| |
SaveCalifornia.com Blog//
Archives for the ‘lockdown’ Category
Friday, February 3, 2023, 6:25 pm | Randy Thomasson
Are you glad Covid lies keep being exposed? Do you want your medical freedom back? Do you want kids protected from the “Covid vaccine” that’s injuring and killing so many?
As intrigue swirls in Washington, D.C. and Sacramento, here are top questions and answers for California parents concerned about mandatory “Covid vaccines” for kids:
Q: Is the threat of a “Covid vaccine” mandate for California schoolchildren OVER?
A: Probably yes. Democrat politicians, steeped in pride, hate admitting they’re wrong. So sometimes, instead of announcing a policy change, they will “speak” through a third-party.
This seems to have occurred this week in a Feb. 1 EdVoice story, “California ends plans for kids’ Covid vaccine mandate.” The article quotes unnamed “officials” of the state Department of Public Health as saying the scheduled end of California’s Covid-19 “state of emergency” on Feb. 28 “effectively ends” Gavin Newsom’s plan to add Covid vaccinations to the list of numerous vaccinations children are required to have to attend school in person.
What’s more, on Feb. 3, two days after the EdVoice article, CDHP apparently emailed a statement to Associated Press, saying: “CDPH is not currently exploring emergency rulemaking to add COVID-19 to the list of required school vaccinations, but we continue to strongly recommend COVID-19 immunization for students and staff to keep everyone safer in the classroom … Any changes to required K-12 immunizations are properly addressed through the legislative process.”
Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom “ordered” these “Covid vaccines” in the fall of 2021, then “paused” his order until July 2023. Yet in the face of hard evidence that these “Covid vaccines” harm and do not help, growing public awareness of the vaccine’s ineffectiveness and dangers, and the fact that Newsom doesn’t want to look stupid in his unofficial presidential campaign, he’s apparently letting his bad idea die a quiet death.
Thank you to everyone who responded to our SaveCalifornia.com alert and others’ alerts to barrage Newsom & Co. with opposition phone calls to his Covid jab mandate for kids. We seem to have won for parental rights and medical freedom!
Q: Are there any other vaccine threats to children enrolled in California government or private schools?
A. Yes, 10 different vaccines are required for California children in K-12 government schools and private schools, including church schools. And sadly, the Democrat-controlled State Legislature has eliminated parental exemptions.
The required vaccines (some in multiple doses) occur from kindergarten through 12th grade. Like drugs, vaccines are not natural, so there are side effects.
As the pro-parent National Vaccine Information Center explains:
There is a wide spectrum of vaccine complications, which have been identified and acknowledged in the medical literature and by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), National Academy of Sciences, including:
- Brain Inflammation/Acute Encephalopathy
- Chronic Nervous System Dysfunction
- Anaphylaxis
- Febrile Seizures
- Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)
- Brachial Neuritis
- Acute and Chronic Arthritis
- Thrombocytopenia
- Smallpox, polio, measles and varicella zoster vaccine strain infection
- Death (smallpox, polio and measles vaccine)
- Shock and “unusual shock-like state”
- Protracted, inconsolable crying
- Syncope
- Deltoid Bursitis
Because vaccine injuries and deaths are real, by 2022 the federal government had paid victims and victims’ families nearly $5 Billion (although many more victims were not paid).
What’s more, consider how the U.S. is #1 in the number of vaccines (26) injected into babies prior to age 1, and how the U.S. is also #1 in infant mortality (death) rates. How do you know whether your baby or grandbaby is susceptible?
These real-world risks have led some to avoid vaccines altogether, and to instead pursue immunity-strengthening nutrition and a healthy lifestyle. Yet under California law, the only legal way to have a vaccine-free child is if you homeschool.
Q: How do I exempt my children from all vaccine requirements?
A: You must homeschool, move to a state that permits exemptions, or go “underground.”
In California, “homeschooling” is not in state law, but are simply small “private schools.” And homeschoolers are exempt from all vaccination requirements.
The homeschooling exemption is in SB 277 (2015): (f) This section does not apply to a pupil in a home-based private school or a pupil who is enrolled in an independent study program pursuant to Article 5.5 (commencing with Section 51745) of Chapter 5 of Part 28 of the Education Code and does not receive classroom-based instruction.
