Does a “Truce” on the Social Issues Serve the Public Good?

Written by Laurie Higgins

The Republican governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels, recently called for a “truce” on the divisive social issues. Republican governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, concurs saying, “Any issue that takes people’s eye off of unemployment, job creation, economic growth, taxes, spending, deficits, debts is taking your eye off the ball.”

Earlier I asked, if one of the “social issues” that divided the country were not the slaughter of the most defenseless but were instead the enslavement of African Americans, would these same “moderates,” be chastising conservatives for refusing to subordinate social issues to fiscal issues?

When social conservatives retreat from the cultural and political debate, the cultural and political views of the public are shaped by those who are publicly engaged. Our retreat creates a vacuum that leftists are only too glad to fill with false moral propositions and destructive legislation. Soon there won’t be enough conservatives who think rightly on fundamental social issues, and the ones who do will lack the courage to speak. Society would be much better served by heeding the words of John Adams who said, “Public business, my son, must always be done by somebody….If wise men decline it, others will not; if honest men refuse it, others will not.”

It should be noted that a truce requires that both sides agree to a cessation of activity. Surely, some have noticed that Democrats aren’t participating in the truce. In fact, carnivorous leftists are licking their chops while waiting to devour the carcass of social conservatism. And while they await its demise, they engage in ever more fevered efforts to advance their pernicious goals to preserve the right to annihilate the unborn and destroy the family.

No, Daniels and other likeminded conservatives are not calling for a truce; they’re effectively calling for a forfeit.

One of the social “moderates” about whom I am particularly critical is Mark Kirk. My criticism of him, however, extends beyond his unconscionable anti-life, pro-homosexual positions. My criticism of Kirk includes his penchant for deceit, about which Karl Rove has inadvertently shed some light.

In an appearance on Hannity on September 14, Karl Rove rejected supporting candidates who demonstrate a lack of honesty and integrity:

It does conservatives little good to support candidates who at the end of the day, while they may be conservative in their public statements, do not evince the characteristics of rectitude and truthfulness and sincerity and character that the voters are looking for.

Whatever you may think about Rove, his sentiments are valid and applicable to an evaluation of Mark Kirk as a candidate.

Despite all the bad press about Kirk’s prevaricating about his past military, teaching, and sailing experiences, and his weaselly responses when confronted by the media about his prevarications, many conservatives continue to argue that as bad as he is, it’s better to have a Republican elected than a Democrat.

In the past I shared that view.  I have never voted for a third-party candidate—until now.  I have always been firmly committed to voting for the Republican candidate even if I had to hold my nose while voting—until now. But is there not a limit to how bad a Republican candidate can be before conservatives are justified in rejecting him? I’m beginning to think that in the service of political expediency, many conservatives have a near limitless capacity for capitulation.

It’s unrealistic to expect 100% agreement with any candidate on all issues. But the accretion of troubling votes and troubling lies from Kirk reached critical mass for me. I arrived at a point at which I could no longer rationalize support for him. When I thought about the unlikelihood of unseating an incumbent Senator Kirk, I came to the conclusion that a longer view was in order.

If Kirk gets elected, there’s not a snow ball’s chance in hell that either the IL GOP or the national party will support a Republican challenge to him in six years, whereas they will obviously field a Republican challenge to an incumbent Alexi Giannoulias.  If Kirk gets elected, we will likely have him for decades. With an inexperienced legislator like Giannoulias, a motivated conservative base, and a supportive GOP, we have a far better shot at getting a truly worthy man or woman into the U.S. Senate in six years.

It’s not social conservatives who are naïve and ignorant. It is the social “moderates” who in their failure to see the portentous cultural implications of legalized child sacrifice and widespread approval of homosexuality demonstrate both ignorance and naïveté. If Kirk fails to win the Senate seat, his loss just may send a message to the Republican establishment that they must stop trying to force social conservatives to sacrifice their principles.

I’m amazed when I hear conservatives express more moral outrage about my refusal to nose-hold than they do about Kirk’s support for the slaughter of the unborn or for homosexuality-affirming legislation. Do these “moderate” conservatives actually believe that an economically sound country that engages in the slaughter of the unborn and celebrates sexual deviancy can long last?

It strikes me that there is an important difference between justifiable political compromises and wholesale selling out. Voting for Kirk represents the latter.

All is not lost, however. There are a few bright lights on the horizon. In response to the debate on setting aside the “social issues,” U.S. Representative Mike Pence recently said, “America’s darkest moments have come when economic arguments trumped moral principles.” We in Illinois need to find our Mike Pence.

If all disgruntled Illinois conservatives would band together, stiffen their spines, and say with their votes “no more” — even if that means we’re stuck with Giannoulias for six years — the powers-that-be might finally get the message. They might then busy themselves with the important task of finding a good candidate to unseat him.

Order Your 2010 Voters’ Guides!

This edition of the IFI Voter Guide will contain non-partisan information about candidates for Illinois Governor and United States Senate — two of the most-watched races in the nation. Plus, there will be information on US House and races right down to State House and State Senate.

How can you use bulk copies of the 2010 Illinois Voter Guide this fall?

