Like us on Facebook HERE.
Subscribe to us on YouTube HERE
Follow us on Twitter @ProFamilyIFI

Written by Hans von Spakovsky

In news that should shock and anger Americans, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that not only has she discussed internally the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called “climate change deniers,” but she has “referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action.”

Lynch was responding to a question from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., who urged Lynch to prosecute those who “pretend that the science of carbon emissions’ dangers is unsettled,” particularly those in the “fossil fuel industry” who supposedly have constructed a “climate denial apparatus.” Lynch is apparently following in the footsteps of California Attorney General Kamala Harris and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, both of whom have opened up investigations of ExxonMobil for allegedly lying to the public and their shareholders about climate change.

None of the public officials involved in this abuse of the prosecutorial power of the government recognize the outrageousness of what they are doing or are urging the FBI and the Justice Department to do. They want to investigate and prosecute corporations and individuals for their opinions on an unproven scientific theory, for which there is not a consensus, despite inaccurate claims to the contrary.

This not only represents a serious blow against the free flow of ideas and the vigorous debate over scientific issues that is a hallmark of an advanced, technological society like ours, it is a fundamental violation of the First Amendment. Will the FBI’s possible investigation include going after dissenting scientists who publish articles or give speeches questioning the global climate change hypothesis?

Will legislators who engage in blasphemy by refusing to recognize a scientific theory as fact and pass legislation to reduce carbon emissions be investigated, too?

The absurdity of this would be laughable if it were not so serious and so dangerous. The very idea that the FBI, the most powerful law enforcement agency in the United States, has had a referral from the attorney general of the United State to investigate whether those who disagree with the climate change theory meet the legal “criteria for which” the Justice Department “could take action” is evocative of Franz Kafka’s chilling novel, “The Trial.”

As I have noted before, this is also reminiscent of the old Soviet Union, where Joseph Stalin persecuted those whom he thought had the “wrong” scientific views on everything from linguistics to physics.  Both Lynch and Whitehouse might want to read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s book, “In the First Circle,” in which he outlined the Soviet government’s suppression of dissenting scientists and engineers.

Or perhaps General Lynch should review the Inquisition’s persecution of Galileo Galilei for disagreeing with the consensus of his time and advocating the Copernican theory of the universe.

Level-headed, objective prosecutors should not be interested in investigating or prosecuting anyone over a scientific theory that is the subject of great debate. What Lynch should have said to Whitehouse is that the duty of the U.S. Justice Department (and the FBI) is to fairly enforce the laws of the United States in a dispassionate, nonideological manner based on the facts, not to investigate those who hold disfavored views regarding scientific controversies.

The fact that she did not do that, but instead has actually referred this issue to the FBI, should concern everyone who believes in the rule of law and fears the unbridled power of the government.

Originally published at DailySignal.com.

Written by Dr. Daniel Boland, Ph.D.

Dear Bishop Daniel R. Jenky
Rev. John I. Jenkins:

The Laetare Medal is awarded each year to American Catholics “whose genius has ennobled the arts and sciences, illustrated the ideals of the Church and enriched the heritage of humanity.” This year, one of the two recipients was Vice President Joe Biden. With your award of the Laetare Medal to Mr. Biden, I am once again stunned that you choose to celebrate a politically influential person known for his ability to make moral compromises which abet the ongoing destruction of millions of children. I had hoped once was sufficient.

By your entirely unnecessary action, you again disappoint and darken the hopes of many Catholics that you would finally raise the official voice of the University of Notre Dame and take a public stand for the simple message of loving and protecting all God’s children, including the unborn.

I am—once again—stunned at your willingness to downplay Catholic teaching about the sanctity and dignity of human life so that you may give an award to a politically prominent abortion supporter who readily admits that human life begins at conception and who yet does nothing in his considerable power to protect the innocent or speak against abortion.

As Catholic priests and leaders in the Catholic educational community, how could you possibly implement such a morally contradictory decision?

Perhaps your awarding the medal to Mr. Biden seems a smart political move, as it did when you so graced Mr. Obama. But, with many other Catholics and graduates of Notre Dame, I am, once again, astounded that you—priests ordained to model Christ and to give example of moral courage and fidelity—deliberately and gratuitously choose to celebrate Mr. Biden who, along with the party he leads, has for decades supported the destruction of children despite his admission that the unborn are in fact human beings.

