Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Good Government’ Category

Which of Newsom’s unconstitutional bill signings can be struck down?

Saturday, October 1, 2022, 2:47 pm | Randy Thomasson

By the end of his September 30 signing deadline, tyrannical Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom had signed hundreds of foolish, unconstitutional, and downright evil bills.

I’m reporting this not to depress you, but so you become so concerned that you’ll share this information with your friends and reasonable acquaintances, so they’ll become energized to vote this election.

While the final week of bill signings saw Newsom’s vetoes of two big, anti-parent bills — SB 70 and AB 1940 (he vetoed them because of their huge, ongoing costs), he signed the rest of the anti-parent bills, and many unconstitutional bills.

Here are the big ones that could and should be struck down:

AB 587 pressures social media companies to censor speech the Democrat-controlled government doesn’t like, such as, the truth about “Covid vaccines,” the harm of the “LGBTQIA+” agenda, the reality of election fraud, and the facts about life in the womb. AB 587 actually forces online platforms to report to the government whether they are blocking “Hate speech or racism,” “Extremism or radicalization,” “Disinformation or misinformation,” and, if so, how. These subjective terms are designed to censor your free speech, but the supporters of AB 587 think they can avoid constitutional scrutiny by forcing social media platforms to do their dirty work. Yet their fingerprints are all over this attack on the First Amendment. The larger conservative or free-speech-supporting platforms, such as Gab, Telegram, Truth Social, Rumble, Gettr, and Frank Speech should sue in federal court to repel this unconstitutional attack upon them and us.

AB 1797 will create a statewide vaccine registry, mandating most Californians’ vaccine status and “race and ethnicity” be reported to the government by “health care providers and other agencies, including schools, childcare facilities, family childcare homes, and county human services agencies.” AB 1797 is ripe for both a state and federal lawsuit, because it violates the California State Constitution’s explicit right to privacy. There’s even a California Supreme Court ruling from 1975 prohibiting any surveillance of Californians when there’s no suspected illegal activity. In addition, there’s California’s voter-approved prohibition of racial preferences (Proposition 209 from 1996). There are also federal medical privacy laws.

AB 2098 will punish doctors who have studied and tell their patients the facts about Covid (the non-threat of the “variants,”) the efficacy of natural and traditional therapeutics, and the risk of injury and death from the unsafe “Covid vaccines.” Because AB 2098 tramples medical ethics, informed consent, and the doctor-patient relationship, it must be sued and struck down in federal court. Specifically, AB 2098 infringes on the fundamental guarantee of freedom of speech in the U.S. and California constitutions. And professionally, it destroys the ethic of a second opinion — when a doctor disagrees with another doctor or even differs from so-called “consensus.”

AB 2223 permitting the killing of already-born infants and toddlers by prohibiting and punishing investigations by authorities of deaths occurring during the “perinatal period” (which a world-renowned child development authority said extends “18 to 24 months after the birth of the child.” This infanticide bill AB 2223 deserves a federal lawsuit based on the 14th Amendment‘s guarantee that States cannot “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.” Who are the constitutional California district attorneys and sheriff-coroners who will sue AB 2223 on its face?

AB 2229 will discriminate against law enforcement officer candidates (police officers, sheriff’s deputies, California Highway Patrol officers) who are practicing Christians, Catholics, Muslims, and conservative Jews. As the Legislative Counsel describes AB 2229: “Existing law requires peace officers in this state to meet specified minimum standards, including, among other requirements, that peace officers be evaluated by a physician and surgeon or psychologist and found to be free from any physical, emotional, or mental condition that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer. This bill would require that evaluation to include bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation.” According to current California law: “Sexual orientation” means heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality … “Gender” means sex, and includes a person’s gender identity and gender expression. “Gender expression” means a person’s gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.” AB 2229 needs to be sued in federal court by law enforcement candidates who will be, or have been, discriminated against because of their religious values, on the strength of the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act.

SB 107 empowers “LGBTQIA+” activists to legally kidnap and mutilate kids. If parents in other states want to help their boys or girls overcome sexual confusion, “LGBTQIA+” groups will scheme to bring these children to California, then their attorneys will go to court and use SB 107 to give California “jurisdiction” over the children, and then California tax-funded hormone injections and “sex change” surgeries will follow. “Counseling” is part of this process, during which SB 107 will convince biological girls they’re “boys” and biological boys they’re “girls” (SB 107 calls this “gender-affirming mental health care”), then the hormone injections and irreversible “sex change” operations (which SB 107 calls “gender-affirming health care”) will follow. Federal lawsuits should be filed by state attorney generals in Republican states for this blatant violation of parental consent laws and other laws in their states. And it might require the U.S. Supreme Court to deliver a clarifying parental rights decision.

Other anti-parent bills that were signed — SB 1184, SB 1419, and SB 1479 — probably have no lawsuit potential (unless SCOTUS delivers a crystal-clear parental decision that California parents can use to regain their rights).

Religious hospitals might become exempt from SB 923‘s tyrannical transsexual indoctrination of health care providers if they sue and win in federal court on religious-freedom grounds. But pro-abortion bills, such as SB 1375 permitting nurses to kill pre-born babies and the 11 other pro-abortion bills Newsom signed, will survive all legal challenges because pro-abortion Democrat and RINO governors have built an unconstitutional, pro-abortion California Supreme Court, which callously guards “abortion rights.”

Overall, Newsom signed 997 bills this year, which were from Democrat authors or Democrat committees around 90% of the time.

One of his worst vetoes was of a Republican bill that Democrat-run committees actually passed, a bill to limit the governor’s emergency powers. Newsom arrogantly vetoed it.