1. To encourage those around you to get to the polls and vote. Start with your own family members, co-workers and colleagues.

2. To distribute in your church. As in the past, these guides are legal for use inside churches.

3. To serve other churches in your area by offering bulk copies of the guide. Take pre-orders; then include them in your bulk order.

4. To send voter guides along with absentee ballot applications to college students in your family or your church. Absentee ballot applications are due at your local  elections office by October 26th.

Order your bulk copies today! Suggested donation $25 per hundred.

Be A Smart Voter! For Our Families, For Our Future

Are you registered to vote? How about your family, friends and church? Did you know polls show that as many as half of those sitting around us in our churches either are not registered to vote or don’t show up at the polls?! You can help change that!

Hold a “Voter Registration Sunday.” The voter registration deadline is October 5th, so pick a Sunday this month, advertise it in your church bulletin with the help of your pastor, set up a small table with the forms and information and you’re set! Just be sure to get those forms back to the county elections offices by October 4th. Call us for a free Voter Registration kit at (708) 781-9328. (Don’t forget to order your Voter Guides in bulk to distribute in October!)

Watch for Illinois Family Institute’s 2010 Voters’ Guide for the November 2 General Election. Soon available online at IllinoisFamily.org. For printed copies, you can place pre-orders now for your church or group by calling us at (708) 781-9328.


IFI Needs Your Support for the 2010 General Election Voter Guide

Summer is always a difficult time financially for non-profit organizations and IFI is no exception. As we prepare to publish our Voter Guide (used by hundreds of thousands in the Primary Election) for the November General Election, we face a significant financial challenge.

The cost of producing both electronic and printed Voter Guides are extremely expensive. In order to produce the November General Election Guide, funds are needed immediately.

This work is only possible because of the generous support of people like you. We invite you to join us as we defend the family in Illinois. Thanks so much for your continued partnership!

Click HERE to make a secure, online donation.

Mark Kirk, Planned Parenthood, and the New “Contract with America”

by Laurie Higgins

It is utterly confounding that Illinois conservatives would even momentarily entertain the notion of voting for a candidate who believes women have a right to have their pre-born children killed, or even worse, voting for someone who supports the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion. How about a candidate who pro-actively seeks the support of a business that profits from the spilled blood of the unborn—particularly the spilled blood of black babies?

Well, Illinois conservatives are spending many moments entertaining the notion of voting for just such a person in the truth-challenged, morally bankrupt Mark Kirk.

Read HERE Kirk’s prideful solicitation of support from the venal, eugenics organization, Planned Parenthood, that is committed both to killing the nation’s unborn and corrupting our youth.

I can just hear the condescending clucking of promoters of materialism and pragmatism who believe the good ends of promoting fiscal responsibility justify the means of allowing a man of such deformed moral conscience—a man who delights in all pro-homosexual and anti-life legislation—to obtain the honor of the title of U.S. Senator.

Well, I’ve heard enough from those who use ad hominem attacks and demagoguery to humiliate principled conservatives into submission. They accuse those who believe the social issues are critical of being politically naïve—or worse—and of splitting the party. Election after election, we hold our noses and our tongues in order to establish conservative majorities in the House or Senate. And what do we have to show for our obsequious obeisance? We have Mark Kirk.

Not only that but Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel warns that the impending revision of the successful Republican “Contract with America” may contain some troubling omissions. He writes that the spanking new contract “will likely not contain any references to pro-marriage or pro-life initiatives!”

Perhaps the voices of “moderates”—who could only be considered “moderate” in a relativistic world—are correct that all that is needed to preserve this great nation is economic stability and a strong national defense.

Take ACTION:  Liberty Counsel has launched a petition with the intent of rallying tens of thousands of grassroots citizens who believe marriage must be made a paramount platform issue in this and every subsequent election cycle.  Click HERE to sign on!

Liberty Counsel has launched our petition with the intent of rallying tens of thousands of grassroots citizens who believe marriage must be made a paramount platform issue in this and every subsequent election cycle.

But maybe, just maybe we outliers are correct. Maybe, just maybe there is wisdom in the belief that even an economically vibrant, militarily strong nation can be brought to its knees by moral decay. Maybe those who hold fast to a long historical view understand that no nation that affirms child-sacrifice and perverse sexual unions can ever be economically viable. Maybe the sacrifice of the most vulnerable, the embrace of sexual immorality in all forms, and the rejection of marriage will destroy a nation.

Thanks, but I’ll pass on Kirk.

“For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, ‘He catches the wise in their craftiness,’ and again, ‘The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.’” (1 Cor. 3: 19-20)

IFA needs your support!

Illinois Family Action is a 501c4 organization funded by donations from involved, caring people like you. Please help financially support IFI’s efforts to defend families in Illinois from anti-family policies and laws.

Give Online:
Click HERE to donate today!

Give by mail:

Illinois Family Action
15941 S. Harlem Ave. #401
Tinley Park, Illinois 60477


Give By Phone:

Give a gift by phone with your Visa, Mastercard, Discover or American Express card. Just call 708-781-9371 during normal business hours.

Donations to IFA are not tax-deductible.

Modified by Matthew Medlen.com