I am, once again, appalled that the messages of abortion’s profound moral evil which Mr. Biden and his cohort have for years furthered are of no primary significance or overriding consequence to you. Your decision sends the message of moral indifference to this sick culture in which we live: a culture into which you should, as Catholic priests and leaders, project constant Catholic moral witness concerning above all else the Church’s profound respect for life.

Surely by now you must realize the harm you do to the unity and stability of the Church’s teaching, to the moral fabric of our country and to the reputation of the University as a once-Catholic institution.

Moreover, one might ask what moral example and insight do you offer students by celebrating the ability to make grave moral compromises? By celebrating this powerful politician who admits that abortion kills living children and then admittedly does nothing, do you deepen your students’ belief in the value and applicability of Catholic moral principles? Are Notre Dame students more intelligent Catholics as a result of your celebrating Mr. Biden’s grave moral avoidance? Is this the sort of “compromise” you find so worthy of Notre Dame’s acclaim? Is Mr. Biden the finest Catholic moral exemplar you can find in our society?

One cannot help but wonder why you did not take this opportunity to act in favor of the unborn, in favor of the children. By your celebration of such a moral compromiser, you ignore the profound harm to the unborn which an award from the University of Notre Dame fosters, both in the minds of those who favor abortion (such as Mr. Obama) and in the minds of so many countless citizens whose hapless moral judgments very often depend heavily on the example of those they see as “leaders.”

Incredibly, you have chosen to willingly ignore an opportunity to celebrate someone such as Joe Scheidler, an outstanding Notre Dame graduate who has—at extraordinary cost to himself for decades—revered human life, as the Church teaches and as Notre Dame used to stand for.

By this latest action, you sadly reduce your own moral credibility and significantly tarnish the original meaning of the Laetare Medal. You also cast a dark shadow over the practical wisdom and moral common sense of those who now award it.

God help the Church to overcome the message of moral indifference that your actions convey.

In the face of the sexual revolution the Christian church in the West now faces a set of challenges that exceeds anything it has experienced, of a similar magnitude, in the past. This is a revolution of ideas—one that is transforming the entire moral structure of meaning and life. These challenges would be vexing enough for any generation. But the contours of our current challenge have to be understood over against the affecting reality for virtually everything on the American landscape, and furthermore in the West. This revolution, like all revolutions, takes few prisoners. In other words, it demands total acceptance of its revolutionary claims and the affirmation of its aims. This is the problem now faced by Christians who are committed to uncompromising faithfulness to the Bible as the Word of God and to the gospel as the only message of salvation.

The scale and scope of this challenge are made clear in an argument made by British Theologian Theo Hobson. As Hobson acknowledges, “Churches have always faced difficult moral issues and they have muddled through.”[1] Some will argue that the challenge of the sexual revolution and the normalization of homosexuality is nothing new or unusual. He says, “Until quite recently I would have agreed,” but he also says “it becomes ever clearer that the issue of homosexuality really is different.”[2]

Why is such a challenge to Christianity different? Hobson suggests that the first challenge is what he recognizes as the either/or quality of the new morality. I agree with him that there really is no middle ground in terms of the church’s engagement with these hard and urgent questions. Churches will either affirm the legitimacy of same-sex relationships and behaviors or they will not. And the churches that do not will take a stand on the basis of a claim that God has revealed a morality to his human creatures in Holy Scripture.

The second factor Hobson suggests is what he calls “the sheer speed of the homosexual cause’s success.” As he describes it: “Something that was assumed for centuries to be unspeakably immoral has emerged as an alternative form of life, an identity that merits legal protection. The demand for gay equality has basically ousted traditionalist sexual morality from the moral high ground.”[3] That is a profoundly important point. Hobson is arguing that this revolution, unlike any other, has actually turned the tables on Christianity in Western civilization.

The Christian church has always enjoyed the moral high ground, understood to be the guardian of what is right and righteous, at least in Western societies. But what we are seeing now is a fundamental change. Hobson is arguing that this moral revolution, having turned the tables of Christianity, now robs the Christian Church of the moral high ground it had previously claimed. The situation is fundamentally reversed. For the first time in the history of Western civilization, Christianity appears to be on the underside of morality, and those who hold to biblical teachings concerning human sexuality are now “ousted” (to use Hobson’s word) from the position of high moral ground.

