Looks like a friend of Jack Franks has a correction. He/she apparently got the phone call and says, “This entire post is a blatant fabrication and a lie. I received the poll too, and it clearly indicated it was from an outside group.”

So, it appears someone else polled with the intent of giving Jack Franks the results, if it turned out the way the unidentified “outside group” wanted.

Correction duly noted and article moved up so people can see the new information.

Also noted is that the person making the comment used a fake email address.

= = = = =

Apparently actively considering voting to approve the gay marriage bill, State Rep. Jack Franks has phone calls being made asking the following question:

“Would you vote to re-elect Jack Franks in 2014 if he votes for same-sex marriage?”

Franks voted for the civil unions bill, but had no opponent on the ballot to test his continuing drift to the Left, even though Tea Party activist Tonya Franklin volunteered for the challenge.  (She was shot down by local Republican Party leaders.)

Late last month a group over 100 picketed Franks’ Route 47 Woodstock office, but he didn’t have time to speak to anyone on the subject.

Something in Chicago was more important.

= = = = =

If you got a call like this, please let us know any other details.

Want to see some of the lobbying efforts in Springfield last week?

If so, this video shows some of what happened including statements by State Rep. Mike Tryon and Tim Schmitz.

When Democratic Party State Representative Jack Franks signed on to co-sponsor a bill that would please the very pro-abortion Personal PAC, Pro-Lifers came out to picket his Woodstock office on Route 47 near the train overpass.

• See story one here.
• See story two here.

History is repeating itself Monday, when social conservatives have scheduled a demonstration at 11 AM to protest his refusal to take to them about potential support for the Gay Marriage bill

Franks voted for the Civil Union bill, so his refusal to talk to the Gay Marriage bill’s opponents have led them to believe he will vote for it as well.

Here is the email that I received about Monday’s event:

Please come one and all to join us at Rep. Jack Franks office in Woodstock, Monday morning at 11:30 am in SUPPORT OF TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE.

“His office is located on Rt. 47 and Lake St. near the overpass. The address is actually 1193 S. Eastwood Dr (Rt. 47) in Woodstock.

“PLEASE BRING SIGNS EXPRESSING YOUR SUPPORT FOR TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE; ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN!

“SINCE HE IS TOO BUSY TO SEE US IN HIS OFFICE OR IN A HOME MEETING, WE THOUGHT HE MAY TAKE NOTE OF THOSE WHO CARE ENOUGH TO COME TO HIM.

“We will assemble at 11:30 and go through the lunch hour as it is a very busy time on Rt. 47, which is located right in the heart of the business district in Woodstock.

“Please share this with other like-minded people who care deeply about the proposed redefinition of marriage and its impact on our families, religious liberty, our schools where the ‘normalization of homosexuality will be promoted K-12, etc.

“We realize this is short notice, but Rep. Franks is leaving for Springfield where the progress of this bill is moving quickly. Our message is VOTE NO ON SAME-SEX ‘MARRIAGE.’

“You can also call his office, or email him directly:

• Woodstock: 815-334-0063 815-334-9147 email: jack@jackfranks.org
• Springfield: 217-782-1717 Fax: 217-557-2118″

A commentary on marriage by former Congressman Joe Walsh:

Of Marriage and Political Courage

It takes courage to do what you believe is right, even if the whole country seems like it’s moving in the opposite direction.

I was thinking about political courage last night after the Illinois Senate passed same sex marriage legislation.

It is true that the media in this country is so giddy in their support for same sex marriage that it has had an impact on the polls.

In many states like Illinois, to support traditional marriage is to stand against “equality” and “fairness.”

To be OUTSPOKEN in support of traditional marriage is to be ridiculed and to risk being called a homophobe, a bigot, and often much worse.

Many become afraid and give in to the media and the “polls” as our Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady did last month when he came out in support of same sex marriage because, as he said, it would help Republicans win elections.

“So brave, so enlightened,” the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune and the rest of the liberal media cheered.

