Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Life’ Category

What the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on abortion and guns mean for California

Friday, June 24, 2022, 12:35 pm | Randy Thomasson

We’re living in historic, even revolutionary, times. As the U.S. Supreme Court acts for the sake of constitutional justice, here’s some perspective to help you make sense of it all.

No more Roe won’t help California babies

Finally, after 49 years of Roe v. Wade’s unconstitutional, murderous agenda, it’s gone and abortion policies revert to 50 states.

Yet the demise of Roe won’t help California or other states ruled by abortion-loving Democrats. This is all the more reason to stand up for life. Especially since Newsom & Co. want to force California taxpayers to subsidize out-of-state abortions.

A top need of California pro-lifers this fall is to defeat SCA 10, which would go on the ballot to “codify” abortion on-demand in the California State Constitution. By proclaiming “The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion,” SCA 10 would continue the California carnage of taxpayer-funded abortion procedures or pills for any girl or woman, regardless of a girl’s age, the number of abortions she’s already had, or her ability to pay. To be placed on the November ballot, SCA 10 requires a two-thirds vote of both the Assembly and the Senate (it already passed the Senate), followed by an affirmative majority vote of the People.

Today’s SCOTUS ruling striking down the unconstitutional, unscientific 1973 Roe v. Wade and the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey opinions was 6 to 3 (Republican-president-nominated judges for the Constitution and life vs. Democrat-president-nominated judges for unconstitutional murder of pre-born babies). Read the history-making decision yourself

Get ready for more gun-owner freedoms

Unlike abortion, the “sacred cow” idol of Democrat politicians, and which is again a question of states’ rights, the fundamental rights of safety-conscious, constitutional gun owners will likely increase in California now that the U.S. Supreme Court has majorly upheld the Second Amendment in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

The June 23 ruling portends a new era of constitutional equity for gun owners in America. Relying on the God-given liberties preceding our Constitution, it concludes:

The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The practical effect in California is this much-needed, admirable ruling will be used in both state and local lawsuits against the unconstitutional laws of the Democrat politicians. It might take a couple of years, but gun-owner rights organizations are planning to use the New York State decision against California’s unconstitutional ban on “assault weapons,” California’s unconstitutional ban on magazines over 10 rounds, California’s unconstitutional background checks, and the unconstitutional ban of concealed weapon permits in Democrat-controlled counties, such as Los Angeles. So have hope!

Just the facts: Why gas prices are so high

Why isn’t there a second Revolutionary War over oppressive gas prices? Because the godless government schools have been very successful at avoiding teaching children the Bible, the Constitution, real history, principles of logic, evidence-based research, and truisms such as the commerce law of Supply and Demand.

This week, SaveCalifornia.com produced and posted these three slides to help people realize who to blame for robbing them of their God-given resources and raising gas prices. Please enjoy and share!

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”
Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813, Scottish advocate, judge, writer and historian

SPECIAL REPORT: Why medical tyranny and infanticide bills passed

Friday, May 27, 2022, 12:05 pm | Randy Thomasson

If you haven’t heard yet, on May 26, the Democrats that rule the California State Assembly powered through Covid medical tyranny bills AB 2098 and AB 1797 and the infanticide legalization bill AB 2223.

AB 2098 revokes licenses of doctors that counsel patients against the “Covid vaccine”

AB 1797 puts Californians into a database, segregating them by “Covid vaccine” status

AB 2223 prohibits law enforcement from investigating infant deaths

That was the worst thing of all. But the second worst was zero Republicans spoke against any of these bad bills. All 19 of them refused to speak to expose these bills’ great harms.

And I have to tell you, based on other times this week that Assembly Republicans vigorously spoke out (such as on protecting Central Valley water), I believe these medical tyranny bills and infanticide bill could have been defeated if exposed in a verbal floor fight.

See the deceitful passage of AB 2223 where nobody spoke to expose its true effect

If you were in this fight, you have my sincere thanks and admiration for calling Sacramento in an effort to stop these horrific bills. We had to try, because last year a vaccine passport bill and a forced jab bill were pulled for lack of support. And this year, several Covid tyranny bills have already been dropped by their authors.

The votes
Despite no Assembly floor fight exposing how bad these 3 bills are, the initial votes were still close. With our goal of denying these bills a majority vote (41 yes votes), we successfully pulled off more than a dozen Democrats; so AB 2098 was declared “passed” by just 5 votes, AB 1797 by only 2 votes, and AB 2223 by 4 votes). However, by the end of the session, votes had changed, both sides coalesced, and vote disparities increased.

