Democrats Take Aim at WI Legislative Maps

Democrats Take Aim at WI Legislative Maps

Last week, Judge Janet Protaciewicz became Justice Protaciewicz when she was sworn in as a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, a move that changed the ideological balance of the court from 4-3 conservative to 4-3 liberal. Two lawsuits have already been filed with the state supreme court that challenge the current legislative maps. Democrats are asking the state supreme court to overturn GOP-drawn maps. The court has to formally accept these “direct-action” petitions, which will likely happen soon given the new makeup of the court.

The filing of these lawsuits was anticipated following the addition of Justice Protasiewciz to the court. She emphasized the existing maps, crafted by GOP legislators and implemented by the state supreme court in spring 2022, as a central theme of her campaign, characterizing the maps as “rigged” and unfairly skewed in favor of Republicans.

Democrats argue that the state legislative maps exhibit partisan gerrymandering. As a result, one of the lawsuits calls for all 33 state senators to run according to new districts next year, and the other lawsuit says all state legislators should be compelled to compete in redrawn districts in fall 2024. Both lawsuits, if successful, would mean the half of the state senate who was elected last year and wouldn’t be up for re-election until 2026 would still be forced to run again next fall.

Republican legislative leaders criticized the lawsuits, and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) pledged to protect the existing maps.

“The timing of this lawsuit questions the integrity of the court,” he said“It’s clear that liberal interest groups are coming to collect from Justice Protasiewicz after her campaign broke judicial code to earn their financial support earlier this year.”

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said the petitions appear to be an “attempt to get the Wisconsin Supreme Court to do what the United States Supreme Court has said judges cannot — decide political issues about redistricting.” Vos is referring to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said federal courts cannot play a role in deciding partisan gerrymandering claims. The 2019 verdict undercut a district court’s decision that had determined the Wisconsin GOP legislators’ drawn boundaries constituted an unconstitutional gerrymander.

Both lawsuits are directed exclusively at the current state legislative maps (Senate and Assembly districts), not the congressional maps, which were accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court at the same time as they rejected the original state legislative maps submitted by Governor Evers. If either of these lawsuits is successful (and in all likelihood if the state supreme court decides to accept both, they will be combined and heard together), and new maps are drawn and ultimately forced upon the legislature, the strong majorities Republicans have in both the Assembly and the Senate would be in jeopardy. This, of course, is exactly what the Democrats want: to eliminate or at least reduce the majorities.

With 2024 being a presidential election year and Wisconsin once again being a targeted state, we can be sure an all-out assault on our state legislature will be waged with massive amounts of money being spent to flip both houses from conservative to liberal majorities. Should that happen while Evers is governor, well, let’s just say it won’t be good for marriage, family, life, religious freedom, or any other freedom.

As we know, elections have consequences. These map challenges are significant; please join us in prayer as these cases and others impacting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom will no doubt soon be filed.

Parent Sues WI School District After Teacher Announces Gender “Transition”

Parent Sues WI School District After Teacher Announces Gender “Transition”

The Daily Wire reports that a Wisconsin school district is facing a lawsuit from a parent who claims that a teacher announced his gender “transition” to students, including those in elementary school, without notifying parents.

On Monday, Leah Buchman, a mother within the Eau Claire Area School District (ECASD), lodged a formal complaint accusing the district of violating open records law and neglecting to inform parents about the teacher’s gender transition announcement.

According to the complaint, on June 5th, all orchestra students at Northstar Middle School were required to meet in the orchestra room along with their orchestra teacher and school counselor, Jacob Puccio, and the district’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) director, Dang Yang. During this gathering, the middle school students were informed that their orchestra teacher, Mr. Puccio, would be undergoing a “gender transition.”

Further, music students at three elementary schools and one high school in the district were purportedly read a scripted statement regarding the teacher’s gender transition.

According to the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), the statement was curated by ECASD with the intention to “ensure that students received information in a particular way.” Additionally, WILL asserts that parents still remain unaware of the exact contents of what was read to the students and are seeking clarification on the specifics.

Buchman immediately requested a copy of the scripted statement but was denied access to it. An attorney representing the school district stated that the document could not be released at that time due to an ongoing investigation into whether any school employee had acted inappropriately during the June 5th announcement.

Following the school’s refusal to provide the statement, Buchman proceeded to file her lawsuit with the assistance of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL).

“All I am asking is for the school district to provide what was told to my children and their peers in the classroom. As a parent, it’s my responsibility to help my kids understand all that life throws their way, and I do not understand why it has taken the school district so long to update parents,” said Buchman.

“It’s ridiculous for a school district to refuse to produce a statement that was read out loud to dozens of minor students in several district classrooms. What was told to these kids should be readily accessible to parents,” said WILL attorney Cory Brewer.

Other Wisconsin schools have been under fire for undermining parents’ rights in an attempt to indoctrinate students with radical LGBTQ+ ideology. 

The Eau Claire Area School District (ECASD) was sued for hosting gender identity trainings that instruct teachers and school staff on how to hide students’ gender transitions from parents. America First Legal (AFL) and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) filed the lawsuit on behalf of several parents, arguing that the district’s policies violate their freedom of religion and their parental rights. 

Similarly, last  November a group of Wisconsin parents sued the Kettle Moraine School District (KMSD) for a policy that allows minor students to “transition genders” at school, even despite their parents’ objection.

In a third case, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) filed a lawsuit in 2020 in Dane County Circuit Court against the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) for its policies that allow children to change their gender identity at school without parental notice or consent. The policy also instructs district staff to hide information about students’ gender identity from parents.

Cases of Wisconsin schools violating parental rights have become far too common– and these are only the instances that have been reported. Hopefully, these lawsuits are successful and send a clear message to Wisconsin schools: teachers have no right to parent students or push a radical agenda without parents’ consent. 

Let’s Talk Leadership!

Let’s Talk Leadership!

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed a law last Friday banning most abortions after a baby’s heartbeat can be detected, just weeks after the Iowa Supreme Court blocked a similar law. The bill signing took place at The Family Leadership Summit, a gathering of nearly 2,000 faith-based conservatives organized by The Family Leader, a state family policy council in Iowa. The governor told the sold-out crowd, “the most important human rights cause of our time [is] protecting unborn human lives from the atrocity of abortion.”

“All life is precious and worthy of the protection of our laws,” Reynolds added. “Everyone understands that a heartbeat signifies life, and we understand that when it falls silent, something precious has been lost.”

Reynolds also acknowledged with gratitude who was in the audience— pro-life activists, saying, “You have lifted us in prayer, grounded me in God’s Word, and reminded me that He is always in control.”

I was privileged to be at that event and to meet Governor Reynolds. The crowd went crazy in applause for the governor and for the at least 50 pro-life legislators flanked her as she signed this bill. 

One of the other speakers at the Summit was Pastor Alistair Begg who did a session on the importance of having a biblical worldview. As he wrapped up his remarks, he gave three words that he said should characterize leaders: integrity, bravery, and humility. 

From what I can discern about Governor Kim Reynolds, especially after listening to numerous Iowans who actually know her quite well, she epitomizes these characteristics. Because of her, people like me have “governor envy,” as we consider what Wisconsin could be like if we had leaders anywhere in our government who were people of integrity, bravery, and humility. 

These are leaders who do the right thing, at the right time, in the right way, for the right reason, even if no one is watching— that’s integrity. Such leaders have the courage of their convictions and are willing to do hard things in the face of adversity because doing right is always good and right. 

Leaders in every walk of life who exhibit integrity, bravery, and humility are rare indeed, and the world is starved for them. We are doing all we can to help develop these types of leaders this week during our LEAD Wisconsin teen worldview and leadership camp. 

At LEAD Wisconsin, 125 teens are undergoing biblical worldview training and are having opportunities to develop leadership skills, all while being encouraged in word and example to be people who have integrity and who are brave and humble.

Who knows? Maybe from this week of LEAD Wisconsin will one day come another Kim Reynolds who will lead a state, business, church, or school well for the glory of God and the good of the people they are leading. We work and pray to that end.

Wisconsin Family Action Responds to Dane County Judge’s Ruling on WI’s pre-Roe abortion ban

Wisconsin Family Action Responds to Dane County Court Judge Ruling on Wisconsin’s
Pre-Roe Abortion Ban

MADISON – Today, Dane County Judge Diane Schlipper determined that the court case challenging Wisconsin’s pre-Roe law will continue rather than be dismissed.

Last December, Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski filed a brief asking the court to dismiss this case that Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed last year just days after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in its Dobbs decision.

Wisconsin Family Action president Julaine Appling responded to today’s court decision.

“While we are certainly disappointed that the judge did not dismiss this case, we are hardly surprised. We have all along believed those advocating for abortion at basically any time in a pregnancy wanted this case to go to the state Supreme Court—but not until after August 1, when Justice-elect Janet Protaciewicz is seated on the court, changing the ideological balance from 4-3 conservative to 4-3 liberal. When campaigning, Justice-elect Protaciewicz made it abundantly clear that she is pro-abortion.

“Judge Schlipper used some telling language in her decision, saying that the pre-Roe law, Chapter 940.04, doesn’t apply to abortion, but rather only to the practice of feticide. We completely disagree. The title of the section of the state statutes where 940.04 is located is ‘Abortion” and (1) of 940.04 clearly states “intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child.” Feticide is commonly defined as abortion.

For years abortion advocates in our state have been trying to revoke this statute, arguing that when Roe was in effect, that the statute was superfluous. They also knew it would be enforceable in the event that Roe was eventually overturned, which is what motivated their ongoing efforts. The statute bans the killing of an unborn baby unless the mother’s life is endangered.

“Activist judges at all levels of our judicial system will obviously find creative ways to interpret this law. This too is not surprising. We will now watch as this case moves through that system, and pro-life Wisconsin citizens will be watching and listening closely to see who the truly independent, rule-of-law, originalist jurists are in the courts where this lawsuit is being and will be handled.

