SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for March 2013

The shaky future of Prop. 8 may depend on one judge

Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 7:09 am | Randy Thomasson

In the past 24 hours, I’ve defended natural, man-woman marriage on all 4 English-language TV stations in Sacramento, including this good interview on Fox40. SaveCalifornia.com’s strong voice for real marriage, natural genders, and what’s best for children was also seen and heard in Los Angeles, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area, and in various national media outlets.

After reading the U.S. Supreme Court transcript of the March 26 oral arguments, my strong belief is Proposition 8, California’s Marriage Amendment, will be decided by one man on the divided court — Anthony Kennedy.

The high court’s “swing vote” is a non-constructionist who believes in the notion of homosexual “rights,” not realizing that  homosexuality is a behavior and not an immutable characteristic, which is required to be considered as a “suspect class” with “civil rights” protection.

Still, Kennedy seems to be a traditionalist in support of a married father and mother being in a child’s best interest, calls homosexual marriages “uncharted waters,” and doesn’t like the “odd rationale” of the Ninth Circuit, which deemed Prop. 8 “unconstitutional.”

See my statement to the media after the hearing

Hear the audio, read the transcript of the oral arguments

Our Republic is on very shaky ground when judges don’t follow the plain words and original intent of the written Constitution. This is why I’ve been telling people that the Prop. 8 case, as much as it matters as a role model for children, is more about our Republic than about marriage.

For no People will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when Knowledge is diffusd and Virtue is preservd. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauchd in their Manners, they will sink under their own Weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.
Samuel Adams, the “Father of the American Revolution,” writing in 1775

Prop. 8 at the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday

Monday, March 25, 2013, 10:46 am | Randy Thomasson

It’s good, not bad, that Proposition 8, the 2008 California Marriage Amendment, will be decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.

The homosexual activists and their attorneys and unconstitutional, liberal judges defeated Prop. 8 in San Francisco federal court in August 2010 and at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in February 2012. So our side appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, and being granted the March 26, 2013 hearing, is the only way to save Prop. 8 from being killed off.

This is a severe crisis. Marriage and our Republic sometimes seem to be hanging by a thread. However, if I were a betting man, I would bet Prop. 8 is upheld, even by one vote. That would likely come from the nine-member high court’s “swing vote,” Anthony Kennedy of California. Kennedy, who believes in homosexual “rights” (but you can’t award rights based on non-immutable or changeable behavior), still might uphold traditional marriage.

You see, in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case, which struck down all laws prohibiting sodomy, Kennedy wrote three times that legalizing homosexuality does not mean the government must give formal recognition to these relationships.

What’s more, for Kennedy and the four more conservative justices on the high court, the Prop. 8 case is coming to them with a big bull’s eye painted on it. “Liberal of liberals” Stephen Reinhardt, who “struck down” Prop. 8 at the appeals court level, is the most overturned judge in America by the nation’s high court.

Prop. 8 reserved marriage licenses in California for “a man and a woman.” But the legal issues in the Prop. 8 case are more about our republic than about marriage.

Where is marriage in the U.S. Constitution? Nowhere. But the Constitution in Article IV, Section 4 says that each state is guaranteed ‘a republican form of government’ — a government under the written law, not government run by the unconstitutional prejudices of some judges.

And the Tenth Amendment says what are not federal powers, and what is not denied the states, are powers that belong to individual states. What is the supreme law of California? The California Constitution, which, because of Prop. 8, reads, in Article 1, Section 7.5, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Therefore, the U.S. Supreme Court should uphold Prop. 8 and reserve marriage licenses exclusively for a man and a woman, not only for the sake of children and families, but for the sake of our Republic.

See the amicus brief of Liberty Counsel and Campaign for Children and Families (SaveCalifornia.com)

And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
Jesus Christ in Matthew 19:4-6 NKJV

Democrats’ bills harm children and families

Tuesday, March 12, 2013, 12:15 pm | Randy Thomasson

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

What do you get with the Democrats in firm control of both houses of the California Legislature? Take a look at some of their new bills harming children and families:

Pushing sexual perversity 

AB 1266: Forces California K-12 government schools to allow biological boys in girls’ restrooms, showers, and on girls’ sports teams; and permits biological girls in boys’ restrooms, showers, and on boys’ sports teams. All under the guise of “gender identity” (transsexuality, transvestitism, cross-dressing, etc.). Authored by homosexual activist Tom Ammiano, a Democrat assemblymember from San Francisco. 

SB 323: Demands that the Boy Scouts accept homosexual-bisexual-transsexual leaders and members or lose their state tax-exempt status. Designed to decrease donations to the Boy Scouts over the national Scouts policy requiring leaders and members to be “morally straight.”  Authored by another homosexual activist, Democrat Senator Ricardo Lara of Long Beach. 

SB 145: This bill is poorly-written at best and deceptive at worst. While claiming to toughen child pornography prosecutions, SB 145 is written to potentially decrease penalties to a mere fine and parole for possessing or selling up to 600 sexual images of children through age 17. Authored by Democrat Senator Fran Pavley of Agoura Hills and co-authored by liberal Republican Jeff Gorrell of Camarillo.

Killing babies, damaging women

AB 154: Kills preborn babies by permitting nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, and physician assistants to torturously vacuum apart babies in the womb (this is what a suction abortion does). A similar bill died in committee last year but is more likely to pass this year. Authored by former abortion clinic manager and open homosexual Assemblymember Toni Atkins, a San Diego Democrat.

AB 926: Threatens young women’s health by paying them to be injected with hormones and drugs for the purpose of giving up their reproductive eggs. This dangerous procedure can leave young women sterile and physically harmed, without informed consent. Authored by Susan Bonilla, a Democrat assemblymember from Solano and Contra Costa counties. See the March 10 Sacramento Bee article on AB 926

Action: Tell others what’s happening. Share via Facebook, Twitter, and more; comment on news websites; announce to your church.

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan.
Proverbs 29:2 NKJV