AFA-IN: Passing of a Giant, Parental Rights take a Hit

 Call to Action
“Well Done Thou Good and Faithful Servant”

Evangelist Billy Graham is now in heaven.  The legendary speaker, who shared the Gospel with hundreds of millions, has passed away at age 99.   He was a model of how to live the Christian life.  While his passing may seem to be the end of an era, his son Franklin now carries his father’s baton to run the race in ways that are perhaps even more important for a postmodern America awash in moral confusion.

Billy Graham crusade telecasts are available to watch online and on certain TV stations.   It would be worthwhile for our generation to show those to our children and grandchildren.   Graham has left many books behind.   I suspect that he would never want his life to outshine God’s message in any way, but his life was a model worth observing and study by future generations.

Corporate America Embraces a Radical, Anti-Family, Anti-Science Political Agenda

It probably won’t surprise many readers of this weekly email that big business increasingly equates with big liberalism today.   According to a new study, a significant number of businesses are pushing the radical transgender agenda upon America. They have done this to the tune of at least $424 million in political and cultural activism donations. Much of that money going directly to LGBT (which we might want to call “Letting Go of Biological Truth”) activist groups that then work to undermine cultural standards, religious liberty and family values.

The transgender ideology demands that government force Americans to accept all “gender identity” sexual confusion claims regardless of scientific truth.  Sadly as Hoosiers know from the “RFRA fix” legislation that was rushed through the legislature to undercut the best religious freedom bill in the nation, many politicians are all too eager to follow corporate demands.   (This is why your financial support of AFA-IN and solid legislative candidates is so important.)

Parental Rights Bill Takes a Hit in the Indiana House

The Indiana House of Representatives is more liberal than the Senate, so it is not surprising that even a simple and short bill on parental rights would face a tougher time than it did in the Senate.  Senate Bill 65 had an impressive 22 co-authors in the Senate.  This is more than half of the GOP membership in that chamber.  That insulated the bill from opposition by the establishment leadership.  Whereas, in the House SB 65 had only four sponsors.   The bill could still easily pass the House, as few legislators might actually want to vote against a parental rights bill in an election year.

SB 65, as passed by the Senate, simply seeks to inform parents and get their consent for instruction on human sexuality, gender identity, or homosexuality before it happens in class.   Opponents claim that this is too much work for schools and too difficult to accomplish, even though schools routinely operate this way this for field trips and other situations.

Yesterday, the House Committee on Education saw nearly two dozens amendments filed for SB 65 which is hardly more than two paragraphs long!  Members took action on four of them.  Amendment # 22, which is longer than the original bill itself, was adopted.

This amendment removed the terms homosexuality and gender identity using human sexuality as an all encompassing phrase.  It then set up a multi-step system for informing parents. If parents do not respond, their child will automatically be a part of the discussions, special programs, or a viewer of films.   This places the burden on the parents rather than the school.  That is what the school lobby and Planned Parenthood groups had wanted all along while claiming to support parental rights in their testimony against SB 65.

The amended bill is not without merit.  Pro-family groups are reviewing this change as the bill moves forward in the process.

If you have thoughts on this new language, feel free to let me know with an email.

In Their Own Words:

“A private faith that does not act in the face of oppression is no faith at all.” – William Wilberforce


Click here to unsubscribe from this mailing list.

AFAIN: So This is Love, Marriage & Hate?

Senate Shake Up!

Yesterday, Indiana Senate President David Long announced that he would be retiring from the legislature on Election Day this November after serving for 22 years in the Indiana General Assembly.  With the recent departures of Senators Brandt Hershman and Luke Kenley, the leadership of this chamber will be very different in November than it was just two months ago.  This could be a positive development for fiscal conservatives, pro-family and pro-life Hoosiers.

Stunned at Where We Are This Valentine’s Day

There’s not a lot that shocks me anymore, even though there is much that is disheartening in our culture.  Last week I had the Pandora phone app playing music in my car on my way into the AFA-IN office.  I was not paying a lot of attention, at first, when a short advertisement came on that nearly made me drive off the road.

The ad went something like this. “This is Joe . . . Joe is . . . (something) . . . Joe has gonorrhea . . . date with Durex (condoms).” 

