Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Churches’ Category

Why the establishment doesn’t want you to see ‘Unplanned’

Monday, April 8, 2019, 11:10 am | Randy Thomasson

As “Unplanned” filled our eyes and ears on the big screen, I saw women in the audience grabbing Kleenex boxes. Similarly touched, my eyes got watery several times.

Afterward, in the theater corridor, I talked with a man who saw “Unplanned” with me. He said it’s obvious how abortion dehumanizes babies. He also said his wife is pro-abortion. I encouraged him to invite his wife to see “Unplanned” and to reward her with dinner out.

Before exiting the theater’s front doors, I talked with a wheelchair-bound theater employee. His slurred speech indicated he had cerebral palsy. I encouraged him to see “Unplanned” because there are evil forces that don’t want him to see it, and they’re the same dark forces who think it was wrong for him to be born. With a big grin on his face, he said he would see “Unplanned.”

After personally experiencing this historic film, I now know why the “progressive” Left is so opposed to teenage girls seeing “Unplanned.” It’s the very same reason why the “Motion Picture Association of America” (MPAA) slapped ‘Unplanned’ with an unfair R rating. You see, the Left just doesn’t want girls, aged 13, 14, 15, and 16, to see the truth about abortion. Yet the government schools tell these same girls they expect them to have sex and that abortion is acceptable.

Bottom line, they don’t want teenage girls to:

  • Recognize that the “fetus” is a separate person, not mere “tissue”
  • See the ultrasound of a baby in the womb, being killed via suction abortion
  • Witness the stomach-churning, blood-curdling effects of swallowing abortion pills
  • Observe the money-grubbing lies of Planned Parenthood abortionists
  • Remember the bloody reality of Planned Parenthood killing centers

Because if teenage girls — and their parents — saw these facts, there would be fewer abortions and more Planned Parenthood abortuaries would close. And Planned Parenthood wouldn’t like that, would they?

You can’t watch “Unplanned” without opposing abortion. I think its high point was showing a baby in the womb (via computer animation) being dismembered and suctioned out in a tube. Not since seeing a real abortion in 1984’s The Silent Scream have I or so many people seen an abortion depicted on the big screen, as in “Unplanned.” I was again shocked by the eviscerating inhumanity of abortion.

Another thing that “Unplanned” impressed upon me is how Planned Parenthood abortionists are trying to redefine femininity to mean women should kill their babies, instead of give birth to their babies. That’s the whole point of Planned Parenthood’s killing business. And it’s the whole point of the color pink at Planned Parenthood political rallies with female Democrat politicians at their side.

What’s more, “Unplanned” strongly suggests that being pro-abortion is a soul problem — that it requires industrial-strength denial to support the killing of innocent boys and girls, in the same place all of us once were — our mother’s womb. Yet “Unplanned” unleashes a barrage of compassionate facts against this denial, opening the mind to Planned Parenthood’s barbaric practices.

Spiritually, the devil is very happy with abortion in America. As the Savior of the world, Jesus Christ, said in John 10:10, “The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy.” “Unplanned” can help Americans repent of supporting abortion and voting for abortion. Otherwise, how can God bless America? As Creator God repeatedly says in His Word, the bloodguilt of a nation is a terrible sin. 

If you’ve been mortified by photos or videos of piles of dead bodies and the crematoriums at Nazi concentration camps, you can’t help but sense the same demonic spirit of Planned Parenthood that’s seen in “Unplanned.” It’s sobering to realize that the U.S. abortion industry has murdered 61 million pre-born babies since 1973’s Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court opinions.

Please see “Unplanned.” You can boost its box-office numbers and help expose Planned Parenthood’s modern-day atrocities. You’ll be energized in your pro-life, pro-family values. And if you take them with you, most persons who call themselves “pro-choice” will have their minds forever changed.

“When I’m asked today what someone might have said to get me to change my mind about having either abortion, I tell them it would be this: ‘What do you think would disappoint your parents most? To find out that you’d gotten pregnant, or to learn that you had taken the life of their grandchild?'”
Abby Johnson, Unplanned: The Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader’s Eye-Opening Journey Across the Life Line

Mandating an abortionist’s phone number on student ID cards?