See the final votes (members are allowed to change their votes by the end of the session as long as they don’t change whether the bill passed or not): AB 2098 | AB 1797 | AB 2223

The future
At this point, the only way I see to defeat these 3 awful bills is IF they’re amended in the State Senate, are sent back to the Assembly floor for concurrence votes — but this time, Republicans lovingly raise their microphones to shockingly expose and defeat these bills.

However, if AB 2098, AB 1797, and AB 2223 pass the entire California Legislature in August, and are signed by Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom, what then? I strongly believe there should be constitutional lawsuits filed against them all. Here’s why:

AB 2098 squashing medical independence on the “Covid vaccine” is an unconstitutional regulation of speech. By targeting doctors for Covid-related “misinformation or disinformation,” AB 2098 unconstitutionally targets professional speech. As the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Pickup v. Brown (2013), “…doctor-patient communications about medical treatment receive substantial First Amendment protection.” 

The appellate court also stated, “where a professional is engaged in a public dialogue, First Amendment protection is at its greatest. Thus, for example, a doctor who publicly advocates a treatment that the medical establishment considers outside the mainstream, or even dangerous, is entitled to robust protection under the First Amendment—just as any person is.” 

The author of AB 2098 knows his bill might be unconstitutional: On April 20, he amended AB 2098 to make its provisions “severable … if any provision of this act or its application is held invalid.”

AB 1797 segregating Californians by vaccine status, race and ethnicity, violates Californians’ privacy rights by eliminating confidentiality. 
By requiring, as the Legislative Counsel’s Digest of AB 1797 describes, “health care providers and other agencies, including schools, childcare facilities, family childcare homes, and county human services agencies to disclose the specified immunization information,” this bill violates the constitutional privacy rights of many Californians.

In 1972, California voters overwhelmingly added “privacy” to the list of “inalienable rights” guaranteed by Article 1, Section 1 of the California Constitution. In 1975, the California Supreme Court, in White v. Davis, relied on California’s newly-affirmed constitutional right of privacy to prevent police officers from posing as college students and gathering intelligence on what is said in the classroom when the intelligence gathered bore no relation to any suspected illegal activity.

As the court wrote: Moreover, the surveillance alleged in the complaint also constitutes a prima facie violation of the explicit “right of privacy” recently added to our state Constitution. As we point out, a principal aim of the constitutional provision is to limit the infringement upon personal privacy arising from the government’s increasing collection and retention of data relating to all facets of an individual’s life. 

By violating Californians’ medical privacy – in the classroom and otherwise – AB 1797 is in direct conflict with the California Constitution.

AB 2223 robs already-born babies of their constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws. 
Since this isn’t about abortion, but infanticide — which is murder — we can foresee a federal constitutional lawsuit demanding the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee that “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” If should be tried, if there’s indeed a pro-life majority at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Thank you again for fighting these awful bills through your phone calls or by donating to SaveCalifornia.com. We had to try, and I’m grateful you did your part. But most Assembly Democrats shirked their constitutional pledges and all the Republicans went mute.

Open your mouth for the speechless,
In the cause of all who are appointed to die.
Proverbs 31:8

If you faint in the day of adversity,
Your strength is small.
Deliver those who are drawn toward death,
And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter.
Proverbs 24:10-11

Best strategy to defeat infanticide bill, AB 2223

Tuesday, April 19, 2022, 8:53 pm | Randy Thomasson


The bad news is AB 2223 to legalize ‘perinatal death’ (infant death up to a month after birth) — in other words, legalizing infanticide — has passed two Democrat-controlled committees in the Assembly.

Due to all the opposition calls and opposition witnesses, it was hard to pass AB 2223 in the Assembly Health Committee April 19. Several Democrats had left the hearing, and probably the Capitol building, before 6pm. But AB 2223 sponsor Planned Parenthood and bill author Buffy Wicks of Oakland corralled them back — so all the Democrat committee members returned to vote yes for this infanticide bill. See our updated analysis

Yet the good news is AB 2223 might be defeated on the Assembly floor. Because Planned Parenthood abortionists aren’t on the floor, and the floor is where even Democrat members have traditionally been allowed to vote their conscience.