Good grief, is this the message we send to young women on the dating scene today?  Since when did dating devolve into nearly anonymous sex like animals in a barnyard?    Detaching sex from intimacy, trust, and long term relationship commitment (marriage) sure does have some serious consequences.

I could not help but to pause and think of this with some sadness and concern as a father, then it hit me.  How much more must our Heavenly Father be saddened by this?

Man Up to Marriage

        Marriage is not worth it for men. It’s not worth the practical and financial sacrifices, the lost romantic opportunities, or the “lack of freedom.” All in all, a spouse is a ball and chain—of little benefit to any man interested in pursuing happiness and well being.

       Considering both the latest survey data and the continuing decline in the marriage rate, it’s fair to say that this viewpoint is becoming more entrenched in our society, particularly among younger men. 

       But, despite its prevalence, the ball and chain view of marriage is simply not supported by the research. Indeed, the benefits of marriage for men are substantial by every conceivable measure, including more money, a better sex life, and significantly better physical and mental health. Yet, many men remain ignorant of these benefits, a view seemingly promoted by popular culture.

These are the opening paragraphs of a great briefing paper from the Institute for Family Studies which dispels many of the myths about marriage that are rampant in our culture.  While being a good husband is hard work, the paper points out that the benefits of marriage are numerous for both men and women, and even more so for children.

Natural marriage also has numerous societal and economic benefits. For example:

• Married men earn 10-40% more than comparable single men;
• Marriage increases the earning power of men;
• Married men are less likely to be fired from a job;
• The typical married man in his 50’s has three times the financial assets of his unmarried peer.

Since romance is the topic of the day on this Valentine’s holiday, it is also interesting to note that married men have better sexual relationships than their peers, including unmarried cohabiting, males.   According to the National Health and Social Life Survey, 51% of married men reported that they were “extremely” satisfied with their sex lives compared to only 39% of cohabiting men and 36 percent of single men.

Marriage also has health benefits for men. Research find that men who get married and stay married live almost 10 years longer than their unmarried peers. Married men and women appear to manage health better and adopt healthier lifestyles than their unmarried peers.

Lastly, married men tend to be happier than their cohabiting or unmarried peers. Married men tend to have better mental health outcomes and less depression than their peers.  To read or print out this report click this link:

Attorney General Tries to Bypass the Hate Crime Hype

Many in the media are still upset over the defeat of SB 418, the so-called “hate crimes” bill before the Indiana General Assembly.  They are very committed to a narrative that ignores current law and shames Indiana over an emotional subject, as if opponents of the legislation support either hate or crime.   Thankfully, some are trying to cut through this and get a proper perspective of this issue.  I had a 500-word editorial in the Indianapolis Business Journal that I will share with you later.

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill, a former prosecutor who understands criminal law, wrote an excellent editorial on this topic. Unfortunately, not a lot of media outlets chose to print it.  So, I wanted to share it with you.  Please take a moment to read his editorial “Let’s Punish Actions Rather than Thoughts.”   Click here:

Apologetics Conference This Weekend

Our conference featuring Frank Turek, author of I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist is this Friday evening and Saturday morning.  You can learn more about this informative event and register here:

In Their Own Words:

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.” – Thomas Jefferson

Why We Are a Republic, Not a Democracy

Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, “What Happened.”

Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.

Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.

To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone. Find out more >>

Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.

California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.

Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.

Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.

>>> Liberals Claim Electoral College Is Biased. Here Are the Facts.

But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.

How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?

In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”

Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”

Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators.

The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto.

To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.

Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states—today, mainly 12 on the east and west coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.

>>> Why We Use Electoral College, Not Popular Vote

Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators.

Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative?

Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress.

While we’re at it, should we make all congressional acts by majority rule? When we’re finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?

My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?


A long read, but well worth the time.  I knew that the deep state goes a lot deeper than we think. Read this.




Warrior for law and order shares the good and bad news from the Trump DOJ at Restoration Weekend.

December 13, 2017

Editor’s note: Below are the video and transcript of remarks given by J. Christian Adams at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2017 Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 16th-19th at the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida.

Editor’s note: Below are the video and transcript of remarks given by J. Christian Adams at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2017 Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 16th-19th at the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida.