Hobson also rightly observes that this vast change in attitudes towards same-sex relationships and behaviors is not simply “the waning of the taboo.” As he explains:

It is not just a case of a practice losing its aura of immorality (as with premarital sex or illegitimacy). Instead, the case for homosexual equality takes the form of a moral crusade. Those who want to uphold the old attitude are not just dated moralists (as is the case with those who want to uphold the old attitude to premarital sex or illegitimacy). They are accused of moral deficiency. The old taboo surrounding this practice does not disappear but ‘bounces back’ at those who seek to uphold it. Such a sharp turn-around is, I think, without parallel in moral history.[4]

Hobson’s main point is that homosexuality “has the strange power to turn the moral tables.” And so what was previously understood to be immoral is now celebrated as a moral good. As a result, the Christian church’s historic teachings on homosexuality—shared by the vast majority of the citizens of the West until very recently—is now understood to be a relic of the past and a repressive force that must be eradicated.

This explains why the challenge of the moral revolution threatens to shake the very foundations of Christianity in the United States and far beyond. And yet, even as we understand this revolution to be a new thing, its roots are not recent. As a matter of fact, the church has seen the sexual revolution taking place turn by turn for the better part of the last century. What now becomes clear is that most Christians vastly underestimated the challenge this sexual revolution would present.

ARTICLE CITATIONS

There is no doubt about it, many of us are hoping that 2016 will bring real change. Remembering back to the mantras of 2008, there were those who were anticipating “hope and change.” However, what we have seen over the course of the past eight years is not only more of the same, but a continual slide into social, economic, international, and moral chaos. And as a result, we continue to petition the Throne of Heaven, seeking real and fundamental change.

However, as we turn to the only One who can indeed bring real change, it’s fitting to consider how we should approach His Throne. The Apostle Paul encourages us to pray, specifically for our political situation, in his first letter to Timothy, and chapter 2 where he says, “Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.”

Reflecting on this verse we see the reality that prayer indeed does change things. Prayer indeed does bring hope. Paul encouraged the people of his day to pray for civil authorities that were in many ways far worse than the man who currently resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. At least in our day, we don’t see Christians being used as sport of the Coliseum or being used to light the path to the Capital Building.

If they were encouraged to pray in their day, we should understand that that mandate is for us as well. And there is hope for us as we pray, and that is that we might lead quiet and peaceable lives. In other words, we pray that the government would simply leave us alone. At least, that’s as far as most people’s prayers actually go.

But perhaps that’s why we are where we are. Perhaps that’s why we have the situation in our nation today, where we see unrest in our cities, we see our economy in shambles, we see our foreign policy in disarray. Perhaps were praying for the wrong thing. You see the issue is this, this Scripture in 1st Timothy calls us to not only pray for the government so that we might lead quiet lives, but that we might live such lives in all godliness and reverence.

I think that’s where the real problem is today. Godliness is out of vogue. Reverence is passé. Instead of seeing the law of God as a lamp to our feet and a light to our path, we have turned into a nation where everyone does what is right in his own eyes. What we have before us today is a new and very secular commandment: to sin is not a sin, but to call a sin a sin is a sin.

And, sadly, our situation is not new. Throughout the Bible, we see times where God’s people faced political unrest and international intrigue. But the majority of those times were the result of the people of God turning away from God, and then God’s judgment came.

Perhaps that is where we are today. We have the current president that we have because of our own ignorance of what is right. We have the unborn being slaughtered, we have the decadent paraded as wholesome, we have raised up a generation who believe that their true source comes in the form of a check postmarked from Washington DC or Springfield Illinois. We no longer seek godliness, no longer desire to live lives that reflect reverence.

I believe it crucial that we pray for the upcoming elections. We all should be setting aside a significant amount of time to make sure that God hears our cries. But friends, if we are only crying out so that we might lead a life that is quiet and peaceable, in other words where we have lower taxes and the vagabonds off the streets, I fear we will continue to get what we deserve.

Let us remember the words of 2 Chronicles 7:14, “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

It is time to turn from wickedness, to repent, and to seek the face of Almighty God.

Written by Jeremy Wiggins

Most of us are familiar with the “exceptions” of the pro-life stance.  That is to say the majority of people in this nation are pro-life with the “exception” of rape, incest, or endangerment to the mother’s life.

My question is this: How can we be truly pro-life if we include exceptions?

The argument is that no woman should be forced to deliver a baby conceived under horrible circumstances, such as having been raped the result of incest. Additionally, no woman should be forced to carry and deliver a baby when the pregnancy puts her life in danger, either due to complications arising from the pregnancy or from the delay of treatments relating to another illness. For many people, if you do not include these exceptions into your pro-life viewpoint, then they throw the whole deal out the window.