“Regardless of any decision by any court, Wisconsin Family Action will continue to be as aggressive as possible in defense of the unborn in Wisconsin as well as caring for mothers who are in crisis pregnancies. Both are worthy of and in need of help and compassion.”

###

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Family Action Responds to SCOTUS Decision Affirming First Amendment

Wisconsin Family Action Responds to SCOTUS Decision Affirming First Amendment
First Amendment Protects All from Government Coercion

MADISON – Last Friday the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 decision holding that “The First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees.”

Justice Gorsuch in the majority opinion writes that “The First Amendment’s protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy. The Nation’s answer is tolerance, not coercion. The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands.”

The ruling is a major victory for those who do not want government telling them what to say or what messages they must create. That goes for the liberal publisher who does not want to publish a book with conservative views, as well as for the religious website designer who does not want to promote weddings that violate her religious beliefs.

The ruling in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis acknowledges the difference between disagreement and discrimination by distinguishing between serving all people and promoting all messages. Lorie Smith, owner of 303 Creative, happily designs websites for all customers but cannot create messages that run counter to her deeply held beliefs. Her decision is based on the message, not the person. The Court affirms that difference.

Colorado’s law attempted to force Smith to design wedding websites with a message she did not agree with. Alliance Defending Freedom successfully argued the case, and all Americans are now freer for it.

Regardless of what one believes about a certain political or social issue, this ruling protects the right of all Americans to disagree with government, while also upholding a prohibition on discrimination based on the traits of a particular person or group.

Wisconsin Family Action filed an amicus brief along with other state allies urging the Court’s decision in favor of Lorie Smith.

###

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

 

Wisconsin Family Action Denounces Dane County Resolution

Wisconsin Family Action Denounces Dane County Resolution
“Sanctuary County” status harms rather than helps children

MADISON – Dane County is poised to be the first in the nation to declare itself a “sanctuary county” for “transgender and nonbinary” individuals, including children.

The county board is scheduled to vote on the resolution today. The resolution indicates Dane County is committed “to protect transgender and nonbinary individuals and believes that access to health care is a fundamental right and all people in Dane County and the State of Wisconsin should have access to all health care, including gender affirming care.” (Emphasis added.)

Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action, responded to the Dane County proposed resolution.

“Dane County needs to quit trying to turn Wisconsin into California.

Wisconsin Family Action is most disturbed by the inclusion of children in this ‘sanctuary county’ idea.

While the rest of the country (18 states and counting) works to protect children from experimental and dangerous transgender interventions, Dane County is revealing its intention to leave children who identify as transgender with permanent scars—both physical and emotional—all before they are old enough to vote or process whether they want to have children of their own.

What Dane County is really supporting is experimentally halting a child’s natural progression through puberty, sterilizing her with cross-sex hormones, and removing both her breasts before she finishes high school. America and Wisconsin understand this is extreme behavior, and we will stand proudly on the side of protecting children every day.

There are 6400[1] children identifying as transgender in Wisconsin. Dane County is determined to send them all down a one-way road to transition that ends in sterilization, mutilation, and  regret. We will stand in the gap for these kids and fight for their right to grow up whole and receive real help—not the harm of transgender procedures.

This move by Dane County should be a wake-up call to concerned citizens and elected officials. We need legislation to protect these vulnerable children, not a ‘sanctuary county’ that condones such egregious medical practices.

Rather than following Dane County’s ill-conceived idea, Wisconsin’s other 71 counties should pass resolutions that denounce what Dane County is doing and assure citizens that they stand on the side of protecting the bodies and minds of children, ensuring they have the best opportunity to grow up intact. Wisconsin Family Action stands ready to help both the legislature and the 71 other counties protect our children.”

###

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

[1] https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/

Copy available PR_WFA_061523.

WFA Testifies Against Bill Allowing Pharmacists to Prescribe Contraception

WFA Testifies Against Bill Allowing Pharmacists to Prescribe Contraception

Last week, Wisconsin Family Action (WFA) provided testimony in opposition to Assembly Bill 176, a bill authored by Republicans and supported by many others as co-sponsors. AB 176 would allow pharmacists to prescribe contraceptive drugs and devices. Currently, pharmacists in Wisconsin cannot prescribe any medication— none. But Republicans think prescribing potent contraceptive drugs is the one thing they should be able to prescribe and dispense.

Jack Hoogendyk, WFA’s Legislative & Policy Director, offered the testimony on behalf of WFA, including answering questions from committee members.

Hoogendyk began by noting that one of the main arguments being presented in support of the bill is that it will reduce poverty by addressing unintentional pregnancies. However, the solution to poverty is certainly not contraception.

We acknowledge the public and personal cost of babies born to single moms, but allowing pharmacists to prescribe contraception is not the answer. One of, if not the best, antidotes to poverty is marriage. It certainly is not contraception. If this body is truly interested in reducing poverty in any kind of meaningful way, it will promote the Success Sequence, which is finish school, get a job, marry, and then have children,” he said.

Further, authorizing pharmacists to prescribe contraception promotes unmarried individuals to engage in sexual activity, at least to some degree, and contraception can fail, leading women to seek abortions. Some forms of contraception even cause a pre-implantation chemical abortion themselves.

Hoogendyk went on to explain problems with the language in the bill, such as the fact that it never uses the word “woman,” but rather “person” and “patient,” opening the door for men with malicious motives to obtain the drugs. 

He also notes that contraception is not health care, as the bill suggests. “Contraception is about the personal choices and decisions of individual women, typically made under the advice and guidance of a doctor because of the potency of the pharmaceuticals involved. To talk in terms of this being about women’s health care is, at a minimum, disingenuous.

Read the full testimony HERE

This isn’t the first time this bill has been introduced; it’s at least the third time. Typically, the Assembly passes it, and fortunately, it dies in the Senate. However, that may not be the case this time, since the Senate version of the bill got assigned to a committee chaired by senators more favorable to the idea.

Ultimately, this bill would open the door to far more harm than good. Please pray that our elected officials have a change of heart and decide to defeat this bill.

Contact your assembly representative and senator and let them know your opinion on this bill. You can get full contact information for these officials HERE. Just put your address in the appropriate area at the top right. Your senator and representative info will pop up on the map.

Wisconsin Family Action Supports “Embrace Them Both” Bill Package

MADISON – Wisconsin Family Action (WFA) fully and proudly supports the “Embrace Them Both’ bill package being offered by Senator Romaine Quinn (R-Cameron) and four State Representatives, Rep. Gae Magnafici (R-Dresser), Rep. Pat Snyder (R-Schofield, Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie), and Rep. Donna Rozar (R-Marshfield).

“’Embrace Them Both’ embodies what we have always said being pro-life means—recognizing that human life begins at conception and that pregnant women often need support. These four bills encompass important aspects of the life issue from different perspectives,” said WFA President, Julaine Appling.

The four bills being circulated for co-sponsors as of today do the following:

LRB-2792 (Quinn/Magnafici) – Clarifies in state statute that medical care to prevent the death of a pregnant woman does not constitute an abortion. Abortion is the intentional killing of an unborn child. Miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and other unfortunate situations are not abortion. Such procedures are not about intentionally killing an unborn baby.

LRB-2486 (Quinn/Snyder) – Increases the dollar amount taxpayers can claim as an exemption for every dependent, including children from age 0-17, from $700 to $1000. It also, in recognition of the humanity of the pre-born, extends that coverage to unborn children for whom a fetal heartbeat has been detected.

LRB-2445 (Quinn/Nedweski)— Funds Wisconsin Pregnancy Care Centers (PRC) with a $1,000,000 annual grant to Choose Life Wisconsin, Inc., to in turn be distributed as grants to PRCs. Choose Life Wisconsin, Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization has, since 2017, administered the receipt of and distribution of funds raised from the sale of the “Choose Life WI” specialty license plates that have been available to Wisconsin drivers. Over 2300 of these plates are currently on cars in Wisconsin, and over $275,000 has been granted to over thirty Wisconsin PRCs since May of 2018. PCCs offer women in crisis pregnancies real help both before and after the birth of their child, help that includes emotional support and much more. In many instances, PCCS offer medical services; job training; transportation; supplies such as diapers, formula, clothing, car seats, and more.

LRB-2918 (Quinn/Rozar)—Creates an Adoption Financial Assistance Grant Program designed to make adoption available to more Wisconsin families. The program would provide $5 million biennially to a Wisconsin adoption agency that gives financial help to families looking to adopt. The cost of adoption, even domestic adoptions, has risen substantially over the years and has become prohibitive for many couples that want to adopt. Adoption is a uniquely pro-life option that provides children with a forever family and is the answer to the hopes and dreams of many couples.

Appling noted, “We are grateful for the leadership Senator Quinn and Representatives Magnafici, Snyder, Nedweski, and Rozar are providing on these proposals. We encourage legislators to join the bills’ authors in co-sponsoring and championing these ideas that provide important clarity and funding to ensure Wisconsin’s future by protecting the unborn and assisting their mothers and fathers, both biological and adoptive.”

###

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

Pro-choicer Debunks His Own Argument During Podcast Discussion 

Pro-choicer Debunks His Own Argument During Podcast Discussion 

A video from podcaster Tim Pool has been circulating on the internet after a well-known pro-choicer from a socialist YouTube channel debunked his own argument in a conversation about abortion.

Pool hosted Lance, a personality from a popular YouTube channel called “The Serfs.” When they reached the topic of abortion, Lance claimed that a woman should have “the choice” and “ultimate authority over what happens to her body.”

Pool responded by asking Lance if he believes a woman should be allowed to use meth while pregnant. 

“Uh, I think if someone is doing meth while they’re pregnant, that it is completely acceptable for something like [child services] .…” said Lance.

“It’s her body, though…If she wants to do meth, what’s the big deal?” Pool replied, pointing out the flaw in his argument.

“Uh, the big deal is that it’s – she’s intentionally trying to kill a child,” Lance said.

After a short moment of silence, Pool said, “Hold on there a minute,” and Lance immediately recognized the unrecoverable error he had made in admitting that the unborn are fully human. 

