Our Lady of Soccorso


Body part peddlers complain that prolifers make them “look bad”

End-Of-Life Decisions and Facts

Click to view video.
Assembly Select Committee On Women's Reproductive Health,
March 11th, 2020

Click to explore.
Landmark Cases explores the human stories and constitutional dramas behind some of the most significant and frequently cited decisions in the Supreme Court's history

Click to listen to interview.
TS Radio interview
about Palliative Care
and the Legislative Process

Click to view video.
Meeting the needs of Patients - Post
Roe v. Wade

Click to view video.
CA Senate Health Committee SB 24 hearing on April 3, 2019.

Click to view full-size.
The Star of Bethlehem shines brightly on the newborn child, Jesus.

Click to view full-size.
This child doesn’t need Government mandated Pre-K schooling. Young John is the grandchild of a very fine Pro Life Family.

Click to view full-size.
Four month and six month old human fetal skeletons, displayed At the Federal Civil War Medical and Military history Museum, in Silver Spring, MD. Display can be found in new more current segment of the museum’s historical displays.

Click to view full-size.
Mary Catherine was an abandoned new-born, found in Antioch and buried by Ca. Right to Life and Birthright of concord, at Queen of Heaven Cemetery in Lafayette, Ca. along with 24 other pre-born babies.

Click to view full-size.
Come Holy Spirit, enlighten the minds and hearts of your people!
July 4th, 2018



Status of Bills at End of First Year of Term
June 26th 2007 @ 6:36 pm

We are pleased to announce that a total of 34 bills which were of concern to us have either been put on a suspense file or on an inactive file. This does not mean that they are dead. They may become two-year bills or be resurrected following summer recess in which case they will have until January 31 to pass.

Now, though, we are able to concentrate on some of the more serious bills that have survived and passed over to the second house.

These bills are coming up for hearing very quickly with little notification. With the lopsided Democrat majority there is small chance that they will be stopped. We are going to have to rely on the Governor’s veto.

However, please continue to contact your Assembly and Senate members. The Republicans are holding fast and voting "NO" on most of these bills and they need your support to under gird their stand. The Democrats need to hear from you as well to let them know that you aren’t going to just take it.

SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE HEARINGS -July 11, 2007 Sheila Kuehl, (D) Chairman.
Sam Aanestad, (R)V. Chairman senator.aanestad@senate.ca.gov or, 916/651-4004

Please understand that our opposition to these health care coverage bills occurs because of the assumed right of the government to expose everyone to abortion and family planning services while we who are pro life are forced to pay for it and Planned Parenthood profits by it.

Remember the tried and true adage that what the government pays for the government owns. The government will own, so to speak, the rights to your health. You will offend the state if you gain weight, don’t exercise, smoke, drink alcohol, serve your children too many empty calories while allowing your children to get dental carries. Will it stop there? Who knows? Will lit get to the point that it is in other countries where the government determines how many children you should have?

AB 1, John Laird, (D-Santa Cruz) Health Care Coverage - OPPOSE.

This is a virtual universal health care coverage for children of parents with incomes anywhere from 135% of federal poverty level all the way to 300% plus it will allow for a "buy-in option for families with income over 300%. Part of the costs of coverage will be born by federal Medi-Cal matching funds. This means that you, the tax payer pays twice, once with California taxes and once with federal taxes.

It deletes any requirement for an applicant to declare residency. This medical care will, in all probability provide physical, dental coverage and include immunizations as authorized by:

AB 16, (whether ab 16 passes or not) and be delivered at school site clinics. The parents will never know what or on what day their child will be seen and evaluated by a physician assistant or nurse practitioner who may well have an agenda all his/her own.

AB 2, Mervyn Dymally, (D-L.A.) Health Care Coverage OPPOSE.

This bill would appear to authorize the Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board - MRMIB and iot’s Medical Insurance Program - MRMIP to be the single payer for health care coverage. AFter July, 2008, if there are any private insurance companies still operating in California, it would require them to contribute toward the very cov erage they are selling or pay a fee into MRMIP.

AB 12, Jim Beall, (D-San Jose), Adult Health Coverage Program: Santa Clara


This bill authorizes Santa Clara County to become a pilot program for administering universal health care coverage. It also mandates that all the residents of Santa Clara County become guinea pigs for universal coverage while employers are mandated to sell you the insurance and provide the major portion of the coverage.