Before I answer the question above, let me first share with you a few stories, beginning with Rebecca Kiessling’s, taken from her website:

I was adopted nearly from birth.  At 18, I learned that I was conceived out of a brutal rape at knife-point by a serial rapist.  Like most people, I’d never considered that abortion applied to my life, but once I received this information, all of a sudden I realized that, not only does it apply to my life, but it has to do with my very existence.  It was as if I could hear the echoes of all those people who, with the most sympathetic of tones, would say, “Well, except in cases of rape. . .  ,” or who would rather fervently exclaim in disgust: “Especially in cases of rape!!!”  All these people are out there who don‘t even know me, but are standing in judgment of my life, so quick to dismiss it just because of how I was conceived.

Do the conditions surrounding her conception make Rebecca any less of a human being? Does she somehow become less human because she was conceived in rape?

Next, we look at the story of Cara Combs, who delayed cancer treatment in order to deliver her child at 28 weeks, against the advice of her oncologist. She was diagnosed with stage 4 Melanoma when she was 23 weeks pregnant, and made the decision with her husband to delay treatments in order to give their baby a fighting chance. This story has a sad ending being that Cara died from the cancer three days after giving birth to baby Shaylin. She had been scheduled to start immunotherapy 48 hours after giving birth. Cara died so that her daughter could live. Isn’t that what we do as parents?

There are many stories that could be shared on behalf of the many babies whose mothers chose to give them life, regardless of the personal health risk or the circumstances behind the conception. The fact is this: a baby is still a baby whether they are the result of rape or incest, or whether there is a health risk to the mother.

So why then do we go to the mat over these exceptions, when we know we are still talking about the killing of an innocent human being? We are willing to let legislation go down the drain that would end abortion in America, because we want some women in some circumstances to be able to choose their lives over the lives of someone else.

Not only do the exemptions not make sense from a moral standpoint, but from a numbers standpoint they don’t either. Let’s put some numbers behind this:

Operation Rescue reports that less than 1% of all abortions are due to the pregnancy being caused by rape or incest, and AbortionFacts.com asks the following question on life of the mother issues:

Are there rare cases when abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother? Yes. As mentioned above, these rare cases occur less than 1% of the time. In fact, even if you lump in all NON life threatening health issues that are cited by mothers as a reason for abortion then the total number only increases to 2.8%. 

Planned Parenthood released their abortion numbers for the past year a few weeks ago, revealing that the abortion giant performed 323,999 abortions. That means that at the low end, 3,239 human beings are killed every year due to rape and incest, while at the high end the number comes out 9,071.  If something is killing thousands of people every year in the United States, that is preventable, shouldn’t something be done to stop it?

Before making a final argument, I just want to make sure that one point is understood, and that is the fact that I am not stating that dealing with this issue is an easy thing for those involved. I am not taking away from the fact that dealing with fatal health issues or rape and incest can be an extremely difficult and often traumatizing thing for a family. What I am saying, is that regardless of the situation, the person living inside of the mother is just that, a person. I just wanted to make sure that we understand that it’s not that I am unsympathetic, but that I have to stand where the Bible says stand, and that is on the side of life.

It may not be an easy thing to grasp, especially in these times, but Psalm 127:13 tells us that children are a gift from the Lord, and Psalm 139 reminds us that God knit us together, and that He knows everything about us from the time we are in the womb. The Bible tells is in verses like Jeremiah 7:6 and Exodus 23:7 warns us not to shed innocent blood, and Proverbs 24:11 instructs us to rescue those stumbling to the slaughter.

The God of the universe is not a God of halves, or partials, or almosts. For salvation, we are forgiven of all of our sins or none at all. We either trust Him fully or we don’t trust Him at all. We may stumble, but if we don’t submit fully to His will, we submit nothing. Why then, when it comes to an issue as major as life and death, would we go halfway, or carve out exceptions to the rule, and still allow innocent lives to be lost? To be pro-life with exceptions is like telling your spouse you will be faithful throughout your marriage…with exceptions.  It doesn’t really work.

This article was originally posted at AFA.net

There has been a sustained assault on truth with regard to sexuality for the last 55 years. For the last 45 years that assault has included successful efforts to normalize homosexuality and gender dysphoria, efforts that have intensified over the last decade.

While this has been happening, many church leaders have failed to address adequately or at all issues related to homosexuality. Some have failed because they remain ignorant of the nature and implications of the “LGBT”-affirming juggernaut, which undermines truth and respect for the authority of Scripture and threatens the temporal and eternal lives of those who experience homoerotic feelings. Other church leaders have failed because of their own cowardice.

