SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Homeschooling’ Category

A screaming child is an untrained child

Thursday, August 3, 2023, 1:27 pm | Randy Thomasson

Are you tired of hearing squalling, screaming kids throwing tantrums?

Temper tantrums that happen more than once are not “natural” or a “phase.” Now, temper tantrums persist because of parents who refuse to take authority and discipline their children for rebellion.

The Word of God in Proverbs 13:24 tells us: He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly.

The problem is worldly parents not taking authority over their children. You can’t reason with a young child. But temporarily pain for blatant rebellion trains younger children to have self-control and respect for authority.

As renowned Christian child psychology expert Dr. James Dobson has written in his 1978 classic, The Strong-Willed Child, from which his child disciplining tips have been adapted into the 1986 pocketbook, Temper Your Child’s Tantrums:

“Corporal punishment in the hands of a loving parent…is a teaching tool by which harmful behavior is inhibited.”

“A spanking is to be reserved for use in response to willful defiance, whenever it occurs.”

“If punishment doesn’t influence human behavior, then why is the issuance of speeding tickets by police so effective in controlling traffic on a busy street? Why, then, do homeowners rush to get their tax payments in the mail to avoid a penalty for being late? If punishment has no power, why does a well-deserved spanking often turn a sullen little troublemaker into a sweet and loving angel?”

“A child is fully capable of discerning whether his parent is conveying love or hatred. This is why the youngster who knows he deserves a spanking appears almost relieved when it finally comes. Rather than being insulted by the discipline, he understands its purpose and appreciates the control it gives him over his own impulses.”

Want to stop the tantrums, or learn how to raise your kids right, or both? Get these eye-opening books by Dr. James Dobson:

The New Dare to Discipline Ebay | Abebooks
The New Strong-Willed Child Ebay | Abebooks
The New Strong-Willed Child Workbook Ebay | Abebooks
Temper Your Child’s Tantrums pocket guides Ebay | Abebooks

If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
The Bible, Hebrews 12:7-11

EMERGENCY: Oppose anti-parent AB 665 on Senate floor

Thursday, June 22, 2023, 4:18 pm | Randy Thomasson


AUGUST 21, 2023 UPDATE: Are you encouraged to realize the horrible, anti-parent-bill AB 665 has been stuck on the State Senate floor for nearly two months? The next opportunity for the Senate to vote is this Thursday.

Which is another big reason for you to squeeze off some strategic, anonymous voicemail messages. See our previous alert below and act now!

* * *

You’ve heard that AB 665, permitting the anti-family Left to manipulate pre-teens and teens to leave their parents, has passed its Senate policy committee. Now, target the California State Senate floor with new information and strategic action. Please participate with SaveCalifornia.com in weighing down and weakening, and perhaps defeating, AB 665.
AB 665’s author lied about parental rights
The bill author, Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo of Los Angeles County (her district includes Glendale, Los Feliz, Echo Park, and East Los Angeles), lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 20 when she claimed AB 665 was really about “homeless youth.” Where is AB 665’s requirement that a minor be “homeless”? This “homeless” condition is NOT in the bill.

Another big lie was when Carrillo told committee members, “It is important that we realize that this does not change existing law as to the parental rights of a child.” But that’s not what the Legislative Counsel’s office says.

Instead, the Legislative Counsel’s Digest reports the main point of AB 665 is “removing [from current law] the additional requirement that, in order to consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, [the specific condition that] the minor must present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to themselves or to others, or be the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.”

AB 665 therefore eliminates existing parental consent before children can be taken away to a “residential shelter” and given drugs (“mental health treatment”).

(b) A minor who is 12 years of age or older may consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if both of the following requirements are satisfied:
(1) The minor, in the opinion of the attending professional person, is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services.
(2) The minor (A) would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to self or to others without the mental health treatment or counseling or residential shelter services, or (B) is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.

(b) A minor who is 12 years of age or older may consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if the minor, in the opinion of the attending professional person, is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services.

By deleting existing law that prohibits taking away children from home unless “The minor (A) would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to self or to others without the mental health treatment or counseling or residential shelter services, or (B) is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse,” AB 665 erases parental consent in this section of Family Code.

