A Memo From Danny Carroll, IFPC Action Board Chair

To: Iowa Family Policy Center ACTION Board of Directors
IFPC Action Staff
Friends of the Family in Iowa

From: Danny Carroll, Chairman of the Board


The Board of Directors and senior staff of the Iowa Family Policy Center and IFPC Action have for some time been contemplating the adoption of a new policy position statement that would work in tandem with the five existing statements to guide the ministry. This statement deals directly with the negative impact of over taxation on the health of the family. While the discussion has been ongoing, it seems as though the current global economic recession, and the continued overspending from government at all levels, requires our immediate action.

The new guiding policy position includes the following statement:
Excessive government 1) over-taxes families, often forcing parents to work longer hours and spend less time parenting; and 2) creates disincentives for handling social problems at their proper levels – in families, faith communities, and local volunteer associations.

It is the clear conviction of the Board of Directors that Iowa is only as strong as the families that live here, and that by increasing the tax burden on our families, governments jeopardize the strength and future viability of our state.

Recent events at the State Capitol have revealed the extent to which some lawmakers will go to fund an ever growing government. With unemployment on the rise, and state revenue projections dropping sharply, Democrat leaders in the Iowa Legislature have proposed eliminating Federal Deductibility as a revenue generating scheme. The plan would permit the State of Iowa to begin taxing residents on the Federal taxes they pay. According to reported estimates, this proposal is a $600 million tax increase on Iowa families.

This current scheme to begin taxing the taxes that hard working Iowa families are compelled to send to Washington should be abandoned immediately. Government has lost all credibility when it comes to promises about lowering tax rates, and there is no reasonable expectation that any so-called “tax cuts” will be real or long-lasting. Legislative leaders should focus on shrinking government instead of playing sleight-of-hand tricks with the tax code.

It would appear that the Iowa Legislature is watching events in Washington, and have rightly concluded that our Federal taxes will go up over the next several years. Current law would help ease the pain suffered by Iowa families when they deduct those taxes on their state income tax returns. The proposed change will place a tax on taxes. Instead of seeing the specter of Iowans’ growing Federal tax bill as an indicator there will be less money to go around, it appears some Iowa legislators are determined to place a first lien on the productivity of every family in the state.

The proposal to eliminate Federal Deductibility is wrong. It holds the potential to hurt Iowa families, and IFPC Action stands in direct opposition to the proposal.

Pro-Choice 150 Years Ago

I got this from a buddy the other day. Pretty poignant, isn't it? Sickening if you think about it too long.

How could this nation have been so calloused as to have accepted slavery?

How long will it take before we wake up to the folly of a pro-choice mentality with regard to human life today?

One of our staffers, Chris Nitzschke, already posted this a few weeks ago, but if you haven't watched Volition, a very powerful and well-produced 7 minute film dealing with this issue in a very creative way, then click here and watch it now.

"I just hope the day comes when we can see this for what it really is."

As agents of truth, we must continue to confront the culture on this issue, no matter what the cost; no matter how long it takes.

The Rest of the Story

As the Director of Public Relations and Communications for the Iowa Family Policy Center, and IFPC Action, I was hesitant when I got the call from Liz Sidoti with the Associated Press wanting a comment from Chuck Hurley on RNC Chairman Michael Steele. Based on his past performance, and his association with groups like the pro-choice Republican “Leadership” Council, there are plenty of reasons for groups like ours to be skeptical of Steele.

Instead, in typical peacemaker fashion, Chuck extended an olive branch wrapped in a challenge for Chairman Steele in his answers to Sidoti’s questions. The AP article first ran on March 10th. Unfortunately, through the editing process, the challenge was stripped from the olive branch, and Chuck’s quote became the conclusion of an entirely positive article. It read “’there's probably a mix of hope and optimism that a fresh face and somebody of African-American descent will be a good thing,’ said Chuck Hurley, the head of the Iowa Family Policy Center and a delegate to the GOP convention last year. Still, he added: ‘It's kind of a wait-and-see attitude with most people.’”

While the text attributed to Chuck was indeed a direct quote, it was not however a complete quote. I was sitting next to Chuck during the interview and heard him say, “While there's probably a mix of hope and optimism that a fresh face and somebody of African-American descent will be a good thing, there is some lingering hesitation among Christian and social conservatives because of his past associations with pro-abortion and pro-homosexual groups. I hope that as Chairman, Mr. Steele will expend at least as much energy reaching out to those of us who are in agreement with his party’s platform as he has to those who do not. Right now, it’s kind of a wait-and-see attitude with most people.”

Now, it would seem as though Chairman Steele has wiped away any lingering optimism among Christian and social conservatives. According to a Politico blog and a GQ blog post that ran the very next day, the wait is over. By his own words, Chairman Steel is not pro-life. He also equated deviant sexual choices with immutable characteristics like race. Perhaps he ought to go out of his way to meet some of the thousands of ex-“gay” individuals who no longer engage in homosexual activities.