  1. Christian Adams: I’m going to talk to you today about what’s going on at the Justice Department, is the topic of my talk, and of course, if you tune into Fox News on any given day, that seems to be the lead story.  So I’m going to talk a little bit about that.  Many of you have been asking me this weekend what’s going on at the Justice Department, and I told you, wait until Sunday and we’ll cover it in great detail.

When I was at the Justice Department, I learned that the Justice Department has so much power over so many things.  If you’ve been to the pool, you’ve seen the chair that goes in and out of the pool, that’s a Justice Department mandate.  Civil rights, elections, on and on.  It is the fulcrum upon which Obama and Holder initiated a radical transformation of the country.  Everything went through the Justice Department, and that’s why it’s so important.

When Holder dismissed my New Black Panther case in 2009, a few months after they were sworn in, those of us working at the Department began to see this radical transformation taking place, just starting at the time.  And you didn’t think it was possible, right?  You didn’t think that, okay, the men with billy clubs in front of a poll, and you bring a case and the case is dismissed, but you also didn’t think they would keep going.  And frankly, the New Black Panther case, with the benefit of hindsight, was just the beginning of a radicalized transformation of, frankly, the United States.

Holder and Obama institutionalized this radicalism at the Justice Department.  They made it not radicalism to the people who work there.  To the people who worked there, my colleagues, this was simply this new, enlightened way of thinking.  It was progressivism meets power, and that’s what you saw over the course of 8 years.  They turned the law into a relativist, racialist, radicalism, and that’s what we saw time after time after time.  Now, I’m here to tell you about what’s happening now.  What has happened the last 10 months since the inauguration, and it’s a mixed bag, and we’ll go over some mixed things that are going on and some bad things that are going on still.  But first the good news.  I put at the top of the list the fact that Eric Holder’s war on cops is over.  It’s done.  Those of you who have read my book, it’s like listening to a Louie Gohmert talk though, which is very hard to follow by the way.  There are so many fanciful, farcical things that are totally true that you can’t believe it’s actually happening, and it gives you an insight into how nuts some of these people were.  For example, when I was at the Justice Department under Obama, they actually hired an organization, Northeastern University, to do police sensitivity training.  Now I’m not done with this.  One of the consultants working for this organization to do police sensitivity training — and by the way, they charged you, the taxpayers, a million dollars to produce these materials.  One of the women who worked for this organization was Angela Davis.  Do you remember this?  And of course Angela Davis is the communist who probably was involved in the murder of a judge in California, but this is the sort of world we lived in under Eric Holder, where federal tax money was moving to an organization, that has as part of its staff Angela Davis, to train police officers.  That’s the world we’ve left under President Obama.

Another good thing that has happened since the inauguration, “sue and settle” is over.  What do I mean by “sue and settle”?  You guys got to give the progressives credit, they’re geniuses when it comes to leveraging power.  What Obama instituted was a series of lawsuits at DOJ against, for example, financial services companies, for redline mortgaging, or other housing firms for discrimination in mortgage lending.  And they would extract these gigantic settlements out of these corporations, and they would require the corporations to set aside millions of dollars for a slush fund that would then be used by progressive organizations.  Just think about that.  They would leverage federal power to fuel their far-left allies, and that’s what they did for 8 years and Jeff Sessions ended it.  Immediately terminated the program, so “sue and settle” is over, good.

Unlike the New Black Panthers, the Justice Department has begun to protect the civil rights of all Americans.  They don’t look at the race of the victim anymore to decide whether to protect civil rights, and one of the things that Jeff Sessions is going to do and has already initiated, is begin to look at discriminatory college admission policies.  What do I mean by that?  Some of you already know.  What the Justice Department is looking at is colleges that receive federal money giving you a spot in college on the basis of race.  Now, some of us have just grown totally accustomed to this. This is how they do it now at elite universities.  But you know what, if you’re an Asian parent and have a child who is Asian, they’re being discriminated against to get into Harvard.  That’s a fact, and so the Justice Department has begun to look at discriminatory implementation of admissions policies, which of course is going to send the left crazy.  This is how they fuel university radicalism, is by making it all about race.