AB 665 would permit children 12 years and up, who are neither harming themselves nor are victims of abuse, to “consent” to “mental health treatment or counseling services” or to go live at a “residential shelter.” Again, current law requires parental consent, but this bill wipes out parental consent.

AB 665 would replace the existing law’s two exceptions by letting children as young as 12 somehow “consent” to “treatment,” “counseling,” and a secret “residential shelter,” without parental involvement, parental consent, or even requiring proof of efforts to notify parents, if a “professional person” (under AB 665, this could be non-experts, such as “a psychological trainee, an associate clinical social worker, a social work intern, a clinical counselor trainee”) simply opines the minor is “mature enough to participate intelligently.” By deleting the current law’s harm or abuse conditions, AB 665 eliminates parental consent prior to children being taken away to live a “residential shelter” to receive “mental health treatment.”
AB 665’s sponsor lied about parental notification
And Carrillo’s chief witness lied when she told the Senate Judiciary Committee parents will be notified, saying, “This bill does nothing to make the existing parental notification that’s currently written in the law, so any providers of residential shelter services or of outpatient mental health care are required to go to their best efforts to notify parents that the young person is receiving the treatment.”

Yet the text of AB 665 neither requires parental notification nor any consequences for failing to notify parents. Look at all these “holes” in the bill:

(c) A professional person offering residential shelter services, whether as an individual or as a representative of an entity specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), shall make their best efforts to notify the parent or guardian of the provision of services.

Our analysis: “Best efforts” is not defined. There’s no notification form, or even notification deadline, in AB 665. Parental notification isn’t real in this bill, which eliminates its so-called notification requirement if one believes it’s “inappropriate.”

(d) The mental health treatment or counseling of a minor authorized by this section shall include involvement of the minor’s parent or guardian unless the professional person who is treating or counseling the minor, after consulting with the minor, determines that the involvement would be inappropriate. The professional person who is treating or counseling the minor shall state in the client record whether and when the person attempted to contact the minor’s parent or guardian, and whether the attempt to contact was successful or unsuccessful, or the reason why, in the professional person’s opinion, it would be inappropriate to contact the minor’s parent or guardian.

Our analysis: Legally, “involvement” of a parent is not requiring parental consent. To ignore parents, a “professional person” merely needs to opine that parental “involvement would be inappropriate” and simply make a note why they didn’t, or why they thought it was “inappropriate” to even try to “contact the minor’s parent or guardian.” Again, parental notification is not required by AB 665.
TAKE ACTION: Target the State Senate floor
It’s up to concerned Californians to tell the truth about AB 665, which is on the Senate floor and could come up for a vote as soon as Monday, June 26.

ACT NOW! Please call 1) your own state senator, and 2) up to 21 “swing-vote” Democrats.

Call your own state senator (either during business hours or by leaving an after-hours voicemail) and here, identify yourself and where you live. Yet for the 21 “swing-vote” Democrats we’ve identified, leave only brief, anonymous voicemail messages Thursday evening and Friday morning (7pm to 8am) and all this weekend (Saturday and Sunday).

Leave your message, saying, “I’m calling to urge you to oppose AB 665. The bill author lied in committee. AB 665 does not require the prior condition of homelessness, yet blatantly eliminates parental consent, doesn’t even require parental notification, and threatens families statewide. Vote NO on AB 665!”

The California State Senate is composed of 40 senators, of which 32 are Democrats. Bills such as AB 665 require 21 votes to pass. Here are the names and numbers of half of the Democrat caucus members to call, listed from in priority from 32 down to below 21:

IMPORTANT NOTE: The following list of “swing-vote” Democrats includes 6 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who’ve already voted yes on AB 665. However, they could easily change their votes on the Senate floor, due to new information about how the bill author and bill sponsor deceived them and how AB 665 clearly erases parental rights.