So easy.

What is hard to do is stand against public opinion and stand for what is right.

What is hard to do is to stand in the public square and defend traditional marriage as the bedrock of society that it is and always has been, as the institution best designed by God to raise and develop children.

What is hard to do is to defend the religious institutions and businesses whose basic religious freedoms will be in jeopardy if same sex marriage becomes law in Illinois.

We have precious little time to defend traditional marriage and religious freedom in this state.

All of us must take to the public square immediately and do what is hard. You will be ridiculed, the media will go after you personally, and they will laugh at you for mentioning God.

Have the courage to do what is right.

Defend traditional marriage and defend religious freedom.

Now.

= = = =
To learn who voted how on gay marriage in the Illinois Senate, plus which Republicans spoke against it and which ones vote for the bill, click here.

This email from David E. Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute was labeled

Lobby Day Bus from Crystal Lake

Defend Marriage Lobby Day – Feb. 20th

As you know, the IFI Defend Marriage Lobby Day is coming up fast: Wednesday, February 20th.

I hope and pray you will be able to join us! A strong presence in Springfield is essential to stopping the push to redefine marriage. (Read more about it HERE.)

For those of you in the Crystal Lake area of the state, you may be interested in knowing that our good friend Kathy Barnette and Truth Exchange Ministries is chartering a coach bus for this important event. Seating on the bus is limited and available on a first-come first-serve basis.

To register for this bus, visit truthexchange.net and learn more details. You can also click HERE to download a flyer for this bus ride opportunity.

If you have any questions, please email Kathy at KathyBarnette@TruthExchange.net.

Blessings,

David E. Smith, IFI Executive Director

Smith offers the following as background information:

The chief sponsor of this anti-family legislation, State Representative Gregg Harris (D-Chicago) is on record saying that the new Illinois General Assembly is on a “fast track” to pass legislation to redefine the institution of marriage.

In addition, homosexual activists with the Civil Rights Agenda, Equality Illinois, Stonewall Democrats, Illinois Log Cabin Republicans, and the ACLU of Illinois have been pushing hard for the passage of this anti-marriage bill.

We cannot afford to ignore this situation! Illinois citizens can send a strong message by joining us at the Capitol on February 20th to rally to protect God-ordained marriage in Illinois and to lobby their legislators.

Over the past few weeks, we have been busy contacting churches in key districts. Thousands of religious leaders from across the state have responded, voicing their opposition to marriage redefinition to local state lawmakers.

We can stop this legislation despite the “fast track” it may be on. We should be encouraged by the fact that recently hundreds of thousands of marriage supporters came out to demonstrate their opposition to same-sex “marriage” in Paris, France! (Watch a YouTube video of it HERE, and read the Reuters report HERE.)

There is strong opposition to same-sex marriage here in Illinois. The establishment media would have us believe that it is only a matter of time — that marriage redefinition is inevitable. It is only inevitable if we fail to speak up and demonstrate our objection to this radical policy!

If the secular French can see the importance of coming out to defend natural marriage — certainly the Christian community can do it. And we must!

A statement from former Congressman Joe Walsh:

This morning former Congressman Joe Walsh released a statement in regards to the current state of the Illinois Republican Party and its chairman.

“Two weeks ago, I publicly called on Pat Brady to step down as Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party.

“Pat is a good guy, but as he has still not retracted his public statements on same sex marriage, again, I call on him to step down.

“He can’t, in his position as Chairman of the Party, publicly refute a major piece of our Party’s Platform. It was a slap at all Republicans who believe in traditional marriage.

“The Republican Party is a big tent and welcomes all viewpoints.

“Pat can have his own individual positions, but the Chairman of the Party must publicly support the Platform and be one of its most ardent spokespersons.

“Pat Brady is no longer in a position to be that spokesperson. For the good of the Party, he should step down.”