They’ve also begun to defend election integrity instead of attack it.  Remember, during Holder’s tenure they attacked Texas voter I.D., which is near and dear to me and my organization. We litigate voter integrity around the country.  They’ve begun to scale back all of these Holder-Obama attacks on clean voter rolls, voter I.D., all of these important implementations of policies to keep our elections clean.  The voter rolls right now have 4 million ineligible names on them.  There are non-citizens on the rolls.  My organization’s called the Public Interest Legal Foundation. We litigate cases to get rolls clean, to help defend election integrity.  We have found in Virginia, in Virginia alone, aliens who self reported they are aliens.  In other words, they raised their hand, they said I’m on the voter rolls and I’m not a citizen.  Found 5,000 of those just in Virginia.  Where this past month we had an election where control of the Virginia House is being decided by about 100 votes, so that’s what happens when you have corrupt voter rolls.  We just got done with a trial in Broward County, Florida, in federal court against Broward County, because they have more people on the voter rolls than they have people alive.  Which, by the way, 250 other counties in the country do, and I just did depositions last week in McAllen, Texas.  Anybody ever been to McAllen?  It’s out there, isn’t it?  And the same thing there: there are about 115 percent eligible on the rolls in McAllen, Texas.  It’s happening all over the country.

We’ve heard a lot about George Soros this weekend, and at the trial in Broward County, Soros intervened in my case to help defend the dirty voter rolls.  They hired these lawyers from a firm called Jenner Block, from an organization called Dimos — all these, put an “n” at the end, right, “demons” — and the Advancement Project, Project Vote, all these Soros organizations.  There were not enough seats in the federal courtroom for all of the Soros lawyers opposing us.  There were 12.  The bailiff had to bring in more seats at counsel table because there were so many Soros lawyers.  That’s the world that Obama helped create.

As I said, there’s good news.  But there’s also bad news at the Justice Department, and if you’ve been watching the news, you know this because what’s happening at the Justice Department is threatening the very results of last year’s elections.  And you heard that all weekend long, from Steve Bannon, from Sebastian Gorka yesterday, so let’s talk about some of the bad news.  Things people have asked me this weekend, and Louie just mentioned it, is why is this not getting fixed?  Why is this still happening?  A lot of people thought the President could come in on Day 1 and snap his fingers and say, “You’re fired.”  I wish he could, but unfortunately, one of the things that’s bad is, there is a massive left-wing civil service, and I don’t just mean Democrats.  I mean hardcore left-wing.  I worked with these folks.  I know what they were like.  These weren’t just sort of like Clinton – and I mean Bill – Clinton Democrats.  These are like Shea Democrats, okay?  So these people are still all throughout the government.  They’re the people who do the factual analysis on cases, the initial legal analysis, and so when it gets up to the new Trump people, it’s already full of lies.  It’s already full of half truths, and so I’ve talked to people in the political branches that Trump put there, they can’t even trust the civil service.  They can’t do a lot of the things you folks want them to do at Justice, because they have no one they can trust to do the work.

Now you say, “Can’t you just fire them?”  The answer, no, you can’t.  There’re civil service lawyers, and they’re all through the government.  Louie mentioned in his talk about all of these Obama political people, that after the election got embedded downward, the opposite happened also, and all throughout the Justice Department after the election, a lot of career civil service people got embedded upward into political branch layer offices.  Acting deputy assistant attorney general civil rights.  I’ve written about these people.  These are radical leftists who were promoted upward into the political layer, so they’re spies now.  They listen in on all the political discussions, and these people are still there.  I’ll give you a name, Alberto Riushansez.  I used to work with Alberto at the voting section.  He is now a political appointee, technically, under the Trump administration. He’s a radical, radical leftist.  So he needs to be sent back down, along with all of the other ones who were promoted right after the election.  Thank you.

There’s two more problems at DOJ.  The first one is also our own fault, or I should say our side’s fault.  After the election, a lot of institutionalists, and that’s a word I use on Fox all the time, they aren’t Democrats but they’re institutionalists.  And these institutionalists were put in positions of power primarily to run the transition team, and so from November to the inauguration, there was a lot of institutionalists at Justice.  Have you guys heard the name Rod Rosenstein?  Rod Rosenstein was put in that position.  A lot of people say, “Why on earth was Rod Rosenstein appointed the No. 2 guy at the Justice Department?” and the answer is that the institutionalists who were in charge of the transition picked people like Rod.  They picked other people to staff the highest levels of the Department who were not so much concerned about the swamp.  They’re kind of more concerned about staying above the fray.  You guys know the type. They don’t usually come and talk this weekend. They wouldn’t get invited.  In fact, they’re talked about.  Congressman Gohmert talked about them but the problem is that they were appointed at high levels, which takes us to my last comment, and that is the special counsel.