Thankfully, there are pastors who are steadfast in their exposition of biblical truth even in the face of harsh criticism. IFI is occasionally posting sermons by men of faith who seek to honor Christ in all things, which includes preaching sermons that the world will hate.

One of these wise and courageous pastors is David Jones who is the senior pastor of the Village Church of Barrington and who also served as the associate editor of The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Crossway, 2001).

Please take 50 minutes of your time to hear some truths that are too rarely spoken by pastors and priests. Better yet, watch and discuss this video together with your children, grandchildren, friends, or in your church small groups:

Worldview Conference with Dr. Wayne Grudem
We are very excited about our second annual Worldview Conference featuring world-renowned theologian Dr. Wayne Grudem on Saturday, February 20, 2016 in Barrington.

Click HERE to register today!

In the morning sessions, Dr. Grudem will speak on how biblical values provide the only effective solution to world poverty and about the moral advantages of a free-market economic system. In the afternoon, Dr. Grudem will address why Christians—and especially pastors—should influence government for good as well as tackle the moral and spiritual issues in the 2016 election.

We look forward to this worldview-training and pray it will be a blessing to you.

Click HERE for a flyer.

In the service of helping families in their efforts to firmly establish and maintain a biblical worldview, IFI is hosting worldview conferences. How do we think about the issues of the day? Do we think clearly and biblically about the issues, or is there something clouding or contaminating our understanding?  Are we buying into lies and distortions of the culture, or are we able to discern fact from fiction, truth from deception?

Having a consistent Christian worldview has never been more important than it is now as our culture is rapidly embracing a secular, non-biblical value system.

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

What:  IFI Worldview Conference with Dr. Wayne Grudem

When:  Saturday, February 20^th, 10 AM to 3:30 PM

Where:  Village Church of Barrington, 1600 E. Main St., Barrington, IL 60010 (map)

How much:  $20 per person/$50 per family

Seating is limited, so please register early.  Register online or call the IFI office during normal business hours at (708) 781-9328.

Click HERE for an event flyer.

Register to vote for the upcoming Primary Election before Feb 16th.

Registering to vote is the first step to engage in civic life and become a good steward of your God-given responsibility of self-government.

The process for registering is easy and convenient, but unfortunately, millions of Americans choose not to take the time. It’s estimated that from 35 percent to 50 percent of Americans are not registered to vote.

It’s even worse among self-professing Christians. Research shows that only about 60 percent of Christians are registered to vote, and of those, only 60 percent actually vote. This means that only 36 percent of Christians actually vote!

Registering Voters is Easy!

Just think about how many people you know who have moved and need to re-register. Think of how many young men and women you know who are turning 18 and can vote for the first time this year. Consider engaging citizens who have not voted in the past to become actively involved in impacting our nation’s future!  Illinois citizens who will be eighteen by the General  Election (Nov. 8) are able to register and to vote in the Primary Election (March 15).

IFI has created a free voter registration packet containing all of the information you need to conduct a drive. Please consider holding a voter registration drive at your church, local school or library. Sign up to help with voter registration drives in your area!

Just 2 Simple Steps:

1. Click HERE to download and print out the Illinois Voter Registration Application. Make as many copies as you think you will need during your registration drive.

2. Mail the completed application(s) to your local election authority. Click HERE to look up the mailing address. If you are unsure of your election authority, please feel free to contact us. Call (708) 781-9328 during normal business hours, or email us anytime and we will be glad to help!

Voter Registration Kit Resources:

• Voter Registration Application
• Constitutional Protections for Pastors
• What Churches Can and Cannot Do
• How to Conduct a Voter Registration Drive
• Election Schedule and Registration Deadlines
• List of Illinois Election Authorities

Voter Registration Bulletin Inserts

• Bulletin Insert Option #1
• Bulletin Insert Option #2
• Bulletin Insert Option #3
• Bulletin Insert Option #4

Voter Registration FAQ’s

Q. I’ve moved. Do I need to register again?
A. Yes. The easiest way to register again is to just follow the 2-step process above.

Q. My name has changed. Do I need to register again?
A. Yes. The easiest way to register again is to just follow the 2-step process above.

Q. I am 17 years old now, but will be 18 on the date of the next General Election. Can I register?
A. Yes. You may register now for an election as long as you will be 18 years old on the date of the immediately following General Election. Just follow the 2-step process above.

Q. I sent in my form two weeks ago, but I haven’t heard anything back yet. Did it get lost?
A. You should receive confirmation 4-6 weeks after your original submission. If you do not hear from your County Clerk by then, give them a call. Click HERE for a list of County Clerk offices.