Some on the left have become so accustomed to simply espousing leftist talking points that they’ve failed to logically reason through their own positions. 

Clearly, Lance isn’t actually pro-abortion/pro-choice, as he doesn’t believe a mother should be able to intentionally kill her child in the womb. He has been indoctrinated by the left into believing that women need abortion to obtain freedom and equality, as so many others have similarly been deceived. In reality, freedom can only be found in the truth, and the truth is that the preborn have the same God-given rights as every person of any age because from the moment of conception, a unique human being is formed. 

Conversations such as this are crucial for the defense of the preborn. When faced with the brutal facts about abortion and forced to follow the logical progression of the pro-choice/pro-abortion position, many so-called “pro-choicers” would likely recognize similar flaws in their own viewpoints. 

Pro-lifers need to be willing to sit down with pro-abortion proponents and demonstrate the incoherence of the pro-abortion worldview by simply asking the right questions. In doing so, their worldview will fall apart on its own.    

In addition to the excellent question Tim Pool used to help Lance recognize that he isn’t pro-“choice” after all, pro-lifers should be asking those on the left the following questions, not in a combative way, but in a conversational, genial manner: When does life begin? At what stage of development should an unborn child have human rights, if not at conception? What confers humans their value? If life in the womb isn’t human, then what is it? If life in the womb is part of a woman’s body, why does it have its own unique DNA? Does a woman have two hearts, two sets of fingerprints, two blood types, and two sets of DNA? What happens when we begin allowing certain groups of people human rights and denying others those same rights?

Finally, while knowing the facts and asking the right questions is crucial, we also need to pray that God will transform the hearts and minds of those who don’t yet recognize the humanity of the unborn. Even with all of the right information, a hardened heart can be blinded by the lies coming from the forces of darkness in our culture. 

This exchange between Lance and Pool is an excellent reminder that the truth must be proclaimed – and it can stand on its own. The truth doesn’t mind being questioned, but a lie doesn’t like being challenged. Our job as Christians and pro-lifers is to expose the lies of the left and allow the truth to take their place. 

Dane County Judge Hears Arguments Over Abortion Ban

Dane County Judge Hears Arguments Over Abortion Ban

Last Thursday, Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper heard oral arguments in the case that challenges the enforceability of Wisconsin’s pre-Roe law that prohibits most abortions. Schlipper heard oral arguments for over 90 minutes, but has not yet released a decision.

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed the lawsuit within days of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade in June last year. The defendants in the lawsuit are the district attorneys from Sheboygan, Milwaukee, and Madison—all places where surgical or induced abortions were being performed before Roe was overturned.

The defendants argued the judge should dismiss the lawsuit because Kaul lacks the legal standing to bring the lawsuit, as the ban does not affect his ability to carry out his duties as attorney general. 

Attorney Matthew Thome argued that modern-day laws that restrict abortion, such as the 1985 post-viability restriction, can act in “harmony” with the ban. Thome also implored the judge to “get back to principles,” noting that the legislature decided not to repeal the abortion ban,and Schlipper should respect the rightful place of the legislature to enact these laws instead of imposing her own opinion.

The case will undoubtedly end up before the state Supreme Court, which by August, will have a 4-3 liberal majority. 

Until then, innocent lives are being saved every day while the abortion prohibition is in place. Please pray that everyone involved in this case recognizes the humanity of the unborn and rules according to God’s will.

Study Reveals Few Americans Have a Biblical Worldview, but Christians are Making an Impact

Study Reveals Few Americans Have a Biblical Worldview, but Christians are Making an Impact

Christian Post reports that a recent survey from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University indicates over 69% of Americans identify as Christians. However, only 4% of Americans have a biblical worldview, which is defined as a means of experiencing, interpreting, and responding to reality in light of biblical perspectives so that every decision is consistent with God’s principles and commands.

Simultaneously, the percentage of believers who say they “have a unique, God-given purpose or calling” has decreased from 88% to 46%. The percentage of those who claim they are “deeply committed to practicing” their faith has fallen from 85% to 50%.

This is sobering news, and it indicates that the culture is shaping Christians more than Christians are shaping the culture. However, this can be remedied as Christians study God’s Word daily and seek His wisdom. And of course, families reading and studying the Bible together is one of the best ways to instill a biblical worldview in the next generation.

“A biblical worldview is critical because that’s what enables you to become a true disciple of Jesus Christ,” said George Barna, the director of research at the Cultural Research Center. “If that’s your goal in life, what you’re saying is ‘I want to think like Jesus so that I can live like Jesus. But in order to do that, notice first, as Romans 12 talks to us about, you have to have your mind ‘renewed,’ you must be ‘transformed’ by that ‘renewing of your mind’ with God’s principles at the core of all of your thoughts so that you can in fact live like Christ.”

Thankfully, the findings of the study aren’t all bad. The good news is that those who are devout Christians are more involved than ever before in the political sphere.

In 2020, a staggering 99% of spiritually active and politically engaged conservatives turned out to vote. 

“[There is a] core of Bible-believing Christians in America who don’t want to just sit and tell other people what to do, but they want to make things happen,” said Barna. “I’ve been doing this in politics for 40 something years now, been involved in a lot of national elections, worked with four presidential candidates. I’ve never seen anything like that. So it’s unprecedented. But it’s because they feel that this is an urgent time. This is not a time to sit back. If you care about the country, if you care about the kingdom, you’ve got to dig in.”

Christians, now is the time to not only stay involved politically, but to encourage fellow believers who have been influenced by our secular culture to re-engage with God’s Word. The only way to make real, lasting change is to point one another to the Source of Truth!

WILL Demands Change After Man Showers Next to Girls in Wisconsin School

WILL Demands Change After Man Showers Next to Girls in Wisconsin School

In early March, four 9th grade girls at East High School (EHS) in the Sun Prairie Area School District (SPASD) used the shower area in their locker room after their physical-education class. Because transgender ideology has permeated Wisconsin schools, the girls experienced a grave violation of their privacy. Thankfully, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) is taking a stand for the victims and demanding answers

As the girls began to shower in their swimsuits after swim class, an 18-year-old male student entered the shower area and told the girls he was “trans.” Then, the male student fully undressed, completely exposing himself to these freshmen girls. 

Parents of the girls alerted the school district of the incident, but administrators failed to address the issue and provided a “completely inadequate” response, according to WILL. Under federal law, school administrators should have reported the incident to the Title IX coordinator right away. Then, the coordinator should have contacted the four girls and helped them file a complaint. However, no one contacted the girls or launched an investigation.

After several requests, the girls’ parents were finally able to meet with school administrators to discuss the incident over a month after it occurred. However, no one was able to provide answers to the parents’ questions. District staff simply referenced a “policy” that they claimed addresses this situation, but they did not identify, describe, or bring the policy to the meeting.

Several days later, the EHS principal sent a copy of a “Restroom and Locker Room Accessibility Guidance” policy to one of the parents, but according to WILL, there is no “indication that this policy has ever been in effect, was in effect on March 3, or was ever approved by the School Board.” 

Further, the guidance document allows males to use the girls’ locker room regardless of the comfort of female students. The guidance only says that if a male requests to use the women’s locker room, then school administrators will evaluate and respond to the request on a “case-by-case basis.” However, “What if there is no such request? Is permission to use the girls’ locker room required? Who evaluates whether access will be permitted? The policy does not answer these questions,” noted WILL in a letter to the district. 

WILL went on to ask administrators to implement policies that will immediately protect the privacy and safety of students, noting that the school violated Title IX.  

“Under the Title IX regulations, sex discrimination encompasses sexual harassment, which includes unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe that it effectively denies a person equal access to the education program. Here, four freshman girls taking a shower in their swimsuits in what is supposed to be a private and safe space, were exposed to the male genitals of a senior student against their will. Considering student development, high school being a relatively new environment for freshman girls, the power dynamics between not only a biological male and female but between a senior and a freshman, and student safety, the age difference of the students here is relevant,” reads the letter. 

WILL is also demanding that the district offer supportive measures to victims of sexual harassment, provide victims an opportunity to file a complaint, conduct investigations of such cases, re-train district staff, hold accountable the staff that failed to uphold students’ rights, and adjust district policies and guidance documents to protect students.

“School districts need to think through what loosening boundaries for single-sex spaces could mean for girls. Parents are understandably concerned about whether school districts—like the Sun Prairie Area School District—are doing everything required to protect girls in bathrooms and locker rooms,” said Libby Sobic, WILL Director of Education Policy. This incident is what inevitably happens when policy is rooted in ideology rather than reality, common sense, and the right to personal, bodily privacy. No student should have to fear sexual harassment while using a bathroom or locker room at school. 

Hopefully this case serves as yet another wake-up call for parents whose children are in a government school. If this happened in Sun Prairie (a “bedroom community” of Madison), it can happen in most any school in our state. From what we can tell, this young man was not dressed like a girl, he simply announced that he was “trans.” Students don’t have to do anything in most schools to “prove” they are “trans.” They just have to announce it. Parents, for the well-being of their children, need to know what the school’s policies are, how they are being enforced, and keep open and frequent communication with their children on this issue.

If WILL doesn’t get the right response from SPASD, we would assume they will sue the district, making this another poignant lesson for all Wisconsin schools. Special rights and protections for “trans” students cannot violate the fundamental rights of “non-trans” students, with girls being the most vulnerable in these situations.

Updates on major religious liberty cases: Groff at SCOTUS and Catholic Charities Bureau in Wisconsin

Updates on major religious liberty cases: Groff at SCOTUS and Catholic Charities Bureau in Wisconsin

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments for a monumental religious liberty case on April 18th. Groff v. DeJoy is an important opportunity for the High Court to affirm the right of employees to honor their religious beliefs and the duty of employers to grant reasonable religious accommodations. 

Christian mail carrier Gerald Groff requested the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) for a religious accommodation that would excuse him from working on Sundays after they started doing Amazon package deliveries so that he could observe the Sabbath and live by his Christian faith. The fact that regular mail isn’t delivered by the USPS on Sundays was a major factor in Groff’s choosing to work there over a decade ago. USPS refused to grant him the accommodation and Groff chose to resign rather than be fired. 