Wednesday, March 6, 2019, 3:39 pm | Randy Thomasson

APRIL 10 UPDATE: AB 624 mandating an abortionist’s phone number on student ID cards late today PASSED the Democrat-controlled California State Assembly Committee. Religious junior high and high schools HAVE BEEN EXEMPTED via the author’s amendment, but religious colleges, universities, and seminaries HAVE NOT. This bad bill promoting abortion and compelling objectionable speech now goes to the Assembly Higher Education Committee.

There’s a very bad bill — ridiculous, unconstitutional, anti-parent, anti-religion, and deathly — introduced by a very pro-abortion California state legislator who’s received lots of money from Planned Parenthood abortionists.

Democrat Jesse Gabriel of Assembly District 45 in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley has authored AB 624 to require an abortionist’s phone number on student ID cards at every junior high, high school, and college campus in California, including Christian- and Catholic-format schools and universities.

The bill states that “a public school, including a charter school, or a private school, that serves pupils in any of grades 7 to 12” and “a public or private institution of higher education”…”shall have printed on either side of the student identification cards”…”a sexual or reproductive health hotline.” NOTE: “A sexual or reproductive health hotline” is obvious code for Planned Parenthood abortionists.

Religious schools are in the Democrat politicians’ crosshairs again. Yet AB 624’s blatant violation of religious freedom and free speech (which even liberal politicians remember as “separation of church and state”) isn’t allowed in the USA. Because the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling NIFLA v. Becerra prohibited government from compelling private organizations (pro-life crisis pregnancy centers) to support pro-abortion messages.

But neither the U.S. Constitution nor the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court matter to Planned Parenthood abortionists or their bought-and-owned politicians (all the Democrats in the California Legislature are pro-abortion and pro-Planned-Parenthood). They want free advertising for new abortion customers as young as 12 years old.

So, AB 624 and its Democrat author have no problem forcing Christian- and Catholic-format junior highs, high schools, and universities to put an abortionist’s phone number on their student ID cards. This way, no parent and no school administrator will know about the killing of pre-born babies and the emotional scarring of teenage girls.

NEW ACTION

1. Leave this message with the 9 Democrats and 3 Republican on the Assembly Higher Education Committee: “Oppose AB 624 which mandates an abortion provider’s phone number on student ID cards, including at faith-based colleges, universities, and seminaries. This bill blatantly violates the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in NIFLA v. Becerra, which said California can’t force private institutions to support abortion messages that they disagree with.”

2. Pray to God in Jesus Christ’s Name that He would send angels to California’s pro-abortion Democrat state legislators (3/4ths of the State Legislature) to bother them to NOT support AB 624.

3. Tell all your friends that Democrat politicians are unfortunately pro-abortion and this tyrannical bill is more evidence of this. Planned Parenthood only endorses pro-abortion Democrats, as shown here and here.

The California Legislature included in its official history the congratulatory statement that the Act was part of California’s legacy of “forward thinking.” App. 38–39. But it is not forward thinking to force individuals to “be an instrument for fostering public adherence to an ideological point of view [they] fin[d] unacceptable.” Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U. S. 705, 715 (1977). It is forward thinking to begin by reading the First Amendment as ratified in 1791; to understand the history of authoritarian government as the Founders then knew it; to confirm that history since then shows how relentless authoritarian regimes are in their attempts to stifle free speech; and to carry those lessons onward as we seek to preserve and teach the necessity of freedom of speech for the generations to come. Governments must not be allowed to force persons to express a message contrary to their deepest convictions. Freedom of speech secures freedom of thought and belief. This law imperils those liberties.
Justice Anthony Kennedy in NIFLA v. Becerra

Is it time to replace the California Republican Party?

Friday, November 30, 2018, 11:12 am | Randy Thomasson


It’s a radical question and I’m “just asking.” But is it time for moral Californians to consider replacing the California Republican Party?

Please understand that I am NOT calling for an immoral political party that is devoid of moral values and socially conservative values. That’s what I’m afraid liberal Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Chad Mayes — and Mayes’ good friend Kristin Olsen — want.

To be clear, I want a political party to belong to that is constitutional and pro-family, and does two new things: 1) expose the chronic problems of California created by the Democrat politicians, 2) articulately explain evidence-based, practical solutions that help responsible Californians and their families.