Former Congressman Joe Walsh

A press release from a lay group of the Methodist Church in Northern Illinois:

Bishop’s statement does not represent Church on Gay Marriage

In response to United Methodist Bishop Sally Dyck’s endorsement of gay marriage, the Northern Illinois Conference Evangelical Association (NICEA) Chairman, James Blue, issued the following statement:

“What Bishop Dyck has expressed is her personal opinion.

“It does not reflect the official position of the United Methodist Church in which the definition of marriage as ‘the union of one man and one woman’ was first articulated in 1972.

“A separate but related action in 2004 called upon the church to ‘support laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.’

Unfortunately, the general public will assume that Bishop Dyck speaks for our entire Church.

“She does not.

“Support for traditional marriage has received overwhelming majority support at all recent quadrennial General Conferences where all United Methodists are represented.

“Support of traditional marriage is the one issue, among all sexually-related issues, that garners the broadest support within the Church.

“We regret the disunity that Bishop Dyck’s statement will inevitably bring to local congregations and we encourage the Illinois General Assembly to find another way to ensure the civil rights of gay couples without redefining marriage which has for millennia, been the foundational unit of human society.”

This email from Paul Caprio might explain the delay in a vote on the gay marriage proposal in Illinois:

Pro-Family Forces Stall Same-Sex Marriage Bill in Springfield

Friday, January 4, 2013

Despite promises last week by Senate and House sponsors of the same-sex marriage bill that passage was imminent, Senate backers, President Obama, Governor Quinn, Rahm “Chicago Values” Emanuel and disgraced GOP Chairman Pat Brady were unable to pass the bill on Thursday in the Illinois Senate.

What a surprise to all those who confidently predicted passage!

       WE know what really happened. As a result of the grassroots activities of the many pro-family organizations in the Coalition to Protect Children and Marriage, people of Faith became energized across the state to say “No to Same-sex Marriage” to their lawmakers.

Here are just a few of the things that occurred in the past week:

1. Pastors Erwin Lutzer and Wilfredo De Jesus and Reverends Bob Vanden Bosch and James Ford, Jr. sent a letter to more than 800 pastors warning the church community. It was sponsored by the Illinois Family Institute.
2. Family-Pac sponsored 170,000 robo-calls to targeted legislators with messages from Sandy Rios and Rev. James Ford, Jr.
3. Pro-family lobbyists Ralph Rivera, David Smith (IFI), Rev. Bob Vanden Bosch, Sharee Langenstein and others did a wonderful job in their face-to-face meetings in Springfield.
4. Cardinal George sent out a strong message opposing the bill to the Catholic Churches and the Illinois Catholic Conference worked day and night to stop the bill.
5. A Coalition of Priests and Ministers representing all major faiths opposing the bill was assembled.
6. These are just a few of the highlights…all Coalition groups played an important role.
7. Our Lord has blessed us.

BUT THE FIGHT IS JUST BEGINNING!

We are told the bill will not be called on Monday or Tuesday in the House…the final days of the lame-duck session.

The bill will be reintroduced immediately in the new Session and the battle will become even more intense. Stay tuned because we have a lot more work to do to defeat this bill…

May God continue to bless us all in this effort.

Apparently working from a voter registration list, S & A Research called last night about gay marriage.

The pollster explained that the state had civil unions, but mentioned two benefits marriage conferred on a spouse that the civil union law did not confer on a partner:

• Hospital visitation of a partner
• Deciding on medical care for a partner

I don’t know the details of the law so don’t know whether the information is true or not.

After explaining that, the basic question was asked again.

Would I be more likely or less likely to vote for Senator Pam Althoff if she voted to legalize gay marriage was the next question.

Then there were questions about

• ideological leanings
• whether there was an Hispanic in the household
• party affiliation
• religious beliefs
• age

Here’s a question Althoff asked in her last electronic newsletter:

Illinois recently passed a civil union law, where same sex couples are offered some of the same rights and responsibilities as married couples are, but only on a state level. Advocates for gay marriage argue that same sex couples in civil unions are not afforded all of the legal benefits that married couples enjoy, such as recognition of marriage no matter what state they reside, joint adoption, spousal benefits, and more. Legislation has been filed to recognize gay marriage in Illinois. Are you in favor of or opposed to the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, which would offer same-sex couples the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples?