Q. I am a pastor or a church leader. Can I encourage the members at my church to register to vote and hold a voters registration drive?
A. Yes. Voter registration drives are not considered political activity. Although certain limitations are imposed by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax code and campaign laws, churches and pastors are able to engage in nonpartisan activity, particularly voter registration and voter education. There is no legal restriction whatsoever on the ability of churches to register voters or provide them candidate survey information, like the material provided in the IFI Voter Guide.

Many already have grown weary of the political season, but now is not the time to grow weary! This year is shaping up to be one of the most critical ever for issues that affect our families.

The philosopher Plato said it well when he wrote, “The penalty that good men pay for not being interested in politics is to be governed by men worse than themselves.”

To request your IFI Voter Registration Kit, call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328 or email us HERE.

Thanks to the remarkable generosity of supporters, we made our goal today and earlier than expected!

We are truly overwhelmed by the support of fellow Illinoisans that we have received over the last few days. I sincerely thank the good folks from across the state and even from Texas, Florida, Indiana, and California who are supporting Illinois Family Institute. THANK YOU!

But we don’t have to stop there!  Any donation given or mailed by December 31st will benefit IFI’s critical work and ministry in 2016.  

As I said in my earlier email, I would love to be able to report to the IFI Board of Directors tomorrow that we not only met our end-of-year fundraising goal, but that we exceeded it!  It would be tremendous to be able to share with them the plans that we could put into effect through the generosity of IFI donors!

Illinois Family Institute is proud to be pro-family. That is what we are here to do. We will continue to boldly speak the truth about the sanctity of life, the importance of marriage, and the role of the natural family regardless of cultural trends, political agendas, and pernicious personal attacks. We hope you will continue to stand with IFI in 2016 as we strive to challenge the lies and political and cultural agendas based on those lies. Thankfully, there are many who are partnering with us!

It is with renewed hope for the protection of children and families that we move into 2016!

Please consider a generous contribution to IFI right now, as we depend heavily on year-end donations. Once the General Assembly returns to Springfield, they will get back to working to fulfill promises to liberal special interest groups. Your financial support was critical to our work in 2015, and your dedication to our common mission is critical to our ability to be effective.

With your help, we will continue our efforts to uphold marriage, family, life, and liberty in the Land of Lincoln.

Your support will take us above and beyond our year-end goal and will be added to the $55,000 matching challenge that a few donors have generously given to IFI. Thanks be to God.

Here are some ways you can give your tax-deductible donation:

• Contribute online HERE. 
• Give a gift of stock or appreciated assets. Contact Colleen Garcia, IFI’s Financial Administrator, at (708) 781-9328 or email her HERE.
• Mail your year-end gift to: Illinois Family Institute, P.O. Box 88848, Carol Stream, IL, 60188
• We also accept credit card donations over the phone at (708) 781-9328.

Please join with us in praying that God would provide the resources we need to move boldly into next year! 

Thank you, God bless you and Happy New Year,

David E. Smith
Executive Director

P.S. Don’t let 2015 pass without taking your stand to protect the values that matter most. Together, with God’s grace, we can accomplish great things in 2016.  To make a credit card donation over the phone, call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.

There is an interesting article on six church trends in America that you may want to check out.   The last trend may be of particular interest to our readers.  It points out, according to new research, that many churches are politically active but not the ones you might expect from the media perception.

One-third (34%) of churches participated in at least one of eight political activities asked about in the National Congregations Study from Duke Divinity School.

The study involved 3,800 congregations and over 70 denomination as well as Buddhists, Muslims, Jews and other religious groups. Yet, evangelicals are the least politically active with only 23% taking part in at least one activity such as voter’s guides or participating in a march or demonstration.  That may explain a lot about the condition of our culture.

By comparison, one-third (33%) of mainline churches, just under half (45%) of Black Protestants, and three-fourths (75 %) of Catholics participated in at least one political activity.

This is not to say that churches are not capable of or actively doing cultural things in regard to the world around them. Many churches simply choose social service over civic matters.  The study points out:

 “Despite the media attention on political engagement, churches are much more likely to be involved in social services — 87 percent of churches are involved in some kind of social service. Churches are twice as likely to have a homeless ministry or be involved in an education service than to have a political candidate as a visiting speaker or to lobby an elected official.”

I believe churches are a vital part of our nation’s social fabric and they are able to, and ought to, do both social and civic duties, after fulfilling their first calling of the Gospel.