Groff is appealing to the Supreme Court in hopes it will overturn its erroneous 1977 precedent in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, which enabled employers to deny religious accommodations. 

Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief in the case asking the Supreme Court to restore Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which provides protection against religious discrimination. 

“This Court should overrule the interpretation in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison that Title VII does not require an employer to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs if doing so would impose more than a de minimis burden on the employer. Hardison’s de minimis standard—found nowhere in the Title VII’s text or legislative history—has led to absurd results, allowing employers to discriminate against religious employees with impunity, thereby forcing workers to choose between their religious beliefs and their jobs,” reads the amicus brief

The Supreme Court justices spent much of the hearing debating the exact meanings of “undue hardship” and “de minimis.”

Groff’s attorney, Aaron Streett, recommended that the justices “construe undue hardship according to its plain text to mean significant difficulty or expense,” which would be consistent with the language in the accommodation standard of the “Americans with Disabilities Act.” 

Arguing on behalf of the Biden administration, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the court that Hardison adequately protects religious exercise, to which Justice Samuel Alito responded, “I’m really struck by that because we have amicus briefs here by many representatives of many minority religions, Muslims, Hindus, Orthodox Jews, Seventh Day Adventists, and they all say that is just not true, and that Hardison has violated their right to religious liberty.”

Chief Justice John Roberts spoke about changes in religious liberty case law since the Hardison ruling, arguing that religious protections had been expanded.

Thankfully, it appears that the conservative justices are poised to rule in favor of Groff and the religious liberty of every employee. The Supreme Court is expected to rule over this case by the summer. 

At the state level, another religious liberty case will soon be heard by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. After the state refused to grant a Catholic charity legal recognition as a religious organization, the charity filed a lawsuit. Without legal recognition as an organization “operated primarily for religious purposes,” the charity is unable to use a Church-run unemployment system and instead must provide funds to the state-run unemployment system.

Although the Diocese of Superior operates the charity, the state refused to grant it its legal rights because it does not consider providing services to the poor, disabled, and elderly to be a primarily religious function. Catholic Charities Bureau is arguing that caring for those in need is central to the practice of the Catholic faith. WFA has filed an amicus brief in support of Catholic Charities Bureau.

Please pray that our justices make decisions informed by the Constitution and our nation’s founding principles in both of these cases. If religious liberty is to be truly honored in Wisconsin and the nation at large, the justices must rule accordingly in these cases. 

U.S. District Court Orders a Florida City and County to Pay Damages for Violating First Amendment Rights

U.S. District Court Orders a Florida City and County to Pay Damages for Violating First Amendment Rights

As radical gender ideology continues to spread throughout health care in the U.S., the left is taking aim at practices that stand in its way while disregarding First Amendment freedoms and the needs of people. 

Currently, 20 states have banned the intentionally misnamed “conversion therapy,” which is actually just the practice of providing counseling to help individuals with same-sex attraction or gender confusion reorient in synch with their God-given sexuality. However, the name “conversion therapy” – a misnomer much like “reproductive health care” in relation to abortion – is intentionally used by the left to conjure up images of patients being effectively tortured, badgered, or bullied into renouncing homosexual interests or abandoning transgenderism.

Banning counseling efforts to guide a patient through struggles with their sexual orientation is a direct violation of free speech, freedom of religion, and patients’ freedom to seek the treatment they want. It also threatens parents’ rights to direct the mental health care and education of their children. 

Some on the left are even attempting to expand the definition of “conversion therapy” to include any form of opposition to homosexuality and transgenderism. Doing so could criminalize even private conversations in which individuals advocate for abstinence from homosexuality or Biblical sermons on God’s design for human sexuality. 

Those struggling with any mental health problem need guidance rooted in Truth and reality, not in lies rooted in the baseless religion of progressivism.

Despite the lack of data regarding the psychological ramifications of the “gender-affirming” approach, and the growing body of evidence that this method doesn’t remedy mental health problems, the left wants “affirmation” to be the only therapy available to struggling minors. 

Thankfully, a U.S. district court has ordered the city of Boca Raton, Florida, to pay a combined $75,000 in damages to two therapists, while also ordering Palm Beach County to pay a fine of $100,000 for passing so-called “conversion therapy” bans for minors seeking help with unwanted homosexual attraction. 

Boca Raton and Palm Beach County passed laws prohibiting conversion therapy for minors in 2017. The two plaintiffs, marriage and family therapists Robert Otto and Julie Hamilton, filed lawsuits arguing that their therapy was voluntary and focused on reducing unwanted homosexual attraction rather than changing the client.

Liberty Counsel, which represented the plaintiffs, said in a statement that the judge’s order sets a “precedent that minors who are struggling with gender confusion can get the help they need from counselors who are free from political censorship” and it should “be a warning to any government that has not repealed similar counseling bans.” 

Several municipalities in Wisconsin have audaciously enacted these bans that blatantly violate counselors’ First Amendment freedoms and rob confused minors of the real help and hope they need. Hopefully, these local governments in our state pay attention to this case and reverse course.

As Christians, obeying God and loving our neighbor require us to call out sin and point one another to God’s Word. The left has no right to stand in the way of our allegiance to God with laws enforcing anti-Christian beliefs about gender and sexuality. Please pray that this case is the first of many victories when it comes to restoring religious liberty and free speech in mental health care and the Wisconsin communities where these bans have been enacted will indeed do the right thing and revoke such policies.

 

Biden Rule Would Override State Laws Protecting Girls’ Sports

Biden Rule Would Override State Laws Protecting Girls’ Sports

Once again, the Biden administration is promoting mass delusion at the expense of women’s rights. Males have stolen at least 30 titles from female athletes between 2003 and 2022, and if the Biden administration has its way, many more titles could be stolen in the near future. 

Last week, Biden officials announced a proposed regulation allowing students to participate in sports teams “consistent with their gender identity.” In other words, boys who “identify” as girls could compete among and against girls in girls’ and women’s sports.

The rule also lowers the age of application to kindergarten, dangerously attempting to normalize the idea that elementary-aged children can fully understand the implications of “identifying” as the opposite sex.

The regulation would override state laws protecting female student athletes from being forced to compete against or share a locker room with men. It would also bar federally-funded schools from implementing a “categorical ban” on boys who “identify” as girls from participating in girls’ sports.

Currently, 19 states have passed legislation to protect women’s sports in recent months, but those new laws would all be nullified with Biden’s new proposal. 

While the Biden administration claims it will allow schools some “flexibility,” pro-family advocates believe schools will face federal intervention over poorly-defined offenses. For example, the proposed rule states that schools may only lock men out of the women’s locker rooms if it is “substantially related to the achievement of an important educational objective,” and schools must “minimize harms” to any student excluded from participating in sports with the opposite sex.

“Without a doubt, institutions are going to err on the side of ‘inclusion,’ because they fear the wrath of the Education Department — thus, achieving the Department’s end goal while allowing them to maintain plausible deniability that they coerced districts into doing so,” said Nicole Neily, founder of Parents Defending Education. 

Title IX was initially implemented to protect opportunities that were previously denied to women and girls. However, the Biden administration’s new rule would unravel Title IX. If it takes effect, women’s sports, at least in schools, could be eradicated. Sports will soon “be divided into a team of men and a team of folks who used to be men, while women are sidelined from the opportunity to compete,” as Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) puts it.

Biological realities tell us that it’s entirely illogical to allow men to compete against women in sports and pretend that the competition is fair. When competing against women, men boast an advantage even greater than if an athlete were taking performance enhancing drugs. Men have 10-30 percent greater muscle strength, greater bone density, better oxygen efficiency, larger heart and lungs, and 10 percent more overall body mass, among other advantages. 

“The Department of Education’s rewriting of Title IX degrades women and tells them that their athletic goals and placements do not matter,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Christiana Kiefer. “The Biden administration’s proposed rules are a slap in the face to female athletes who deserve equal opportunity to compete in their sports.” 

Wisconsin legislators last session introduced bills designed to protect women’s and girls’ sports at both the K-12 and collegiate levels. The Assembly passed the bills, but the Senate did not take either of them up. In this current session, no bills dealing with this issue have yet been introduced.

After the Biden administration officially publishes the rule, Americans will have 30 days to provide comments before officials decide if the rule will be officially adopted. We will be sure to let you know when the 30-day window opens. Conservatives must make it clear that we will not allow the respect and dignity of female athletes to be violated at the behest of gender-confused men and a delusional administration. 

New State of the Bible Report Shows a Downward Trajectory but Still Offers Hope

New State of the Bible Report Shows a Downward Trajectory but Still Offers Hope

Since 2011, the American Bible Society (ABS) has been issuing an annual report entitled State of the Bible USA. Earlier this month, ABS released the first installment of its 2023 report, which tracks key metrics about Scripture engagement, Bible use, and perceptions of the Bible in America. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the newly released report shows a continued downward trajectory in Scripture engagement, which is not good for America in just about any way we can think of. The good news is that this is a reversible trend. 

While our founders and founding documents were undoubtedly very influenced by Christian principles, sadly, over the years, our nation has become less and less overtly Christian, and part of that is because of the diminishing influence of the Bible in every aspect of our culture.Christianity cannot thrive when its definitive authority, the Bible, is not accepted and genuinely adhered to by the faith’s followers.

We’ve known for years that biblical literacy is waning. In 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down any compulsory Bible reading in public schools. In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court also decided public schools couldn’t display the Ten Commandments in a classroom or anywhere else in a school.

These Supreme Court decisions along with a number of other cultural happenings, including the breakdown of the family unit, pretty much ensured that upcoming generations would be unfamiliar with biblical teachings and disengaged from Scripture. 