1. Homeschool: To learn how to protect your children from risky shots, as well as a raft of other public-school ills, visit SaveCalifornia.com’s special site, RescueYourChild.com.
2. Other states: As for the rest of the country, 44 out of 50 states currently offer parents philosophical or religious exemptions to vaccines (requires filing out a simple form). In addition to California, the only states opposing parental rights on vaccines are New York, Connecticut, Maine, West Virginia, and Mississippi. And where states offer only medical exemptions, those can be difficult to obtain or, in California, virtually impossible.
3. Non-compliance: Going “underground” is homeschooling without filing a private school affidavit or any other “school” correspondence with the state or the county. Similarly, a pro-medical-freedom micro-school or small church school might lovingly and creatively “verify” all students as “fully vaccinated.” Because enforcement of inhuman laws varies by county.
When the Democrat politicians are in control, life gets harder. So it’s going to take work to rescue your children. But with sincere faith in Creator God and sacrificial love for your precious boys and girls, you can do it!
Train up a child in the way he should go,
And when he is old he will not depart from it.
The Bible, Proverbs 22:6
Posted in America, Babies, California Governor, Children, Christians, Constitution, COVID-19, Creator God, Democrats, Education, Election, Fatherhood, Fighting for what's right, Gavin Newsom, lockdown, Meaning, Medical Freedom, Parenting, Religious Freedom, Republicans, SaveCalifornia.com, Science | Comments Off on No more ‘mandatory’ Covid shots for kids? Q&A
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
Posted in Abortion, America, Babies, Ballot, California Bills, California Constitution, California Governor, California Legislation, California Legislature, California Supreme Court, Children, Christians, Constitution, COVID-19, Democrats, Education, Election, Employment, Fatherhood, Fighting for what's right, Future, Gavin Newsom, Good Government, Good Science, Health, Homosexuality, Judges, LGBT, Life, lockdown, Medical Freedom, Money, Morality, Parenting, Patriotism, Religious Freedom, republic, Republicans, SaveCalifornia.com, Science, Taxes, Transsexuality, Voters | Comments Off on Which of Newsom’s unconstitutional bill signings can be struck down?
Thursday, August 25, 2022, 8:45 pm | Randy Thomasson
AUGUST 25 UPDATE: AB 1940, SB 1184, and SB 1479 have passed the Democrat-controlled California State Legislature. This leaves only 2 Democrat-authored bills shoving aside parents and eliminating parental rights on the floor of the California State Assembly. But with enough opposition calls (including demanding Republican assemblymembers stand and speak), these awful bills can be defeated!
There’s practical hope, since, due to strong public outcry, SB 866 has been stalled on the Assembly floor since June 6.
Please act NOW. Your bold, loving action today can determine the outcome of these blatantly anti-family bills, which can come up for votes in daily Assembly floor sessions between August 15 and 31.
Oppose these 2 anti-parent bills on or coming to the Assembly floor:
SB 866 threatens teenagers with coerced vaccines behind parents’ backs
SB 1419 eliminates parental rights to see all of their children’s medical records
Note: See our new alert on SB 1479, which passed the California State Assembly on August 18. This bad bill would mandate all K-12 government schools develop a “Covid testing plan,” targeting every boy and girl for invasive testing, tracking, and quarantining, shoving aside parental rights and wishes.
See details about these bills at the SaveCalifornia.com Legislation Center.
YOUR 3 STRATEGIC ACTION STEPS
STEP 1. Leave voicemails for the deciding-vote Democrats and 1 independent* 7pm to 8am and weekends, without identifying yourself, since most legislative offices “trash” messages from outside their districts: Tell them, “Don’t you dare eliminate parental rights! Oppose anti-parent bills SB 866 and SB 1419.”
* When clicking below to see a new seat for which a current assemblymember is running, scroll down to the lower right for the map of the new district “after 2020 redistricting cycle”
Tina McKinnor (running for the new AD61) 916-319-2062 and 310-412-6400: A new assemblymember (sworn in June 20), McKinnor is untested and needs your calls.
Lisa Calderon (running for the new AD56) 916-319-2057 and 562-692-5858. She is running for a new district covering South El Monte, Pico Rivera, Rose Hills, Whittier, La Puente, Walnut, and Diamond Bar. Some local activists are targeting her, and with enough calls, might be moved to abstain.