32. Melissa Hurtado (family area, barely “won” reelection, voted NO on SB 866 last year)
916-651-4016 and 661-395-2620

31. Dave Min (in somewhat conservative area, his worsening reputation, abstained on SB 866 and SB 33, is running for more conservative U.S. House seat)
916-651-4037 and 949-223-5472

30. Richard Roth (abstained on SB 866, has abstained on other bills, from somewhat conservative area, termed out in 2024)
916-651-4031 and 951-680-6750

29. Bob Archuleta (family man, abstained on SB 866, has abstained on other bills)
916-651-4030 and 562-406-1001

28. Benjamin Allen (abstained on SB 866 last year, questioned AB 665)
916-651-4024 and 310-318-6994

27. Anna Caballero (family area, has abstained on SB 866 and other bills)
916-651-4014 and 559-264-3070

26. Henry Stern (abstained on SB 866 last year)
916-651-4027 and 818-876-3352

25. Angelique Ashby (new, untested, calls herself a Christian)
916-651-4008 and 916-651-1529

24. Tom Umberg (abstained on SB 866 last year)
916-651-4034 and 714-558-3785

23. Susan Rubio (abstained on SB 866 last year)
916-651-4022 and 909-469-1110

22. Marie Alvarado-Gil (new, from somewhat conservative area)
916-651-4004 and 916-933-8680

21. Catherine Blakespear (new, from somewhat conservative area)
916-651-4038 and 760-642-0809

– – – If AB 665 does not receive 21 yes votes, it will be defeated – – –

20. Monique Limón (abstained on SB 407initially didn’t support SB 866
916-651-4019 and 805-988-1940

19. Anthony Portantino (abstained on SR 33 pushing “LGBTQ+ Pride Month”)
916-651-4025 | 818-409-0400

18. Aisha Wahab (new, Muslim, misses parents who died when she was a child)
916-651-4410 and 510-794-3900

17. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (new)
916-651-4028 and 213-745-6656

16. María Elena Durazo (wild card)
916-651-4026 and 213-483-9300

15. Lena Gonzalez (wild card)
916-651-4033 and 323-277-4560

14. Steve Glazer (wild card)
916-651-4007 and 925-754-1461

13. Bill Dodd (wild card)
916-651-4003 and 707-224-1990

12. Steve Padilla (an open homosexual, yet represents strongly “pro-family,” largely Hispanic Imperial County)
916-651-4018 and 760-335-3442

PA’RENT, noun [Latin parens, from pario, to produce or bring forth. The regular participle of pario is pariens, and parens is the regular participle of pareo, to appear.]
1. A father or mother; he or she that produces young. The duties of parents to their children are to maintain, protect and educate them.
When parents are wanting in authority, children are wanting in duty.
Noah Webster, 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

URGENT: AB 659 Assembly floor targets — please call now

Saturday, May 20, 2023, 5:08 pm | Randy Thomasson
Thank you for caring about children, parental rights, health, and your God-given liberties!

If you want to see the ineffective, harmful, tyrannical Gardasil bill (AB 659) stopped on the Assembly floor, and if you’ve already called your own assemblymember and Democrat Akilah Weber, here are a bunch of “swing votes” who need a flood of calls this weekend. Because the Assembly floor vote on AB 659 could be as soon as Monday afternoon!

In the 80-member California Assembly, there are 62 Democrats (a 3/4ths supermajority). Because a majority vote to pass bills is 41, our side must pull off at least 22 Democrats.

Please leave anonymous voicemails this weekend and by 8am Monday for some or all of the deciding votes and “swing votes” that SaveCalifornia.com has identified.

Anonymous, because messages where you reveal you live outside the district will be “trashed.” So be wise, strategic, and anonymous when you leave voicemails anytime this weekend. If you can participate, your calls should take less than a minute each!

Tell these Democrat assemblymembers, “Oppose AB 659, which falsely claims risky Gardasil shots are mandated. Stop misleading children and young adults and their families — defeat this dishonest bill.”