AB 8, Fabian Nunez, (D-LA), Health Care Coverage: Employers and Employees.


Nunez and Senator Don Perata have joined their two bills into one patterning it as closely as possible to the desires of the Governor regarding universal health care coverage. It’s been amended 4 times going from a one page bill to a 35 page bill.

Summary listing # 12 states:

Requires CHHSA - California Health and Human Services Admin - to encourage fitness, wellness, and health promotion programs that promote safe workplaces, healthy employer practices, and individual efforts to improve health. (see editorial comments).

Nunez and Asm Mark Leno of San Francisco hosted a tv panel on health care several months ago. One of the panel "experts" claimed that it would be necessary for this coverage to pay for fitness programs for overweight people.

Chair. Alan Nakanishi, Vice Chairman, 

SB 32, Darrell Steinberg, (D-Sacramento) Health Care Coverage: Children


This bill expands eligibility for Medi-Cal and Healthy Families programs to include children of families with incomes under 300 percent of the federal poverty level.

Information for this bill has come directly from the 100% Campaign (Partnership for Children, Children NOW, Children’s Defense Fund) and a number of special interest community agencies. It also includes PICO-California and the Service Employees International Union - SEIU. You may recall I’ve written several articles about PICO and its subversion of the Catholic Bishops of California. This is the main reason why you see and hear so much propaganda from the Bishops supporting universal, government payer health care.

The bill does the following:

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT (as stated in the bill analysis): According to the author’s office, this bill finishes the job of providing California’s children with access to needed coverage and eases the enrollment process for families and helps maintain coverage for children for as long as they are eligible. The author’s office adds that this bill ensures that all of California’s children, regardless of immigration status, have access to health insurance so that they may grow up healthy and strong. The author’s office notes that children with health insurance are healthier, are at less risk of suffering from preventable illnesses, have better access to needed health care services, and perform better in school. The author’s office points out that, despite efforts to increase the numbers of children enrolled in existing programs and to streamline the enrollment process, there are still almost 800,000 uninsured children and this number could grow if the CHIs are not sustained.

(note) if Healthy families and Medi-Cal for children was such a great deal why is it that agencies like Planned Parenthood are continually crying about the large numbers of children who are not signed up? Parents who sign up their children are seldom required to pay but a pittance of the cost of insurance coverage.

SB 564, Mark Ridley-Thomas, (D-L.A. area) Public School Health Center Support

Program. OPPOSE

  1. Expands the definition of "school health center" to allow the center to conduct routine physical health, mental health, and oral health assessments, and provide for any services not offered onsite or through a referral process.

  2. Requires DPH to establish a grant program within the PSHCSP to provide technical assistance, and funding for the expansion, renovation, and retrofitting of existing school health centers, and the development of new school health centers, as specified.

  3. Requires a school health center receiving grant funds under the PSHCSP have a plan regarding how the center will: provide comprehensive services; provide primary and other health services including mental health and oral health; work in partnership with the school nurse; coordinate services with health care providers; serve all students regardless of ability to pay; operate during school hours and facilitate transportation.

Notice this bill never once includes parents?

SB840, Sheila Kuehl, (D-Ventura) Single-Payer Health Care Coverage. OPPOSE.

Establishes the State Universal Healthcare System. Makes all state residents eligible for specified health care benefits under the system, which would, on a single-payer basis, negotiate for or set fees for health care services provided through the system and pay claims for those services. Creates the Universal Healthcare Policy Board to establish policy on medical issues and various other matters relating to the system.

SB 11, Carole Migden, Domestic Partnerships. OPPOSE.

This bill was heard today in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Darrell Steinberg, Chair. It passed out to the Assembly Appropriations on a 6-3 vote.
Assembly Appropriations Chair Mark Leno, (D-San Francisco) Mimi Walters (R-Laguna Niguel) assemblymember.walters@assembly.ca.gov

comment on this article

Notice: All comments are moderated. Your comment will appear once approved.

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-Spam Image

Take away God, all respect for civil laws, all regard for even the most necessary institutions disappears; justice is scouted; the very liberty that belongs to the law of nature is trodden underfoot; and men go so far as to destroy the very structure of the family, which is the first and firmest foundation of the social structure.
- St. Pius X, Jucunda Sane, March 12, 1904