• I am in favor of the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act.
• I am opposed to the Relgious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act.
• Not sure.

The poll results have not been released.

Whenever homosexuals win a victory, it is trumpeted all over the media.

At the world convention of the United Methodist Church in Tampa this week, the homosexual agenda took a beating, however, and I couldn’t find a line of type in the Chicago Tribune today.

That, even though there was a major article on which religions were growing and which were declining in Illinois, complete with county-by-county maps for (in descending order of Illinois membership) Roman Catholics, Evangelicals, Muslim, Methodists and Southern Baptists.

The Methodist Church’s Book of Discipline “does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching” and does not allow “a self-avowed practicing homosexual” to be a pastor.

However, as a commentator for Good News puts it, the church “affirms the ‘sacred worth’ of all persons even while acknowledging that as Christians we cannot affirm every expression of human sexuality.”

Two days ago (Wednesday) a resolution supported by the Love Your Neighbor Coalition to dilute Methodist policy was defeated 53%-47%.

Another resolution to eliminate the statement that homosexuality is “incompatible with Christian teaching” failed 61%-39%.

Moderates offered a compromise similar to one defeated four years ago which would state Methodists agreed to disagree on the issue, but that was defeated by a similar margin.

Afterwards the homosexuals took over the convention floor to demonstrate their frustrations (or “Temper Tantrum,” as the Institute for Religion and Democracy puts it.)

Although neither the Chicago Tribune or Sun-Times could find space.

Neither could the Northwest Herald or the Daily Herald.

The New York Times, however, ran an article:

Methodists Keep Stricture on Homosexualitys

USA Today also ran an article, written by Associated Press:

Methodists vote to keep stand against same-sex relationships

In other mainline Protestant denominations, The Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the homosexual agenda has held sway of the position of theological conservatives.

One of the groups in the winning, Good News, issued the following statement:

Pain and Protest

For ten previous General Conferences (1972-2008), the issue of homosexuality has absorbed increased time and energy and caused deep division in the church.

This General Conference was the tenth such time.

Veterans of previous General Conferences come prepared for the drumbeats of protest, the rainbow stoles designating us vs. them, and the tears that accompany the vote of the General Conference.

Although we do not agree with those who would change United Methodism’s stance on homosexuality, we do not take their tears lightly.

It is grevious that General Conference has become a place of such pain and protest. The sorrow is profound and will not be healed easily.

We know that the protesters and their supporters are hurt and upset at the direction, once again, that our denomination has taken.

We do not celebrate in their pain.

Most would agree that the orchestrated protest is not what John Wesley had in mind when he spoke of holy conferencing.

For first-time visitors, the experience can be overwhelming and dramatic.

For many of the Central Conference delegates, it is difficult to comprehend.

There were ceremonial arrests in Cleveland and a broken African communion chalice in Pittsburgh.

In Fort Worth, it was

• the chalk outlines,
• a lesbian wedding in the park, and
• a funeral shroud over the communion table.

One need not be a sacramentalist to find it exasperating to see the elements of the Lord’s Supper once again used as political theater.

When well-known, inspirational hymns are sung as a means of promoting a gay-rights agenda, delegates and observers are placed in the undeniably strange position of singing along with a protest that they may not have supported or observing in silence.

Yet after

• numerous dialogues,
• at least two General Church study commissions,
• official study resources,
• dozens of convocations,
• piles of books,
• demonstrations and
• disruptions of the General Conference business, and
• extended impassioned debate,

our denomination has consistently affirmed a holistic position that is pastoral and biblical, compassionate and redemptive.

United Methodism’s statement is a balanced and nuanced position that affirms the “sacred worth” of all persons even while acknowledging that as Christians we cannot affirm every expression of human sexuality.