The special counsel, Bob Mueller, is on an absolute out-of-control crusade to wreck the presidential election of last year, period.  Who did he turn to to staff his prosecutorial unit?  institutionalists and Democrats.  You can look at the roll call of people involved in that investigation, and down to a gnat’s fanny, they are the relics of the Obama age.  And now they have this enormous power.  I just got a call from a campaign staffer from the Trump campaign last week, looking for a lawyer because now they’re burrowing into the campaign in their investigation.  What were you doing for all of these nefarious foreign interests?  They are unhinged and out of control. And why are they unhinged and out of control? Cycle back: because of Rod Rosenstein.  Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, the No. 2 guy at Justice.  Remember, when Sessions recused himself, Rod Rosenstein became effectively the attorney general of the United States for the special counsel.  And Rod Rosenstein will not get this under control because Rod Rosenstein is mostly concerned about Rod Rosenstein and not the future of the United States, and not the President, for sure.

So what you have now at the Justice Department is a lot of good news.  The worst radicalism of the Holder era has been shut off, but like you heard over and over and over again this weekend, Seb Gorka said it yesterday, all we did is prevent the car from going off the cliff.  And unfortunately, the fight continues.  You have to be ever vigilant because we still have not mastered the bureaucracy.  We still aren’t over the hill yet, and we aren’t on the downhill side.  Because these people, frankly, ranging from moderates to frank all-out communists who work at the Department, are not giving this up.  This is a theology to these people.  You have to understand that.  The people who think they’re going to transform the world using the power of law and your tax dollars to do it, and they aren’t giving up easily, and the fight of the next 4 years is going to be, or 3 now, can you defeat and hold off the special counsel from destroying the presidency?  And make no mistake, that’s what that’s about.  It’s about destroying the President and totally stopping your revolution.  That’s what the special counsel was there for.  So will that continue?  Will the results of the election be treated as legitimate by these bureaucrats, by the media, by the country?  Unfortunately, that’s the central fight that exists at the Justice Department.

So what’s going on?  A lot at the Justice Department.  Sessions is exactly the right guy, and I’m telling you that.  I hear that question more than anything else.  I was on with Judge Jeanine 2 weeks ago.  I know some of you saw that.  Every time I go on her show, she wants to run down Sessions, and I keep telling her, he’s the right guy, and boy, you don’t want to tell her that off the air because she sounds differently than she does on the air. And Milo used up all the profanity quotient yesterday, so I’m not going to tell you what was said.  The point is that Sessions is the right guy.  When you hear things like put Rudy in place — I’ve heard that a lot; Rudy would do a better job.  I see it on Twitter, I see it on other places.  That is sort of the moderate institutionalist answer to Jeff Sessions, so don’t buy it.  Sessions gets it.  It is very difficult to navigate through this swamp, and he’s just getting started so he needs everybody’s support.  So thank you all very much for being here, and thank you for your time.

Thanks a lot.


A Call for Parental Rights in Indiana

 Call to Action


     I want to pass along this alert from our national office in place of our usual AFA-IN email this week.  It is an important call to action regarding Senate Bill 65 in the Indiana General Assembly.  This is a parents’ right to know bill, which helps inform parents of what is being taught to their child in school.   With the Indiana legislature now underway, a phone call to your State Senator today about the importance of this legislation would be very helpful. 

Thank you,
Micah Clark
Executive Director
AFA of Indiana

Tell Your Indiana Senator to Support Parental Rights Bill

In schools all across America, stories are emerging of young children being exposed to graphic topics under the guise of health, sex education, diversity, or even literature.

Hoosier parents have a right to know what their child is being taught in school concerning human sexuality. Parents should also have the right to have their child excused from inappropriate instruction at school.

Indiana’s General Assembly bill, Senate Bill 65, will address this problem. This legislation is simply an informed consent bill. It stipulates that parents have a right to know what the school may teach their child under topics related to sex, sexual behaviors, or lifestyles.