The State of the Bible USA report documents these unfortunate realities. Putting people into three broad categories—Bible Disengaged, Moveable Middle, and Scripture Engaged—the report looks for trends, both favorable and unfavorable. This year, the first chapter of the report says the data collected suggests three things. First, when people engage deeply with the Bible, their lives and relationships are better. In other words, they flourish. Second, fewer people in America are engaging with the Bible. Scripture engagement is not rising yet; it continues on a downward trajectory. And third, there are signs of hope. The Movable Middle has rebounded, and Bible disengagement has fallen in the past year.

The reality is America cannot sustain its republican form of government with “we the people” as the central characters, its free-enterprise, capitalistic economy, and its unprecedented wealth and freedom long-term without the influence of the Bible and its clear teachings on what true Christianity is. John Adams told us early on that “[o]ur Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” At that time, Adams knew people understood he was talking about Christianity and the Bible when he referenced “a moral and religious people.”

Thankfully, the loss of the influence of the Bible in our country can be reversed. That reversing won’t happen in public schools, to be sure, even if the courts decided to reverse course on Bible reading and posting of the Ten Commandments in those schools. However, as dads and moms make the Bible an integral part of their personal and their family’s daily lives, the next generation will become more biblically literate and more Scripturally engaged. Churches should help families in this area in really practical ways; but ultimately, we reverse this dangerous trend one family at a time.

U.S. House Passes Crucial “Parental Bill of Rights”

U.S. House Passes Crucial “Parental Bill of Rights”

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Parents Bill of Rights Act by a vote of 213-208 “to ensure the rights of parents are honored and protected in the Nation’s public schools,” according to the bill’s text.  Wisconsin’s six Republican representatives (Bryan Steil, Derrick Van Orden, Scott Fitzgerald, Glenn Grothman, Tom Tiffany, Mike Gallagher) voted in favor of the bill, while the two Democrats (Mark Pocan, Gwen Moore) voted against it.

Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) urged his colleagues to vote for the bill, saying that it would empower parents to always remain aware of what their children are learning in school and how their taxpayer money is being spent.

“Once you are a parent, you will give your life for your child,” said McCarthy. “You have a right to get the basic information about your children’s education….the Parents Bill of Rights is an important step towards protecting children and dramatically strengthening the rights of parents.”

The Parents Bill of Rights outlines five key rights that all parents nationwide should have, including the right to know what’s being taught in schools and to see reading material, the right to be heard, the right to see a school’s budget and spending, the right to protect their child’s privacy, and the right to be updated on any violent activity at school. 

This is common sense legislation that would help protect children from activist teaching by empowering parents to be involved. 

This bill comes in response to the many school districts across the country, including a numbere in Wisconsin, that have been caught hiding or withholding pertinent information about students from their parents.

For example, last year the Eau Claire Area School District was sued for directing teachers and school staff to allow students to change their preferred pronouns, name, and “gender identity” without parental involvement.

Similarly, in November of 2021, the Kettle Moraine School District (KMSD) was sued for a policy that allows minor students to “transition genders” at school, even despite the parents’ objection. A hearing for this case is scheduled for April 19th, and a ruling is expected in the late spring or summer.

In a third case, the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) was sued for its policies that allow children to change their “gender identity” at school without parental notice or consent. The policy also instructs district staff to hide information about students’ “gender identity” from parents. This case is ongoing after the Wisconsin Supreme Court sent it back to the Dane County Circuit Court for further action.

Across the nation, there are at least 6,000 schools that allow or require teachers to hide students’ “gender identity” from parents. Clearly, a parental bill of rights is urgently needed. 

While the Wisconsin Constitution protects the “inherent right” of parents to “direct the upbringing and education of children under their control,” it’s clear that parental rights need more protection.  A relatively strong Parents’ Rights Bill passed in the Wisconsin legislature last session, but Governor Evers vetoed it. The Assembly author, Rep. Rick Gundrum (R-Slinger), has indicated an interest in introducing the bill again this session.

While legislation can certainly help, parents should never rely on it alone to keep their children safe from harmful ideologies. Parents should always remain deeply involved and keenly aware of what is going on in the classroom and during any meetings with school staff. For the sake of children’s safety and well-being, parents must be the primary decision-makers when it comes to their children’s upbringing, education, and mental health. 

It’s also crucial that parents make their voices heard during this year’s Supreme Court election on April 4th. The balance of our State Supreme Court is on the line, which is our last chance and our strongest defense against liberal policies that have resulted in gross violations of parental rights and put our children at great risk in public schools.

 

Pro-life Groups Invest Millions in Supreme Court Election, Backing Justice Kelly

Pro-life Groups Invest Millions in Supreme Court Election, Backing Justice Kelly

The upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court race is breaking campaign spending records. Outside groups have donated millions of dollars in what is already the most expensive supreme court race in the history of not just Wisconsin, but the nation. Candidates and outside groups have already spent over $20 million in television and radio ads alone, and we have a week to go. While much of the donations are in support of pro-abortion candidate Janet Protasiewicz, WFA-backed candidate Daniel Kelly is receiving significant support from pro-life groups. 

Women Speak Out PAC, a partner of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, has committed $2 million to support Justice Daniel Kelly.

The donation will help pay for canvassing, digital ads, and a statewide TV spot, highlighting No Jail Janet’s soft-on-crime record.

In a press release, Women Speak Out PAC’s Director of State Public Affairs Kelsey Pritchard is urging voters to turn out in support of Kelly, as Wisconsin’s abortion ban is on the line. 

“Janet Protasiewicz has a horrific record on crime with a history of being soft on sex offenders. Someone with her dangerous lack of judgment should not be entrusted with the responsibilities of a state Supreme Court justice.”

“Based on the statements Protasiewicz has made throughout this campaign,” she continued “the Constitution and the laws won’t stop her from ruling based on the whims of her own flawed judgment in order to carry out Planned Parenthood’s agenda to eliminate parental rights for the sake of abortion on demand.”

Pritchard is right. Wisconsin’s abortion ban will go before the court, and whoever comes out on top on April 4th will likely be the fourth vote in support of life or abortion. 

“The abortion industry couldn’t be more enthusiastic about Protasiewicz,” said CatholicVote Communications Director Joshua Mercer. “And they couldn’t hate Judge [sic] Dan Kelly more. But they’re absolutely right when they talk about how important this election is. [Christians] in Wisconsin absolutely have to get out and vote on April 4. It sounds hokey, but it’s more undeniable in this election than just about any other in my lifetime: lives depend on your vote.”

Wisconsin Family Action (WFA) is also backing Kelly with an election campaign. WFA recently launched a $225,000 election campaign.   

WFA’s targeted, statewide, multi-media express advocacy campaign encourages Wisconsin voters to vote and to vote for Kelly. The express advocacy ads educate voters about the judicial philosophy of each candidate and seek to motivate them to cast their ballots accordingly. 

Thankfully, other pro-life groups have joined us in supporting Kelly, who is endorsed by all three pro-life groups in Wisconsin. WFA, Pro-Life Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Right to Life are all urging pro-lifers to elect Kelly, pointing to his outstanding track record of judicial conservatism, clearly showing he is not a judicial activist seeking to make law from the bench.

As Christians and pro-lifers, we have a duty to do everything in our power to elect the only candidate who will preserve the rule of law and respect the Constitution.

While not everyone can make financial contributions to this race, we all can play a role in electing Kelly by sharing the truth about the candidates and getting as many Christians to the polls as possible. Innocent lives depend on it. 

 

Supreme Court Candidate Justice Kelly Exposes Protasiewicz’s Lies

Supreme Court Candidate Justice Kelly Exposes Protasiewicz’s Lies

The upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court race holds incredibly high stakes as liberal Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz competes against conservative former Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly, and the court’s conservative majority hangs in the balance. This election could determine the fate of the unborn, free speech, Second Amendment rights, gerrymandered political maps and a range of voting rights issues.

For 20 years, Kelly has given legal advice to clients on a variety of legal issues through his private practice. Throughout this race, his corrupt opponent has been spreading lies to smear his reputation, but Kelly is fighting back with the truth. 

In a document titled, “Learn the Truth about the False Attacks on Justice Kelly” on the former Supreme Court justice’s website, Kelly outlines the many lies that Protasiewicz has been spreading and refutes each of them. 

The first lie states that Justice Kelly received funds from a “radical anti-abortion group working to take away women’s rights.” The truth is that Justice Kelly never received funds from Wisconsin Right to Life. Protasiewicz is attempting to suggest that Kelly would vote in favor of life in a case dealing with abortion. 

However, as a candidate, Kelly does not discuss his views on abortion. He has said if a case on that subject comes before the Supreme Court, he would analyze it as he does all cases — he would apply the applicable laws, as written, to the extent they are consistent with the state and federal constitutions.  

Protasiewicz, on the other hand, has been clear about her stance on abortion. In one of her ads, she says, “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change,” showing a clear progressive bias on the issue of abortion. 

Another lie about Kelly is that as a lawyer, Kelly allegedly “defended child sex predators who posed as ministers in order to prey on vulnerable young girls.” The truth is that Kelly briefly handled pre-trial duties in the cases in question, but did no further work to defend the accused. He left the law firm before the trial.  

The same cannot be said for No Jail Janet. As a judge, she gave no prison or jail time to child sex offenders in several cases.

Another lie is that “Justice Kelly was ‘bought off’ over $20,000 in campaign contributions.” In reality, prior to the 2020 election, Kelly removed himself from presiding in a case pertaining to an issue that could have affected an election in which he was a candidate. When the election was over and Kelly had lost the conflict of interest no longer existed. At that point, he asked the parties involved whether they would have any objection to him taking part in the case. No one objected. 

Please read the rest of the lies and rebuttals, which can be found here. 

The best way to help Justice Kelly is to share the truth. As Christians, this is not only our right, but our duty. 

Please share this document on social media and send it to friends and family, urging them to vote for Daniel Kelly on April 4th. 

Please also share WFA’s Facebook posts discussing more of the lies about Daniel Kelly. 

And the only actual debate the supreme court candidates are having happened yesterday. The debate is worth watching to hear directly from these candidates. The lies and accusations are clearly addressed.