Dawn Addis (916) 319-2030 Capitol office | (805) 549-3001 district office
Jasmeet Bains (916) 319-2035 Capitol office | (661) 335-0302 district office
Juan Carrillo (916) 319-2039 Capitol office | (661) 266-3908 district office
Damon Connolly (916) 319-2012 Capitol office | (415) 479-4920 district office
Gregg Hart (916) 319-2037 Capitol office | (805) 564-1649 district office
Josh Lowenthal (916) 319-2069 Capitol office | (562) 429-0470 district office
Stephanie Nguyen (916) 319-2010 Capitol office | (916) 670-7888 district office
Liz Ortega (916) 319-2020 Capitol office | (510) 583-8818 district office
Blanca Pacheco (916) 319-2064 Capitol office | (562) 861-5803 district office
Diane Papan (916) 319-2021 Capitol office | (650) 349-2200 district office
Gail Pellerin (916) 319-2028 Capitol office | (831) 425-1503 district office
Pilar Schiavo (916) 319-2040 Capitol office | (661) 286-1565 district office
Esmeralda Soria (916) 319-2027 Capitol office | (209) 726-5465 district office
Avelino Valencia (916) 319-2068 Capitol office | (714) 939-8469 district office

Tasha Boerner (916) 319-2077 Capitol office | (760) 434-7605 district office
Eduardo Garcia (916) 319-2036 Capitol office | (760) 347-2360 district office
Timothy Grayson (916) 319-2015 Capitol office | (925) 521-1511 district office
Brian Maienschein (916) 319-2076 Capitol office | (858) 675-0760 district office
Sharon Quirk-Silva (916) 319-2067 Capitol office | (714) 525-6515 district office
Cottie Petrie-Norris (916) 319-2073 Capitol office | (949) 251-0074 district office
Carlos Villapudua (916) 319-2013 Capitol office | (209) 948-7479 district office

David Alvarez (916) 319-2080 Capitol office | (619) 498-8580 district office
Joaquin Arambula (916) 319-2031 Capitol office | (559) 445-5532 district office
Steve Bennett (916) 319-2038 Capitol office | (805) 485-4745 district offic
Isaac Bryan (916) 319-2055 Capitol office | (310) 641-5410 district office
Lisa Calderon (916) 319-2056 Capitol office | (562) 692-5858 district offic
Sabrina Cervantes (916) 319-2058 Capitol office | (951) 371-6860 district office
Laura Friedman (916) 319-2044 Capitol office | (818) 558-3043 district office
Jesse Gabriel (916) 319-2046 Capitol office | (818) 346-4521 district office
Mike Gipson (916) 319-2065 Capitol office | (310) 324-6408 district office
Chris Holden (916) 319-2041 Capitol office | (626) 351-1917 district office
Jacqui Irwin (916) 319-2042 Capitol office | (805) 370-0542 district office
Ash Kalra (916) 319-2025 Capitol office | (408) 286-2535 district office
Kevin McCarty (916) 319-2006 Capitol office | (916) 324-4676 district office
Tina McKinnor (916) 319-2061 Capitol office | (310) 412-6400 district office
Al Muratsuchi (916) 319-2066 Capitol office | (310) 375-0691 district office
James Ramos (916) 319-2045 Capitol office | (909) 889-7145 district offic
Anthony Rendon (916) 319-2062 Capitol office | (562) 529-3250 district office
Eloise Gómez Reyes (916) 319-2050 Capitol office | (909) 381-4100 district office
Robert Rivas (916) 319-2029 Capitol office | (831) 759-8676 district office
Luz Rivas (916) 319-2043 Capitol office | (818) 504-3911 district office
Freddie Rodriguez (916) 319-2053 Capitol office | (909) 902-9606 district office
Blanca Rubio (916) 319-2048 Capitol office | (626) 960-4457 district office
Miguel Santiago (916) 319-2054 Capitol office | (213) 620-4646 district office

“Is There Objective Evidence that the Current HPV Vaccination Programs are not Justified?”
Session 7, 4th International Symposium on Vaccines in Leipzig, Germany (April 2016)
From the session’s conclusion:
Q: Is it ethical to put young women at risk of death or a disabling autoimmune disease at a pre-adolescent age for a vaccine that has not yet prevented a single case of cervical cancer, a disease that may develop 20-30 years after exposure to HPV, when the same can be prevented with regular Pap screening which carries no risks?
A: We don’t know if it can offer any long-term clinical benefit for a disease that is safely preventable through other methods.