Eloise Reyes (running for the new AD50) 916-319-2047 and 909-381-3238: Claims to be in favor of parental rights, but robotically voted for SB 866 in committee; tight with Democrat bosses, she needs your calls
Mike Fong (running for the new AD49) 916-319-2049 and 323-264-4949: Needs to remember Asian family values and needs your calls
Blanca Rubio (running for the new AD48) 916-319-2048 and 626-960-4457: She voted yes on the SB 866 amendments; her sister, Susan Rubio, abstained on SB 866 on the Senate floor
Luz Rivas (running for the new AD43) 916-319-2039 and 818-504-3911: She voted yes to amend SB 866; however, she “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866
Mike Gipson (running for the new AD65) 916-319-2064 and 310-324-6408: Voted yes to amend SB 866, but thinks he’s a Christian and might support clear-cut parental rights
Jose Medina 916-319-2061 and 951-369-6644: Representing northeast Riverside County, Medina will reportedly abstain on SB 866 — make sure
Miguel Santiago (running for the new AD54) 916-319-2053 and 213-620-4646: Vote yes on the SB 866 amendments, but used to abstain more, and represents mostly pro-parental-rights Hispanic families
Isaac Bryan (running for the new AD55) 916-319-2054 and 310-641-5410: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments
Lori Wilson (running for the new AD11) 916-319-2011 and 707-399-3011: A new assemblymember (sworn in April 6), Wilson reportedly won’t support SB 866 — it’s a start
Wendy Carrillo (running for the new AD52) 916-319-2051 and 213-483-5151: She abstained on the SB 866 amendments
Robert Rivas (running for the new AD29) 916-319-2030 and 831-759-8676: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments. His district overlaps that of Democrat State Senator Anna Caballero, who abstained on SB 866.
Joaquin Arambula (running for the new AD31) 916-319-2031 and 559-445-5532: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments, personally believes in traditional parental rights, and represents mostly Hispanics
Kevin McCarty (running for the new AD6) 916-319-2007 and 916-324-4676: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments, and also abstained on AB 2223 permitting infanticide
Freddie Rodriguez (running for the new AD53) 916-319-2052 and 909-902-9606: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments. Used to abstain on controversial bills.
Eduardo Garcia (running for the new AD36) 916-319-2056 and 760-347-2360: From the sprawling Imperial Valley region with many Hispanic families
Jacqui Irwin (running for the new AD42) 916-319-2044 and 805-482-1904: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments. Represents part of state senator Henry Stern’s district, who twice abstained on the Senate side
Tasha Boerner Horvath (running for the new AD77) 916-319-2076 and 760-434-7605: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments, and represents a formerly Republican district with pro-family constituents
Cottie Petrie-Norris (running for new AD73) 916-319-2074 and 949-251-0074: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments and “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866
Jim Cooper (just won election to be Sacramento County sheriff) 916-319-2009 and 916-670-7888: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments; he also abstained on AB 1797 creating a state “Covid vaccine” database
Sabrina Cervantes (running for the new AD58) 916-319-2060 and 951-371-6860: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments. Also initially abstained on AB 2098 punishing good doctors and AB 2223 permitting infanticide, but then later changed her votes to yes after both bills passed
Tom Daly 916-319-2069 and 714-939-8469: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments. He also abstained on AB 2223 permitting infanticide, and initially abstained on AB 2098 before later changing his vote to yes. Has abstained on other bills over the years
Al Muratsuchi (running for the new AD66) 916-319-2066 and 310-375-0691: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments, and also initially abstained on AB 2098 before later changing his vote to yes
Adrin Nazarian 916-319-2046 and 818-376-4246: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments; he also abstained on medical tyranny bills AB 1797 and AB 2098
Brian Maienschein (running for the new AD76) 916-319-2077 and 858-675-0077: Abstained on the SB 866 amendments and voted no on the original SB 866 in committee