 

 

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. Launches Advocacy Campaign in Support of Justice Dan Kelly

MADISON – Today, Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. (WFA) launched a $225,000 targeted, statewide, multi-media express advocacy campaign to encourage Wisconsin voters to vote and to vote for Justice Dan Kelly for Wisconsin Supreme Court in this spring election.

“Basically everything we value is at grave risk with the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court on the line. Low bail/no bail policies for hardened, repeat criminals; the life of the unborn; parental rights; boys playing in girls’ sports; school choice; and religious freedom are just a few of the issues that will likely find their way before our state’s highest court— significant issues affecting all Wisconsin families,” said Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action.  “Our goal is to encourage Wisconsin citizens to get to the polls on April 4 and do their part in electing a justice who will not legislate from the bench nor decide cases based on political or personal agendas, but who will honor the constitutional role of the judiciary. Dan Kelly is clearly that candidate.”

The express advocacy ads educate voters about the judicial philosophy of each candidate and seek to motivate them to cast their ballots accordingly.

The campaign asks citizens to make sure they are registered and to adopt a plan to vote—via absentee ballot, if absolutely necessary, or early in-person, or day-of at the polls. Educational resources for voters are available on WFA’s Vote Right Wisconsin website.

“Our goal is to make sure Wisconsin citizens understand the role of our judiciary and to paint a picture of what’s at stake if we elect a justice who tips the scales to favor political ideology rather than a justice like Dan Kelly who will honor the rule of law as prescribed by our state statutes and state constitution. We want people to cast their votes and to do so with the information they need to make a good choice, a choice that is in line with their values,” said Appling.

###

Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

Authorized and paid for by Wisconsin Family Action, Inc. Not authorized or paid for by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Copy Available online here.

Wisconsin Republicans Aim to Add Unnecessary Exceptions to Wisconsin’s Abortion Ban

Wisconsin Republicans Aim to Add Unnecessary Exceptions to Wisconsin’s Abortion Ban

On March 15th, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) held a joint press conference to introduce legislation sponsored by State Senator Mary Felzkowski (R-Irma), and State Representative Donna Rozar (R-Marshfield). The proposed bill would allow abortions in certain cases to supposedly “save the life of the mother” or in the case of rape or incest. Every pro-lifer should oppose this legislation.

When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, Wisconsin’s Statute 940.04 went into effect, making it illegal for a doctor to perform an abortion for any reason other than to save the life of the mother. 

The new proposed legislation would amend Wisconsin’s abortion ban so that it “does not apply to any pregnancy in the first trimester if the pregnancy is the result of sexual assault or incest.” 

It also modifies the definition of “to save the life of the mother” to mean any “serious risk of death of the pregnant woman or of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the woman” or any “circumstance in which the fetus has no chance of survival, including a physical condition of the fetus that makes survival of the fetus outside of the uterus not possible, an anembryonic pregnancy, an ectopic pregnancy, or a molar pregnancy.”

“A vote to add more exceptions to Wisconsin’s abortion ban is a vote to kill more preborn babies. It is that simple,” said Pro-Life Wisconsin legislative director Matt Sande in response to the proposed bill. 

“The fact is that legal abortion — the direct, intentional killing of a living preborn human being — is incapable of being justified. It is always and everywhere wrong, regardless of motivation or consequence. It may never be employed, even in the narrowest of circumstances, as a means to a greater end. It is incredibly disheartening that legislative Republicans are working to restore abortion to Wisconsin.”

Sande is right. The passage of this bill would certainly lead to an increase in abortions across the state, and in every case, the intentional killing of an innocent child is deeply immoral. Further, the language in the bill claiming that abortion is sometimes necessary to save the life of the mother is entirely false. 

“The bill mentions three specific circumstances,” said WFA President Julaine Appling, “all three of which are either not pregnancies at all or are already recognized as medically necessary to save the life of the mother. Anembryonic pregnancy and molar pregnancy are circumstances where there is no embryo or fetus; so obviously, it cannot be an abortion. Ectopic pregnancy is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency treatment. In all three of these cases, there is no current law that would prohibit a physician from providing the necessary medical care.”

Read Julaine’s full statement here.

Healthcare workers should always respect and care for both lives. Often, both the mother and the baby can be saved. 

It is possible that the child may be harmed as an unintentional side effect of treating the mother. While this is incredibly tragic, it is not considered an abortion, and therefore not a violation of Wisconsin’s Statute 940.04. 

In cases of rape and incest, the child who is conceived is just as valuable as any other child. The child’s “wantedness” or circumstances of conception do not determine his or her worth. Rather, a child’s worth comes from the fact that each and every person is made in the image and likeness of God. Further, the solution to one injustice is never another injustice. Killing a child will not remedy the trauma that the mother endured. It will only add to it. 

Lastly, the proposed exceptions would only empower sexual predators. “The problem with this legislation is that it punishes the innocent unborn child while making it easier for the perpetrator, the real guilty party in this situation, to hide his crime. Abortion is often used to cover up crimes from sex-trafficking to rape. Additionally, and very importantly, the legislation does not require any documentation or police record that an actual sexual assault took place,” noted Appling.

Abortion is not healthcare. In fact, it’s the opposite. “Healthcare” that ends one life and traumatizes another is never “safe,” despite what the left wants us to believe. 

Passage of this bill will only lead to legalizing abortion again in Wisconsin. Pray that this bill is defeated and that robust protections remain in place for the unborn in Wisconsin. Governor Evers shortly after the press conference, sent a message that he will veto the bill because it doesn’t go far enough. Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) issued a statement saying the bill will not receive a vote in the Senate. Contact your state legislators and ask them to protect all preborn life in Wisconsin. You can look up your state legislators and their contact information by clicking here.

Wisconsin Family Action Responds to “Abortion Exceptions Bill”

MADISON – Today, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) held a joint press conference to introduce legislation sponsored by State Senator Mary Felzkowski (R-Irma), and State Representative Donna Rozar (R-Marshfield). The proposed bill would allow abortions in certain cases to supposedly “save the life of the mother” or in the case of rape or incest. Wisconsin Family Action opposes this legislation.

“The language describing the need for an abortion to save the life of the mother, is totally unnecessary,” said Julaine Appling, President of Wisconsin Family Action. “The bill mentions three specific circumstances, all three of which are either not pregnancies at all or are already recognized as medically necessary to save the life of the mother. Anembryonic pregnancy and molar pregnancy are circumstances where there is no embryo or fetus; so obviously, it cannot be an abortion. Ectopic pregnancy is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency treatment. In all three of these cases, there is no current law that would prohibit a physician from providing the necessary medical care.

“Using the term ‘therapeutic abortion’ in the bill’s co-sponsor memo and in the legislative analysis is at best misleading. Abortion is not health care, and medical professionals have told us for years that we no longer have ‘either-or’ situations, but rather ‘both-and,’ meaning today both the mother and unborn baby can be saved. If the baby dies inadvertently from the treatment given to the mother, while tragic, it is far different from intentionally killing the baby in an effort to save the mother.

“With regard to allowing for an abortion for cases of rape and incest, the termination of a viable pregnancy, under any circumstances is the destruction of a human life. The child who is conceived under these circumstances is just as viable and valuable as any other child. He or she should not be destroyed because of the crime that was committed by her father,” Appling continued.

“Rape or incest are tragic circumstances to be sure, and the trauma to a woman is horrific. But abortion doesn’t stop that trauma; it actually adds to it. The problem with this legislation is that it punishes the innocent unborn child while making it easier for the perpetrator, the real guilty party in this situation, to hide his crime. Abortion is often used to cover up crimes from sex-trafficking to rape. Additionally, and very importantly, the legislation does not require any documentation or police record that an actual sexual assault took place.

For these reasons, we cannot support this legislation. Passage of this bill would be the first step in fully legalizing abortion again in Wisconsin.”

###

Wisconsin Family Action is a statewide organization engaged in strengthening, preserving, and promoting
marriage, family, life, and religious freedom in Wisconsin.

Explanation of Referenda Questions on Spring 2023 Statewide Ballot

REFERENDA QUESTIONS ON WISCONSIN STATEWIDE BALLOT
SPRING 2023 – ELECTION DAY, APRIL 4, 2023

The state legislature has approved three (3) referenda questions on the statewide ballot for this spring’s nonpartisan general election.

Questions 1 and 2 are “binding” referenda, meaning if they pass, the state constitution will be amended to include language as reflected in the questions. If they fail, the state constitution will not be amended.

Here are the questions taken directly from the ballot, with some annotation Wisconsin Family Council is supplying to help voters understand what each question involves. Simply put, both questions give judges more flexibility when setting bail. Voters indicate either “yes” or “no” in response to the questions.

State of Wisconsin Conditions of Release Before Conviction Referendum – Question 1

QUESTION 1: “Conditions of release before conviction. Shall section 8 (2) of article I of the constitution be amended to allow a court to impose on an accused person being released before conviction conditions that are designed to protect the community from serious harm?”

Question 1 is about whether or not a judge can consider “serious harm” (public safety) when setting conditions of bail.  A “yes” vote will amend the Wisconsin constitution as noted; a “no” vote means the noted section of the Wisconsin constitution will remain as it currently is.

Under current law, judges can only consider conditions that prevent the risk of death or potentially life-threatening injury. For example, a pedophile awaiting trial currently can’t be prevented from going to a playground as a condition of bail, because that condition (banning the pedophile from playgrounds) isn’t really necessary to prevent a risk of injury potentially resulting in death. It would just be preventing sexual assault.

State of Wisconsin Cash Bail Before Conviction Referendum – Question 2

QUESTION 2: “Cash bail before conviction. Shall section 8 (2) of article I of the constitution be amended to allow a court to impose cash bail on a person accused of a violent crime based on the totality of the circumstances, including the accused’s previous convictions for a violent crime, the probability that the accused will fail to appear, the need to protect the community from serious harm and prevent witness intimidation, and potential affirmative defenses?”