The parental rights bill, S. 65, would:

  • Make available for inspection to a parent of a student instructional material used in connection with instruction on human sexuality.
  • Prohibit a school from providing a student with instruction on human sexuality unless the parent of the student or the student consents to the instruction.
  • Establish requirements regarding the consent form.
  • Require the department of education and the governing body of a school corporation to give parents and students notice of these requirements.

The Indiana General Assembly has just begun, and your senator needs to hear from you today, and that parents and grandparents want Senate Bill 65 to pass. 
Contact your State Senator at 317-232-9400, and ask them to vote “yes” on SB 65.

Click here to find out who your IN senator is by entering your zip code and your registered voting home address.

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association


Click here to unsubscribe from this mailing list.

HB 1097, Protection at Conception Bill Has Been Filed: sign petition

Can’t See This Message? View in a browser
This is the logo

HB 1097, Protection at Conception Bill Has Been Filed

This is the divider

It’s TIME!


Dear Friend,


This is the moment we have all been fighting for!


After fighting the good fight for forty four years, striving to save babies and help women, revealing the horrors of abortion, and educating the public about the true nature of Planned Parenthood, the moment the pro-life movement has been fighting for has finally arrived!


Pro-life champion, Rep. Curt Nisly, has filed the Protection at Conception bill, HB 1097, which treats the unborn like any other living individual.  If other legislators at the Statehouse are courageous enough to pass this bill, every single Hoosier baby will be protected at the moment of conception.


I am so excited for this opportunity and ever grateful for Representative Curt Nisly, who bravely stands for what is right, no matter what Republican establishment may throw at him.  Rep. Nisly not only talks the pro-life talk, but he walks the pro-life walk.  He has accomplished what no other lawmaker has before him and filed a bill which would end abortion in Indiana once and for all.


Rep. Nisly has done his job.  The bill is in the hopper, and now our work begins.


In order to pass this bill, we need a fair hearing and a roll call vote.  Speaker Bosma and Public Policy Chair, Ben Smaltz, both point to their voting records as proof they are against abortion, but how can anyone vote on a bill these guys kill in committee?


With a roll call vote, constituents will know for sure which legislators stand with Planned Parenthood and which stand with the army of Hoosiers behind the Protection at Conception bill.


We, the pro-life community in Indiana, need to band together and demand our Representatives uphold the Indiana Constitution, which recognizes a God given right to live and the protection of posterity!


I am tired of the bullies at Planned Parenthood pretending to run the show.  They march around in vulgar costumes and hats, waving their banner of Roe v. Wade and even try to make people believe they have a constitutional right to abortion.   I am fighting back with hard cutting truths.


Roe v. Wade is not the law of the land.  Government 101 teaches us courts don’t make laws!  Further, the right to kill your own child is not in the Constitution.


Thankfully, what can be found in our Constitution is a God given right to live as well as a way to protect us from over reaching, tyrannical federal rule which may try to strip away our rights.  The tenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution decrees power not given to the federal government by the Constitution is power which belongs to the states.


Indiana has a vested interest in protecting its own citizens, and the federal government cannot intervene.  In essence, the feds do not have jurisdiction and we have a constitutional right to protect Hoosier babies without interference.  All we need is the courage to do the right thing.


The baby killing machine, Planned Parenthood wants you to believe you are powerless because of the courts, but reality is the great state of Indiana has the power to protect posterity if only our so-called pro-life legislators would take courage, stand up to the abortion bully, and declare “NO MORE child killing!”


Our legislators are not relieved of their responsibility to uphold the Constitution and protect a baby’s right to live simply because of what another government official might do.


Planned Parenthood has made many believe the lie that the courts are the hold up, but really, when Speaker Bosma reportedly plans to kill the bill and Ben Smaltz refuses to hear the bill, it is NOT the courts that are in the way of ending abortion in Indiana.


The current roadblock to abolishing abortion in our state is the “pro-life” Republican leadership at the Statehouse.


We the people are not powerless, my friend.  Our voices and our votes can be the tidal wave that drowns the abortion industry once and for all.  Thousands and thousands of people in Indiana want to see an end to abortion and that number only keeps growing.


But, believe it or not, there are still some people who have not heard about this historic bill.  I’m counting on you to sign your petition demanding a hearing and a vote on Protection at Conception.  After that, please do not wait—forward your petition on to all of your friends who will sign.  A message will be sent directly to Republican leadership, letting them know you are part of the army of people demanding this bill be heard.