Who to call? SaveCalifornia.com has done the research for you. Below are the names and telephone numbers of 28 Assembly targets. These are Democrat assemblymembers who are either termed-out, new and untested, running in a new district, running in a formerly Republican district, or who have a history of sometimes abstaining on the most radical Democrat bills.

Here’s the math: If none of the Assembly’s 19 Republicans and 1 independent (former Republican Chad Mayes) vote for AB 2223, and if 17 of the current 59 Democrats abstain or vote no, this horrific bill will be defeated.

Instructions for calling

Unless you see your own assemblymember on this list below, please call only during non-business hours (8pm to 8am and weekends) and remain anonymous. The reason is so your calls will have impact and not be “trashed” (the Democrat legislators’ M.O. is to disregard every message not from their own constituents). By leaving anonymous voicemails only, the offices cannot reliably “trash” your calls, and you’ll “mix” in and be part of the flood of opposition calls.

Leave a strong voicemail message against AB 2223. Use your own words or our suggested message, such as: “Oppose AB 2223. This bill permits ‘perinatal deaths,’ which means permitting killing newborns up to a month after birth. Oppose AB 2223, which opens the door to infanticide.”

Source: The MedicineNet website definition of perinatal period is “starts at the 20th to 28th week of gestation and ends 1 to 4 weeks after birth.”

If you’re calling your own assemblymember, you should call during business hours, and identify yourself as living in his or her legislative district.

28 Assembly Democrat floor targets on infanticide bill, AB 2223

Their State Capitol offices and legislative district offices:
Joaquin Arambula of Fresno County 916-319-2031 and (559) 445-5532
Tasha Boerner-Horvath of north San Diego County 916-319-2076 and 760-434-7605
Ken Cooley of Sacramento County 916-319-2008 and 916-464-1910
Jim Cooper is running for sheriff of Sacramento County 916-319-2009 and 916-670-7888
Tom Daly of central Orange County 916-319-2069 and 714-939-8469
Mike Fong of Monterey Park to Arcadia in L.A. County 916-319-2049 and 323-264-4949
Eduardo Garcia of Imperial and Riverside counties 916-319-2056 and 760-347-2360
Mike Gipson of South-Central Los Angeles 916-319-2064 and 310-324-6408
Adam Gray is running for the new Central Valley congressional seat that includes West Modesto, Ceres, Patterson and Newman among other central and eastern Stanislaus County communities 916-319-2021 and 209-726-5465
Timothy Grayson of northeast Contra Costa County 916-319-2014 and 925-521-1511
Jacqui Irwin of southwest Ventura County 916-319-2044 and 805-482-1904
Brian Maienschein of north San Diego 916-319-2077 and 858-675-0077
Chad Mayes of Palm Springs/Yucca Valley/Yucaipa 916-319-2042 and 760-346-6342
Al Muratsuchi of the Los Angeles South Bay 916-319-2066 and 310-375-0691
Adrin Nazarian of Van Nuys 916-319-2046 and 818-376-4246
Patrick O’Donnell of Long Beach 916-319-2070 and 562-429-0470
Cottie Petrie-Norris of coastal Orange County 916-319-2074 and 949-251-0074
Sharon Quirk-Silva of Fullerton/Buena Park/Anaheim 916-319-2065 and 714-525-6515
James Ramos of Redlands/Loma Linda/Highland/north San Bernardino and Rancho Cucamonga 916-319-2040 and 909-476-5023
Eloise Reyes of San Bernardino/Rialto/Fontana 916-319-2047 and 909-381-3238
Luz Rivas of northeast San Fernando Valley 916-319-2039 and 818-504-3911
Robert Rivas of Monterey, San Benito, and San Cruz counties and Gilroy 916-319-2030 and 831-759-8676
Freddie Rodriguez of Ontario/Chino/Pomona 916-319-2052 and 909-902-9606
Blanca Rubio of Azusa/Glendora/Covina and other east L.A. County communities 916-319-2048 and 626-960-4457
Miguel Santiago of downtown Los Angeles 916-319-2053 and 213-620-4646
Rudy Salas is running for a new congressional seat covering parts of Fresno, Kern, Kings, and Tulare counties 916-319-2032 and 661-335-0302
Carlos Villapudua of Stockton and Tracy 916-319-2013 and 209-948-7479
Lori Wilson of Fairfield/Vacaville/Rio Vista/Antioch/Brentwood 916-319-2011

Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.

Psalm 127:3