After all, there are certain sexual practices that contradict biblical standards and as faithful disciples we must be willing to declare them to be incompatible with Christian teachings.

The United Methodist position does that with mercy and grace.

To a watching world and local churches at home, it is a statement of ethical stability in an age of murky morality.

It is a statement of theological honesty in an age of religious ambiguity.

It is a prophetic statement to a world that offers no boundaries to sexual expression.

To young people, our statement may provide a necessary guardrail to protect them from sexual brokenness.

The biblically prophetic message has always been more interested in truth and transformation than in consensus and conformity to mob-rule morality.

What the world often finds excusable and acceptable, the church does not and cannot.

In the interest of reaffirming our stance on human sexuality, we must admit that we have not always shown love for those who struggle with same-sex attraction.

In far too many of these highly-charged denominational gatherings, the temptation has been to view one another in the “us vs. them” mentality.

Sometimes our words and actions weighed heavier on “incompatible with Christian teaching” than on “persons of sacred worth.”

That was never our intent.

Despite that, we apologize.

This is not to paper over legitimate differences of opinion that we have regarding

• sexual ethics,
• the authority of Scripture, and
• the role of boundaries in the UM Church.

We probably will not change one another’s minds.

Nevertheless, we are grieved that what has been lost in the debate over homosexuality since 1972 is the potential for ministry to those who struggle with sexual brokenness.

Even though our denominational debates usually focus exclusively on homosexuality, United Methodism must begin to learn how to provide effective and compassionate ministry to all persons who struggle with their sexuality-whether it be heterosexual or homosexual.

We live in a hypersexualized culture and United Methodism must deal seriously-and here we are speaking to conservatives as well as liberals and moderates-with the crippling spiritual devastation that sexual brokenness brings into our local congregations.

Many who sit next to us in our pews have been victimized by sexual abuse or by an unfaithful spouse.

Others in our congregations

• struggle with promiscuity,
• are addicted to pornography,
• suffer with sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS,
• are confused about their sexual identity, or
• wrestle with same-sex attractions.

They all need to know that the United Methodist Church is prepared to minister to their needs. Right now, we are woefully ill-prepared.

In the midst of our sexual brokenness, the Bible says,

“Surely the arm of the Lord is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear!” (Isaiah 59:1)

The United Methodist Church was birthed as a Holy Spirit movement that believed in the power of God to transform the lives of all those who struggle with sin–homosexual or heterosexual.

Through a biblical ministry of mercy and grace, we must be a church that welcomes the sexually broken and confused.

We must be a church that stands with those who seek

• healing,
• wholeness, and
• holiness

in their sexuality.

= = = = =
Other articles that may be of interest:

• 4/24/12 Methodist Convention This Week in Tampa – Unity Not on the Agenda
• 4/27/12 The Disconnect Between American Liberals and Africans in Tampa’s Methodist Convention
• 4/28/12 Conservative Methodists Making Headway in World Conference, Big Fight on Homosexuality in Offing
• 4/29/12 Update from United Methodist Church General Conference in Tampa – Conservatives Winning Most Votes, Setbacks for Abortion & Israeli Divestment Supporters
• 4/30/12 Good News Reports Most Endorsed Candidates for Methodist “Supreme Court,” University Senate Win
• 4/30/12 Conservatives Take Three of Four Vacancies on Methodist Judicial Council, Vote on Homosexuality Imminent
• 5/2/12 Methodists Vote Almost 3-1 Against Ending Investments (Divestment) in Motorola and CAT, Proportional Representation for Africans on Ruling Bodies, Preacher Tenure Ended
• 5/3/12 53% Reject Homosexual Liberalization at Tampa World Methodist Conference
• 5/3/12 Homosexuals Take over Methodist Tampa Convention Floor after Losing Vote
• 5/4/12 Coverage of Conservative Methodists’ Victory over Homosexual Activists Missing in Newspapers