This morning, The Iowa Republican ran an article by Emily Geiger that aptly addressed Steel’s continued actions which are likely to collapse “the big tent.” She quickly and clerly pointed out some of the reasons Michael Steele is having trouble establishing credibity wth Christians and social conservatives.

Much like the partial quote that was creatively carved from Chuck’s comments for publication in an AP article, Michael Steele was careful to omit the portions of his personal worldview that didn’t compliment the story he was writing for members of the RNC when he ran for chair. In the famous words of Paul Harvey, “now we know the rest of the story.”

Cartoon Characters Fall in Love with Senator McCoy

If State Senator Matt McCoy (D-Des Moines) has his way, he could become quite an icon in Japan. Senator McCoy, a proud homosexual has introduced a bill that neuters Iowa’s marital laws by replacing the words “husband” and “wife” with “spouse” (Senate File 353). McCoy believes a bill to remove references to husbands and wives will help the Iowa economy. He just might have a point, especially if the changes are allowed to apply to Taichi Takashita and a thousand of his friends.

In Japan there is a growing obsession with escaping from reality. Millions head home after work to assume a cartoon character on their computer. On-line virtual reality communities are so popular that some characters have been elevated to superstar status. The country even has two cartoon characters as ambassadors, like "Kitty" pictured above.

The relationships that are developed in these virtual realities are so “real” that many have fallen in “love” with other characters and are asking the government to legally recognize their commitments. These individuals are petitioning the Japanese government to recognize marriage between humans and their cartoon partners. One supporter supported the request by saying, "For a long time I have only been able to fall in love with two-dimensional people and currently I have someone I really love.”

Taichi said, “Even if she is fictional, it is still loving someone. I would like to have legal approval for this system at any cost."

Could it be that the cost of marrying the object of his affection might be a move to Iowa? Thanks to Senator McCoy, Mr. Takashita may gets his wish. Were the terms husband and wife simply replaced with the word “spouse” it’s not difficult to imagine that Mr. Takashita’s marriage would be recognized in the great state of Iowa!

Redefining marriage is wrong. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman becoming husband and wife to form a new family. That’s what is best for the culture. Traditional marriage has worked since the dawn of civilization and it will continue to work till the end of time if we only let it.

Will Senator McCoy’s bill redefine the foundation of human relationships? Could his effort to eliminate obvious human characteristics from Iowa law lead to marriage between a human and a cartoon? If that’s the case, would that make divorce as easy as pressing the delete key?

Instead, it is Senate File 353 that ought to be deleted.

God Bless America???

President Obama’s executive order allowing tax-payer funded embryonic stem cell research is bad policy, bad economics, and most of all, bad morality.

Some claim the proposal has merits. Proponents ask, “What’s wrong with taking cells that are already going to be destroyed, and see if we can bring something good from them? After all, people are dying and they need help that these embryos might provide.” If we consider embryonic humans as balls of cells that merely have the potential for life, then President Obama’s order has merit.

If however, life begins at conception then Obama’s order is thoroughly sadistic. Taking a human life to experiment on it with the hope of preserving others was the same rationale used by Nazi doctors to justify their experiments on Jews in concentration camps. The doctors believed their actions were defensible in that they were only taking the lives of the “weak” to preserve the lives of the “strong.”

When WHO-TV in Des Moines ran a story during their 10 o’clock broadcast on March 9th, they highlighted the life of Rob Borsellino and the stem cell debate http://www.whotv.com/news (stem cell debate). Borsellino’s wife, Reka Basu spoke passionately about how her husband might have been saved if only President Bush had signed the order eight years earlier. I wonder how she would have felt if someone would have suggested that federal funds be made available for scientist to experiment on her husband after he was first diagnosed with ALS. Using her line of reasoning, he was going to die anyway, why not experiment on him with the hopes of finding a cure? By her reasoning, not allowing scientists full access to him for experimentation was not compassionate. If society were to adopt Basu’s rationale, we would be obligated to think of all the lives that might have been saved by sacrificing her husband. So why don’t proponents of embryonic stem cell research recognize their own hypocrisy? According to Basu’s statement, the difference comes down to the fact that we don’t have to look the unborn in the face as they approach their death.

It’s important to note that the pro-life community would have been just as outraged by a government willing to experiment on Mr. Borsellino as we are about the eagerness with which it is now experimenting on the unborn.

Not only is the President’s order on shaky moral ground, it’s not medically necessary. Recently, scientists have taken adult stem-cells and moved closer to a cure for Parkinson’s disease. Additionally, over 70 diseases like juvenile diabetes and heart disease have been treated through adult stem cells research. Comparatively, embryonic stem cell research shows no promise. Even Dr. James Thomson, who first grew human ESC (embryonic stem cells) in 1998, has pulled his resources from embryos and invested in induced pluripotent or iPS (adult stem cell) research. Adult stem cells are easier to access, cheaper to reproduce, and are proving to be far superior in providing the types of treatment embryonic stem cell proponents claim to hope for.

Obama concluded the signing ceremony by saying, “May God bless America.” How can God bless America when we are so intent on destroying life?