Question 2 deals with whether a judge can consider the “totality of the circumstances” when setting cash bail for violent crimes. A “yes” vote will amend the Wisconsin constitution as noted; a “no” vote means the noted section of the Wisconsin constitution will remain as it currently is.

Currently in Wisconsin a judge is limited to a single factor (flight risk) when setting cash bail. This question allows a judge to look at additional factors (past criminal convictions, serious harm, etc.) when setting cash bail for violent crimes.

The third question on the statewide ballot is strictly advisory, meaning if the “yes” votes outnumber the “no” votes, nothing changes in our law; and if the “no” votes outnumber the “yes” votes nothing changes in our law. The state legislature put this question to the voters to get a sense of what citizens think about this issue. The question is very straight-forward.

State of Wisconsin Welfare Benefits Referendum – Question 3

QUESTION 3: “Shall able-bodied, childless adults be required to look for work in order to receive taxpayer-funded welfare benefits?”

A printable pdf of this post is available HERE.

“No Jail Janet’s” soft-on-crime record is another reason to keep her off the Supreme Court

“No Jail Janet’s” soft-on-crime record is another reason to keep her off the Supreme Court

The MacIver Institute calls Janet Protasiewicz “perhaps the most unethical Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate in recent memory”—and they’re right. Not only has she promised to support abortion “rights” and seemingly violated Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct, but as a judge, she has failed to establish justice. 

The Republican Party of Wisconsin created a website called NoJailJanet.com, outlining Protasiewicz’s extensive soft-on-crime record. Most notably, in several cases, she gave no prison or jail time to child sex offenders. She “has failed to stand up for victims and sided with hardened criminals,” says WISGOP

“The best indication of what someone will do in the future is what they have done in the past,” said Republican Party of Wisconsin Communications Director Rachel Reisner. “Judge Janet Protasiewicz’s record of giving no jail or prison time to violent sexual offenders disqualifies her from serving on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.”

Reisner is right. If Protasiewicz hasn’t ruled justly as a judge, why should we expect her to rule justly on our highest court? Protasiewicz is a political activist who will be a judicial activist. She has not been a fair judge, and she won’t be an impartial justice on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court. 

Her endorsements further prove that justice is not her priority. She has been endorsed by Democrats such as Mandela Barnes, who support the defund-the-police movement. She was also endorsed by a group linked to a domestic terror attack in Atlanta. 

“Janet Protasiewicz is so extreme that she would be enlisting help from anti-police domestic terrorists,” said Reisner. “Protasiewicz has a soft-on-crime record that aligns perfectly with unhinged rioters like Grace Martin of 350 Wisconsin. Protasiewicz is law enforcement’s worst nightmare, and will make cleaning up our streets nearly impossible.” 

Further, Protasiewicz presided over one case in which a father was abusing his children, ages 5, 8, and 10, by whipping them with a dog leash. He was convicted of a Class I felony with two counts of child abuse, yet Protasiewicz sentenced him to only nine months of work-release jail and probation.

In response to questions about her weak sentences, Protasiewicz doubled down by calling them “fair” and “appropriate.” Her soft-on-crime record is yet another reason Wisconsin voters should reject Protasiewicz as our new Supreme Court justice. 

Justice Daniel Kelly, on the other hand, has been endorsed by the Milwaukee Police Association. “Its members know the Rule of Law must not be replaced by the Rule of Janet,” said Kelly on twitter. 

The right choice is clear. Wisconsin’s Supreme Court needs an impartial justice who respects the rule of law, not ideologically-driven acts. Vote for Justice Kelly on April 4th!

Protasiewicz’s endorsements speak just as loudly as her words

Protasiewicz’s endorsements speak just as loudly as her words

Political candidates’ endorsements often speak volumes about how an elected official will handle critical issues.

In the case of Judge Janet Protasiewicz, candidate for Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, her endorsements astonishingly speak just as loudly as her own words, which are already bluntly liberal and arguably unethical.

“In regard to the progressive label,” she says, “I embrace that [label] when it comes to issues such as gerrymandering, when we talk about the maps, when we talk about marriage equality, when we talk about women’s rights and women’s rights to choose.”

Further, in one of her ads, she says, “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change,” showing a clear progressive bias on the issue of abortion. Time and time again, she has stated that her values require her to vote in favor of “a woman’s right to choose” and “bodily autonomy.”

She has also been vocal about her progressive view of legislative maps, saying, “Let’s be clear here: The maps are rigged, bottom line, absolutely, positively rigged,” she said. “They do not reflect the people in this state, they do not reflect accurately representation in either the State Assembly or the State Senate. They are rigged, period. I’m coming right out and saying that.”

Protasiewicz’s statements are not only politically charged, but also a clear violation of Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct, which states that “a judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should not manifest bias or prejudice inappropriate to the judicial office.”

She should be disqualified from the race for commenting on how she would vote in certain cases because that’s exactly what she’s done when she talks about her personal values in the way she has during this campaign. She has said she can’t say exactly how she will vote on a certain case or issue because she doesn’t know the facts of the case, but her expressed “values” have been abundantly clear. Protasiewicz says she “embraces” the progressive label when it comes to a myriad of issues. We should listen to her. What she is telling us is she will not rule fairly from the bench; she will be effectively legislating based on her personal opinions.

In case her bias wasn’t clear enough from her statements alone, her endorsements speak just as loudly and are further indications of how we can rightly expect her to vote on a host of important issues.

Protasiewicz has been endorsed by a number of leftist organizations including Planned Parenthood Advocates of WI and EMILY’s List, a political action committee that works to help elect Democrat female candidates who will support abortion. Citizen Action and numerous unions have also voiced their support of Protasiewicz.

Plus, many radical leftist politicians, including US Senator Tammy Baldwin (D) and US Rep Mark Pocan (D-02), who are both openly homosexual and lead the LGBTQ caucuses in their respective houses, have given their endorsements.

A liberal group known as Wisconsin Takes Action is even offering gift cards to entice people to vote for Protasiewicz, which should be considered bribery and therefore illegal.

One need only look at Protasiewicz’s endorsements to understand how she will legislate from the bench of the Wisconsin Supreme Court if elected–and that’s a problem.

And one need not be liberal or conservative to see that she is unfit for the role of supreme court justice. A vote for Protasiewicz is a vote against the rule of law. 

Please share this information with family, neighbors, and friends. Protasiewicz is an incredibly dangerous choice for Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, and we must do everything in our power to keep her from legislating in Wisconsin’s high court.

The future of Wisconsin is at stake in the April 4 election. Get involved, spread the word, and show up on April 4!

Update: on March 7th after this was originally published, the Human Rights Campaign (same-sex marriage advocates) and NARAL Pro-Choice America both announced their endorsements of Protasiewicz.

Why Not Janet Protasiewicz

Why Not Janet Protasiewicz

“What I would tell you is that [on] the bulk of issues, the myriad number of issues, there’s no thumb on the scale,” said WI Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz recently according to the MacIver Institute, “but I will also tell you that I’ll call them as I see them and I’ll tell you what my values are in regard to this particular issue because this issue [abortion] is so critically important.”

So, according to Janet Protasiewicz, “there’s no thumb on the scale”; and yet, she has been quite open about her views and values:

  • “[The state legislative district maps] are rigged, period.  I’m coming right out and saying that.  I don’t think you could sell to any reasonable person that the maps are fair.” Except for the US Supreme Court justices who ruled just last year that Wisconsin’s maps are legally permissible.

 

  • “Women have, for the last 50 years…relied on the Roe v. Wade case. They’ve relied on it to be able to make their own decisions regarding bodily autonomy,” Protasiewicz said in an interview with WKOW.

 

  • Said another way in one of her ads: “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change.”

Despite the fact that Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct specifically states that “a judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should not manifest bias or prejudice inappropriate to the judicial office,” Protasiewicz seems to feel quite comfortable in at a minimum, signaling to Wisconsin voters how she intends to rule on cases. And we should pay attention to that because that means she has no true regard for the rule of law.

If Protasiewicz’s stance on major issues weren’t already made clear, here’s what she said just last month on WKOW’s Capital City Sunday:

  • “In regard to the progressive label, I embrace that when it comes to issues such as gerrymandering, when we talk about the maps, when we talk about marriage equality, when we talk about women’s rights and women’s rights to choose.”

There’s no mistaking how Protasiewicz would rule on major cases affecting life, marriage, and elections in Wisconsin—cases that could alter the future of Wisconsin for at least the next decade.

Now, contrast that with what Justice Dan Kelly, Protasiewicz’s opponent in the April 4 election, said in a recent PBS Wisconsin interview:

“…if you think as a candidate that you should be virtue signaling to attract the votes of a certain body of Wisconsinites, what you’re telling them is that you are not — you are not committed to the constitutional order, and you’re telling them that the politics should have a role in the court, even if you don’t intend to follow through on that, what you’re telling the voters is that it should have a role, and I think that’s extraordinarily problematic because when people come in to this room so that the court can hear their case, what people of Wisconsin want to know, with absolute certainty, is that everyone on that bench is going to follow the law.”

The difference in judicial approach is pretty clear.

The April 4 election for the WI Supreme Court is one of the most consequential elections in modern Wisconsin history—and the nation is watching because what happens here in this election has national ramifications.

We urge you to please share this blog far and wide with your neighbors, friends, and family and ask them to pass it on, too. 

You can also share this helpful handout that details what else you can do to impact the April 4 election and provides important dates and deadlines for voting.

Help ensure the future of Wisconsin by spreading the word about what’s at stake on April 4!

 

The results are in – here’s how the WI Supreme Court primary race played out

The results are in – here’s how the WI Supreme Court primary race played out

A pivotal election took place in Wisconsin on Tuesday. This race has garnered nationwide attention and involvement because the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is at stake. Will it remain conservative or flip to liberal?

The race, which the New York Times calls “the most consequential American election on the 2023 calendar,” is expected to be the most expensive judicial election in American history. Over $8.7 million has already been spent on advertising.