Lastly, while I am confident a hearing and a vote will expose the pro-aborts in pro-life clothing down at the Statehouse, Planned Parenthood will fight with all of its baby killing might to make sure this bill dies.  They feel safer when the bill dies in committee, without a vote, and even publicly thanked Republican Ben Smaltz for making that happen last year.


With an army twice the size of Planned Parenthood’s, our voice would roar through the Statehouse, and our legislators would know we mean business.   I hope you’ll consider chipping in $25, $50, or more to help me reach even more like-minded people with news about the Protection at Conception bill.  If that’s too much, even $10 or $15 would go a long way in reaching more people who could pressure our legislators to represent us well.


It’s time for Indiana Republicans to stop representing Planned Parenthood and start representing the pro-life voters who put them in office.  After all, a total ban on abortion is what we, the pro-life people of Indiana, have been fighting for all of these years.  Our hard work has finally paid off.


If your legislators will not join us as we make history in Indiana, then when election season comes around, I will be here to let you know about it.  Thank you so much for your support.  I’m certain, if they could, your pre-born neighbors would thank you, too.




Amy Schlichter

Executive Director


P.S.  Rep. Curt Nisly of Goshen has filed the Protection at Conception bill, HB 1097, which would save all babies from abortion.  In order to see which legislators stand with the thousands of pro-life voters in Indiana and which stand with Planned Parenthood, we need a fair hearing and a roll call vote on this historic bill.


I’m counting on you to sign your petition today, demanding a hearing and a vote on the Protection at Conception bill.  Then, please forward the petition to all of your friends who will sign it.


Lastly, please consider chipping in $25, $50, or more to help us reach more people who can also demand a hearing and a vote for Protection at Conception.  If that’s too much, even $10 or $15 will go a long way in gaining even more support than we already have for this life saving bill.


This is the video



This is the footer

Trump/Republican in the White House benefits

Good Morning,

>From everyone here at the Marion County Republican Central Committee we hope you have a safe and Happy Holiday!

Yesterday was a historic day for our country. Republicans in Washington were able to pass the largest tax reform package in the history of our country, sending the bill to the President’s desk for his signature. Even though the bill hasn’t been signed yet companies like AT&T, Boeing, Comcast, and Fifth-Third Bank have already announced that they’ll be giving out bonuses and raises to hundreds of thousands of employees as well as investing billions of dollars back here in the United States. These tax cuts will help out every day Americans, especially people here in Marion County.

At a high level, here is what is included in the final bill:

  • Lowers tax rates at every income level
  • Doubles the standard deduction
  • Doubles the child tax credit to $2,000
  • Eliminates Obamacare’s individual mandate penalty tax
  • Retains many popular tax credits, deductions and tax-advantaged programs
    • Adoption tax credit, mortgage deductions, education savings programs, retirement accounts…

This reform is especially beneficial for manufacturing-intensive states like Indiana, as this bill closes a tax loophole that allows businesses to offshore jobs overseas.

  • Companies that renounce their U.S. headquarters and move overseas will see a 20% excise tax on stock compensation.
  • Business will enjoy $1.8 trillion in tax cuts that will be critical to helping them compete in the global economy.
  • Small businesses – the backbone of our Hoosier economy – will enjoy a first-ever 20% tax deduction on the first $315,000 of their income.

This has been a year of growth for our party and I’m excited about what we’ll be able to do in 2018 with your help. Thank you for helping make 2017 a successful stepping stone for 2018. I hope you have a happy New Year!


Jim Merritt
Chairman, Marion County Republican Central Committee

Political Science: Interesting that the Bible supports Aristotle and vice versa….