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan.

Proverbs 29:2

Because of the transgression of a land, many are its princes;
But by a man of understanding and knowledge
Right will be prolonged.

Proverbs 28:2

Celebrate the blatantly anti-parent bill SB 866 is dead

Wednesday, August 31, 2022, 12:25 pm | Randy Thomasson

Celebrate that SB 866, the most blatantly obvious of the anti-parent bills in the Democrat-controlled California Legislature, is dead for the year! Thank you to everyone who called in support of God-given parental rights and in opposition to dangerous, coerced injections!

“Parenting is the most important responsibility most of us will ever face, and none of us does it perfectly.”
Famous U.S. Christian evangelist Billy Graham (1918-2018)

5 California Republican congressmen for ‘homosexual marriages’

Saturday, July 23, 2022, 10:25 am | Randy Thomasson

SaveCalifornia.com provides this solely for educational purposes
and does not support or oppose candidates for public office.

It was shocking to see new political prostitutes emerge in the Republican Party on July 19. Because five U.S. House Republicans from California voted in favor of unnatural, unhealthy, unbiblical, tyrannical homosexual “marriage.” The question now facing you and your friends is, do they deserve your support this 2022 election?

If you live in the new districts in which these five pro-homosexual “marriage” Republicans are running, it’s your decision whether to keep supporting them. But consider this:

1. The “yes” votes of Ken Calvert, Mike Garcia, Darrell Issa, Jay Obernolte, and David Valadao are against the natural familyagainst our U.S. Constitutionagainst the Word of Godagainst good health, and against the Republican Party platform. What’s more, they’re challenging you to support the unnatural, unhealthy, unbiblical “LGBTQIA+” too — because these pro-perversity Republicans are still asking conservatives to vote for them.

2. These five Republicans’ pro-perversity votes are symptomatic of slavish fear of the Tyrannical Left, instead of respectful fear of God or love for impressionable children. To flip from being pro-man-woman-marriage and pro-traditional-family in an election year, in the general election cycle where they might be beaten, is indicative of fear, not moral principle (for how can a principle be moral if it violates the commands of Holy God?). Don’t we need constitutional fighters, who will do what’s right under pressure, not cave and sell-out?

3. Homosexual “marriage” is a harmful role model for impressionable children. Because not only are most male homosexual relationships “open,” their behavior has very high rates of sexually-transmitted diseases. And children are being roped into this, by the government schools or other strangers. What’s more, state schools aim to “groom” children not just into homosexual behavior, but also into cross-dressing and “sex changes.” Most of all, promoting homosexual “marriage” all the more rapidly erodes the difference between Right and Wrong on every moral issue. With fewer and fewer moral absolutes, our culture becomes exponentially more confused, divided, and dangerous.

4. This is not the first time three of these five Republicans have voted very wrong:

  • Also in 2017, David Valadao abstained on this pro-family amendment that would have banned taxpayer-funded, military “sex changes.” And in January 2021, Valadao was the only California U.S. House Republican to vote “yes” to impeach former president Donald Trump (for the second time).
  • In 2018, as a California state assemblyman, Jay Obernolte voted “yes” on AB 2439 to establish an “official” State of California “LGBTQ Veterans Memorial.” Then, in 2019, Obernolte voted “yes” on AB 711 to force schools to retroactively falsify a student’s “sex” on former student records. That same year, Obernolte abstained on ACR 99, a Democrat resolution blaming pastors and religious leaders for “LGBTQIA+” suicides. In 2020, Obernolte’s liberal positions were exposed by his conservative opponent, Tim Donnelly.
  • Back in 1994, Ken Calvert was publicly exposed for having sex in his car with a known prostitute. Still, in light of Calvert’s strong pro-family record since then, I was surprised he caved to the “homosexual marriage” agenda this month.
  • I am most surprised by Mike Garcia’s capitulation to darkness. Garcia votes pro-life on abortion and calls himself a Christian. And in 2021, he admirably voted against putting homosexuality and transsexuality into federal employment and housing law, stating “equality that comes at the expense of or as a detriment to other free citizens is contrary to American ideals.” Yet now, succumbing in fear to “LGBTQIA+” activists is Garcia’s inexplicable, head-shaking act.

5. With the strong expectation that Republicans will win back majority control of the U.S. House of Representatives this year by capturing most of the 33 identified toss-up seats, they’ll still take away Nancy Pelosi’s gavel even if California’s five sell-out “Republicans” are defeated.

So whether you live in the new District 22 from Hanford to Bakersfield (where David Valadao is running), or in the new District 48 from Murrieta to Santee, then south to the Mexican border (where Darrell Issa is running), or in the new District 23 which includes Ridgecrest, California City, Barstow, Baker, Victorville, Big Bear City, and Twentynine Palms (where Jay Obernolte is running), or in the new District 41 from Corona to Indio (where Ken Calvert is running), or in the new District 27 which includes Santa Clara, Palmdale, and Lancaster (where Mike Garcia is running), now you are more informed and the decision is yours. See the new California congressional district map

A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no “gay” gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue…
“‘Gay’ gene claim suddenly vanishes,” WND.com, May 12, 2009

“Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them…”
Moses’ father-in-law Jethro in Exodus 18:21

“When Christians face two clearly immoral options, we cannot rationalize a vote for immorality or injustice just because we deem the alternative to be worse,” Moore said. “The Bible tells us we will be held accountable not only for the evil deeds we do but also when we ‘give approval to those who practice them,’ (Romans 1:32).
Russell Moore, “Should Christians Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils?”