Chad Mayes (former Republican, now “independent”) 916-319-2042 and 760-346-6342: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments; in May, he also voted no on AB 2223 and abstained on AB 2098
Chris Holden (running for the new AD41) 916-319-2041 and 626-351-1917 and 909-624-7876: Earlier he “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866; however, he voted yes on the SB 866 amendments
Adam Gray (running for the new CD13) 916-319-2021 and 209-726-5465 and 209-521-2111: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments and earlier “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866
Timothy Grayson (running for the new AD15) 916-319-2014 and 925-521-1511: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments; he also abstained on AB 2098, punishing good doctors against the “Covid vaccines”
Ken Cooley (running for the new AD7) 916-319-2008 and 916-464-1910: He abstained on the SB 866 amendments; he also voted no on medical tyranny bills AB 1797 and AB 2098
Rudy Salas (running for the new CD22) 916-319-2032 and 661-335-0302 and 559-585-7170: Abstained on SB 866 amendments, but earlier he “confirmed no on SB 866”
Patrick O’Donnell 916-319-2070 and 562-429-0470 and 310-548-6420: Abstained on SB 866 amendments, and previous issued public statement promising to vote no on the original SB 866
Sharon Quirk-Silva (running for the new AD67) 916-319-2065 and 714-525-6515: Voted no on amending SB 866 and has “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866
James Ramos (running for the new AD45) 916-319-2040 and 909-476-5023: Voted no on amending SB 866 and has “publicly confirmed no or abstain” on the original SB 866
Carlos Villapudua (running in the new AD13) 916-319-2013 and 209-948-7479. Voted no amending SB 866 and earlier “confirmed he will be voting no” on the original SB 866; he also issued a public statement promising to vote no on the original SB 866
STEP 2. Leave voicemails for the 19 Republican assemblymembers 7pm to 8am and weekends, without identifying yourself: Tell them, “I expect you to stand and speak on the floor against anti-parent bills. Raise your microphone to expose SB 866 and SB 1419.”
Megan Dahle (running for the new AD1) 916-319-2001 and 530-223-6300
James Gallagher (running for the new AD3) 916-319-2003 and 530-895-4217
Frank Bigelow 916-319-2005 and 209-267-0500 and 559-673-0501
Kevin Kiley (running for the new CD3) 916-319-2006 and 916-774-4430
Heath Flora (running for the new AD9) 916-319-2012 and 209-599-2112
Jim Patterson (running for the new AD8) 916-319-2023 and 559-446-2029
Devon Mathis (running for the new AD33) 916-319-2026 and 559-636-3440
Thurston Smith (running for the new AD34) 916-319-2033 and 760-244-5277
Vince Fong (running for the new AD32) 916-319-2034 and 661-395-2995
Jordan Cunningham 916-319-2035 and 805-549-3381
Tom Lackey (running for the new AD34) 916-319-2036 and 661-267-7636
Suzette Valladares (running for the new AD40) 916-319-2038 and 661-286-1565
Phillip Chen (running for the new AD59) 916-319-2055 and 714-529-5502
Kelly Seyarto (running for the new SD32) 916-319-2067 and 951-894-1232
Steven Choi (running for the new AD73) 916-319-2068 and 714-665-6868
Randy Voepel (running for the new AD75) 916-319-2071 and 619-258-7737
Janet Nguyen (running for the new SD36) 916-319-2072 and 714-843-4966
Laurie Davies (running for the new AD74) 916-319-2073 and 949-240-7300
Marie Waldron (running for the new AD75) 916-319-2075 and 760-480-7570
STEP 3. Call your own assemblymember’s office (and especially who might become your new assemblymember, state senator, sheriff, or congressmember) during business hours or after-hours, and identify yourself and where you live. Tell him or her, “Don’t you dare eliminate parental rights! Oppose anti-parent bills SB 866 and SB 1419.”
See who wants to represent you by clicking the new district maps above. To find your own, current state assemblymember, click here and enter your information.
Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?
Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?
The Bible, Psalm 94:16
Posted in Abortion, California Bills, California Legislation, California Legislature, Children, COVID-19, Creator God, Drug Abuse, Election, Fatherhood, Fighting for what's right, Gavin Newsom, Good Science, LGBT, lockdown, Medical Freedom, Morality, Parenting, SaveCalifornia.com, Science, Transsexuality, Voters | Comments Off on TOP ALERT: 2 anti-parent bills to kill on the Assembly floor
|
|
| |
RSS 2.0 Feed