Political “Science” – in Good Faith

Few contemporary political science students know the checkered history of their discipline, which has principally become an empirical field devoid of metaphysical questions. Aristotle, the “father of political science,” argued, however, that, in a properly and prudently governed polis, the good citizen will be coincident with the good man.
The nature of goodness was thus an essential matter of political inquiry. That simple idea is profoundly significant, for it captures a key element of genuine political science, which aims at developing and inculcating virtue. “The main concern of politics,” Aristotle writes in the Nicomachean Ethics, “is to engender a certain character in the citizens and to make them good and disposed to perform noble actions.”
St. Thomas Aquinas thought that political administration was good if, and to the extent that, it was ordered to holiness. Good people would lead good governments; without virtuous leadership, the citizens would largely fail in the cultivation and practice of virtue. In fact, Aquinas quotes from Proverbs 28:12, 15, 28 and 29:2, the theme of which is that oppressive rulers are ravenous beasts who impair virtue and the common good.
By “virtue,” Aristotle meant excellence of the soul (as did Aquinas), so that “the student of politics must obviously have some knowledge of the working of the soul.” Obviously? Today’s academics?
When almost two millennia later Machiavelli taught that rulers required virtù (not virtue), he argued for might over right, and for the acquisition of power regardless of divine consequences. If Solomon, in Proverbs, warned against oppressive princes, Machiavelli exalted them as effective, contending that the love of power was greater by far – and much more practical – than the power of love.
Since then, political science had become more concerned with what is, than with what ought to be. Cynics argue that we have no reliable measurements of what virtue is, but we have a warehouse of tools for measuring more “useful” matters (such as voter tabulations and public opinion polls).
Lenin defined politics as Kto/kovo (or Who/whom – who does what to whom?) Harold Lasswell (1902-1978) described politics as “who gets what, when, how.” And systems theorist David Easton (1917-2014) said that politics is “the authoritative allocation of values.” Nothing there about virtue, rectitude, or nobility. Nothing there, either, consistent with the Catechism’s observation that “ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action, and morals” (#407).
The Tribute Money by Masaccio, 1425 [Brancacci Chapel, Florence]
The American man of letters Russell Kirk (1918-1994), however, struggled to restore the Aristotelian-Thomist understanding that politics is “the application of ethics to the concerns of the commonwealth.” There is a necessary connection, Kirk and his students would say, between Athens and Jerusalem, between the virtues of love and of prudence, between Ought and Is. In conscientiously and continuously seeking that connection between the Perfect and the Possible, one finds both the purpose and the pity of politics.
Philosopher Eric Voegelin (1901-1985) saw clearly the danger of our day, warning of the evil sure to result from “the degradation of political science to a handmaid of the powers that be.” Genuine political wisdom proceeds, from knowledge that “the truth of man and the truth of God are inseparably one.” There is a measure, after all, for determining right and wrong in political life. If Protagoras and all subsequent positivists or secularists proclaim, “man is the measure,” they are grievously mistaken, for, as Plato told us, “God is the measure.”
In the absence of proper diagnosis – that “the whole of man’s history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil” (Gaudium et Spes 37) – the medicine of politics curdles and corrupts. Politics is seen either as messianic (with would-be political saviors in the political arena) or as despicable (with debauched despots vying for power and attention).
Here, then, is modern politics: a political convention in Charlotte which boos God and a raft of politicians who, as Walter Lippmann once put it, “advance politically only as they placate, appease, bribe, seduce, bamboozle, or otherwise manage to manipulate” the public, to whom they present themselves as servants of the people.
When we scoff at the true, the good, and the beautiful; when we worship the false and fleeting and call the profane sacred; when we conflate what is noble with what is noisome; when fraudulent education creates, as C. S. Lewis said, “men without chests” – then we will continue to look for solutions to problems in all the wrong places and by all the wrong means. We will create hell and call it heaven; we will kill babies and the elderly and call it mercy (cf. Is 5:20). We will cheer what is filthy and loathsome and call it sublime. We will not know that we do not know. And we will not care, for a drugged and decadent society will divert us.
And what of those who seek to restore virtue in public policy and to remind us that we are creatures of a loving God? What of those who speak faithfully of the moral law and of a political science which tells us – against those who boo God – that we are neither angels nor beasts but beings made in His image and His likeness, trying to work out our salvation in fear and trembling (Phil 2:12)?
Political science, wisely taught and wisely practiced, tells us always that we must know, first, Whose we are (1 Cor 7:6:19, 7:23). Remembering that, we might heed Churchill’s advice: “The day may dawn when fair play, love for one’s fellow men, respect for justice and freedom, will enable tormented generations to march forward serene and triumphant from the hideous epoch in which we have to dwell. Meanwhile, never flinchnever wearynever despair.”