While four candidates were on the ballot, voters voted for only one. The top two candidates move on to the general election in April. Two of the candidates leaned liberal—Janet Protasiewicz and Everett Mitchell—and two lean conservative—Daniel Kelly and Jennifer Dorow. The winner of the race will serve a 10-year term. 

Openly liberal, pro-abortion candidate Janet Protasiewicz came out on top with just over 46 percent of the vote in the unofficial results. She has been an outspoken abortion supporter, saying “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion,” during a campaign ad. 

The good news is that Daniel Kelly came in second with just over 24 percent of the vote. Wisconsin Family Action PAC gave an exclusive endorsement to  Justice Daniel Kelly in this Supreme Court race, as he has a proven track record as a judicial conservative and has the judicial temperament necessary to serve effectively on the state’s highest court. 

In a speech Tuesday night after his victory, Justice Kelly said Protasiewicz would act as an “assault on our Constitution and our liberties.” If she wins, he said, “we will lose the rule of law and find ourselves saddled with the rule of Janet.” In this now two-person, head-to-head race, Kelly and his allies need to turnout considerably more voters than showed up for the primary. The results show that nearly 75,000 more liberals voted in this election than conservatives. That needs to change for the general election on April 4. 

Currently, the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court leans conservative with a 4-3 margin. However, mostly-conservative Justice Pat Roggensack announced that she was not going to seek a third 10-year term. Her current term ends July 31, 2023, and the newly elected justice will take office August 1, 2023. If a liberal wins on April 4, the balance becomes 4-3 liberal, which means the lives of preborn children, our religious freedom, parental rights, election integrity, and more are all effectively on the ballot.

For example, a 1849 abortion ban, which only allows for exceptions when the life of the mother is at risk, is expected to end up at the Wisconsin Supreme Court. State Attorney General Josh Kaul (D) filed a lawsuit last year arguing that the law contradicts another abortion law that provides broader exceptions, according to The Hill. This means the new state Supreme Court majority could rule to allow for broader exceptions for abortion or to restrict the procedure further.

With a liberal majority, the court could also redraw the state’s current congressional maps and influence how Wisconsin’s electoral votes are allotted for the 2024 presidential election, and could also change election laws that would drastically impact the upcoming presidential election. Remember that the experts tell us that in 2024 there really is no path to the presidency without going through Wisconsin.

Elections have real consequences, and as Christians, we cannot afford to remain silent. We need to be part of making sure the consequences from the April 4 election are as good as they can be, Mark your calendars for April 4, get informed about these candidates, encourage others to join you,and make your voices heard in the most important election of this year!

Wisconsin Family Action PAC Congratulates Endorsed Justice Daniel Kelly on His Advancement to the General Election

Madison, WI – Wisconsin Family Action PAC (WFA PAC), the state’s only conservative pro-family PAC, gave an exclusive endorsement to Justice Daniel Kelly for Wisconsin Supreme Court, in advance of yesterday’s primary election.

WFA PAC director Julaine Appling, issued the following statement:

“We are proud to have given Justice Daniel Kelly an exclusive endorsement for the Wisconsin State Supreme Court and congratulate him on his hard-fought victory. We urge conservative Wisconsin citizens to give Justice Kelly not just their vote in the general election, but their time, energy, and financial support over the next six weeks.

“Justice Daniel Kelly is well positioned to go head-to-head with Janet Protasiewicz, a self-described liberal judge,  in the general election. Justice Kelly has everything we look for in a judge, especially for our state’s highest court. He has made it very clear and very public that his judicial philosophy is that the courts are not lawmakers; that’s the job of the legislature. The role of the judiciary, as Justice Kelly puts it, is to interpret the laws according to the clear language of state statutes, the Wisconsin Constitution, and the US Constitution. Deciding a case based on a political or personal agenda is outside the purview of a justice.

“The balance of our State Supreme Court is on the line, which is our last chance, our strongest defense against liberal policies that have resulted in

  • low-bail, no-bail practices that put dangerous, repeat offenders back on the streets just hours after being apprehended,
  • out-of-control crime rates across Wisconsin,
  • a major erosion of our religious freedoms,
  • gross violations of our parental rights, and
  • our children placed at great risk in public schools.

“And as if that’s not bad enough, add the life of the unborn, school choice, election integrity, and re-districting of our state legislative districts that will tilt in favor of more liberal decisions and outcomes.

“This race has been highlighted as the country’s most important election of 2023 and will undoubtedly be the most expensive State Supreme Court race in Wisconsin’s history. It should not be viewed as a single-issue campaign. Wisconsin voters are encouraged not to become disenchanted by what will soon feel like a race to the bottom with special interest ads that seek to deceive, disengage, and/or suppress Wisconsin voters. Justice Daniel Kelly is the only candidate who will uphold the rule of law.”

The general election for Supreme Court will be held on Tuesday, April 4.

###

Authorized and paid for by Wisconsin Family Action PAC, Leslie Harrison, Treasurer.
Not authorized by any candidate or by any candidate’s agent or committee.

80-year Harvard study reaffirms key to a happy and healthy life is our relationships – family included!

80-year Harvard study reaffirms key to a happy and healthy life is our relationships – family included!

The Harvard Study of Adult Development has followed 700 men from the 1930s until today and has identified what helps make people happy and healthy. 

Born out of the study was the book The Good Life: Lessons from the World’s Longest Scientific Study of Happiness, authored by the study’s current leaders, Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz. The authors conclude: 

“For 84 years (and counting), the Harvard Study has tracked the same individuals, asking thousands of questions and taking hundreds of measurements to find out what really keeps people healthy and happy…

[O]ne crucial factor stands out… [I]t’s not career achievement, or exercise, or a healthy diet. Don’t get us wrong; these things matter (a lot). But one thing continuously demonstrates its broad and enduring importance:

Good relationships.

[I]f we had to take all 84 years of the Harvard Study and boil it into a single principle for living, one life investment that is supported by similar findings across a wide variety of other studies, it would be this:

Good relationships keep us healthier and happier. Period.” (Emphasis added.)

As we wrap up National Marriage Week, what more fitting message could there be? Relationships matter!

The study identified nine simple habits that can put you on track for a healthier and happier life:

  1. Take stock of your relationships – take time to assess if there are relationships that could be improved.
  2. Nurture casual relationships – continue to cultivate relationships with acquaintances, even if you don’t know their name!
  3. Make time for conversations – a recent study from University of Kansas demonstrated that the act of reaching out to someone once a day for a conversation increases happiness and lowers stress!
  4. Cultivate kindness – take extra care to be kind to the people who matter to you.
  5. Volunteer – those “who took time to volunteer, even just a few hours a week, met more people, formed relationships with more people, and took pride and satisfaction in the volunteer work they were doing.”
  6. Learn to apologize – especially if it helps repair a relationship.
  7. Ask questions – some people may surprise you with how much they open up after you ask a question!
  8. Express your love – through an act, like helping someone out with a project, or the simplest phrase, “I love you.”
  9. Be willing to be vulnerable–you may be rejected–or not! 

These tips apply to any relationship in our lives, but no earthly relationship is more important than the marriage relationship and the family that typically develops from that relationship. That tells us promoting marriage and family is one of the best things we can do to help people be happier and healthier.

Think about how the relationships in our own family (relationships we may take for granted!) could flourish if we make a conscientious effort to incorporate these nine habits into our daily lives. 

Of course, no relationship is more important than the one we are designed to have with God the Father, through His Son Jesus Christ. Biblical Christianity is all about relationships; so it shouldn’t surprise us that relationships, especially in marriage and family, create happiness and good health. And the happier and healthier individuals are, the better off society is in general. 

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to make the connection: The stronger we make our families, the stronger the future. 

WILL brings on expert witnesses to protect parental rights in Kettle Moraine case 

WILL brings on expert witnesses to protect parental rights in Kettle Moraine case 

Last summer, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) and the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit against Kettle Moraine School District (KMSD) for its gender identity policy that allows children to “change” their gender identity at school without parental consent. The policy also prohibits district employees from notifying parents of their child’s “transition” and even instructs staff to override a parent’s objection. In this case, at least one parent called and asked the school to call a daughter by her given feminine name and to use only feminine pronouns. The school refused.

Now, WILL and ADF have brought on two experts in support of summary judgment in this case. The experts specialize in gender dysphoria, asserting that school personnel socially transitioning a minor as is happening in this school district violates widely accepted mental health principles and practice.

Dr. Erica E. Anderson is a transgender clinical psychologist from Berkeley, California. Over the last 40 years, she has worked with hundreds of children and young adults struggling with their gender identity. She has also been a board member for the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and served as the President of USPATH (the United States arm of WPATH).

Dr. Anderson’s affidavit states, “A school policy that involves school adult personnel in socially transitioning a child or adolescent without the consent of parents or over their objection violates widely accepted mental health principles and practice.”

The second expert, Dr. Stephen Levine, is a psychiatrist and professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. He helped develop the 5th version of the WPATH guidelines and served as the court-appointed expert in the first major case to reach a federal court of appeals pertaining to surgery for transgender prisoners. 

Dr. Levine’s publications include “Transitioning back to maleness” (2018), “Ethical Concerns About Emerging Treatment Paradigms for Gender Dysphoria” (2017), “Meanings and political implications of ‘psychopathology’ in a gender identity clinic: A report of 10 cases” (2009), “The standards of care for gender identity disorders” (1998), among many others. 

If the Waukesha County judge grants summary judgment, then the parents win. This would be incredibly encouraging and right. As the parents’ attorneys argue, not only is the school’s policy harmful to children, it’s an unconstitutional violation of the parents’ rights. School districts statewide and across the country should be watching this case closely. 

The Wisconsin Constitution protects the “inherent right” of parents to “direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.” For the sake of children’s safety and well-being, parents must be the primary decision-makers when it comes to their children’s upbringing, education, and mental health. No school has the right to override parents in any way, especially when it comes to something as personal and important as gender. 

A hearing for this case is scheduled for April 19th, and a ruling is expected in the late spring or summer. Hopefully, Dr. Levine and Dr. Anderson guide the Court to a decision that will protect children and parent’s rights.