Over the past few decades, a growing number of California conservatives have already personally left the Republican Party, by registering with the American Independent Party, the Libertarian Party, or as “No Party Preference” or “NPP.”

I’m one of them, since I’m much more constitutional and conservative than the current California Republican Party. You see, many of their elected legislators don’t speak out for, but increasingly vote against, family values.

For example, a growing number of Republicans in Sacramento are voting for (and none are speaking out against) the transsexual, cross-dressing agenda to “advance the cause of [LGBT] equality,” and labeling pro-family opposition as “prejudice and discrimination”:

State Senate: SR 111 text | 6 Republicans voted yes, including Republican Leader Pat Bates

State Assembly: HR 109 text with 5 Republicans coauthoring | 2 Republicans voted yes in committee

The last Republican presidential candidate to win California’s winner-take-all electoral votes was George H.W. Bush in 1988.

The last time that Republicans gained seats in the California State Legislature was 1994, on the coattails of Newt Gingrich’s well-articulated “Contract with America.”

But since then, it’s been downhill for Republicans in Sacramento due to lack of messages that hit home with voters.

Fast forward to 2018. Before Election Day, there were only 25 Republicans in the 80-member State Assembly and 14 Republicans in the 40-member State Senate.

But today, California Republicans are weaker than ever. The November 2018 election handed Republicans losses of 4 Assembly seats, 3 state Senate seats, and 7 U.S. House seats. It’s a new low for the Republican Party in California.

Yes, there was a “blue wave” in California, powered by pro-Democrat unions and bureaucracies, and helped by politically-irrelevant pastors who can’t seem to even remind their congregations to “remember to vote.”

This is a problem that’s motivating me to think deeply, and I hope you’re thinking too.

Not just about “Republican” or “Democrat”

Because, as you know, it’s not just about “Republican” versus “Democrat” seats. It’s about what our elected representatives actually stand for, which determines how they vote, which determines the laws we have to live under. Because values matter.

As a family values leader in California since 1994, I’m grieved about the growing number of Republican officeholders that vote against The Natural Family.

Indeed, several of the California Republicans who were booted out of office in November had voted in favor of the unnatural, unhealthy, unbiblical, tyrannical homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda once or more:

Assemblywoman Catharine Baker of Contra Costa County*
State Senator Andy Vidak of Hanford*
Former assemblywoman Young Kim of Fullerton*
State Senator Janet Nguyen of Garden Grove**
Congressman Jeff Denham of Modesto***
Congressman Steve Knight of Palmdale***

These types of Republicans are a turn-off to principled, pro-family voters.

* Do these California Republicans deserve to win or lose?
5 pro-‘LGBTIQ’ Republicans join Democrats to further brainwash schoolchildren

** Nguyen at least twice voted in favor of transsexuality, to “advance the cause of [LGBT] equality,” and saying pro-family opposition was “prejudice and discrimination”
SR 46 text | votes / SB 111 text | votes

*** These are the 24 Republicans who think the Pentagon should pay for transgender surgeries

Republican numbers — and values — are down

In light of the painful reality of Republicans losing seats in California (and abandoning tried-and-true family values), some are calling for a brand-new party to replace the Republican Party in California. I’m open to it as well.

On the one hand, a new conservative party could win on issues without the Republican label. If, for example, it were the “People’s Party” or the “Family Party,” moral or common-sense or conservative voters who’ve been trained to hate “Republican” might just vote for it. I’m thinking about Latinos and blacks who are either Catholic or Protestant churchgoers.

On the other hand, given the likely excesses of Gavin Newsom and the 2/3rds majority Democrats, could the California Republican Party return with strength in 2020? It would require aggressive voter registration efforts and a strong, articulate message from both the Republican Party and from individual Republican candidates.

But the question about the California Republican Party’s viability is a valid one. Before the election, California voter registration numbers had Democrats at 44%, Republicans at 25%, and “No Party Preference” at 27%.

Can Republicans get better and stronger and win in 2020? Or it is time to tip over the game board and “get a new game with a new name”? As I’ve written earlier, California is in a dynamic, the Democrat-union grip can indeed weaken, and liberal policies are ripe for taking down.

Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?
Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?
Psalm 94:16