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



Legislative Agenda for Week of 5/14/ 2007
May 14th 2007 @ 7:04 pm

Tom Torlakson, (D-Concord)Chair, senator.torlakson@senate.ca.gov . Dave Cox,(R-Roseville) V. Chair senator.cox@senate.ca.gov

SB 32, Darrell Steinberg, Health Care Coverage: Children. OPPOSE

STATUS: Amended three times. Passed the Senate Health Committee

This bill would:

  1. Raise to 300% the amount above federal poverty level -= fpl allowable to qualify.
  2. Allow self-certification of applicant for income and assets. No checking up.
  3. Delete federal SCHIP requirement for proving citizenship or immigration status.
  4. Allow all children, from birth to 19 years of age, living in California to have access to affordable, comprehensive health care coverage.
  5. Would end up placing almost every child in the government health care plan where parents will have no oversight or authority for health care.

List of Supporters:

California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies Children’s Health Initiative of Napa County Health Access Jaeger Family Olive Oil Latino Coalition for a Healthy California Latino Issues Forum Mental Health Association in California Northern Santa Barbara County United Way Service Employees International Union United Way of the Bay Area United Way of Santa Cruz County Western Center on Law and Poverty

SB 20, Tom Torlakson, Pupil Nutrition: Free and Reduced-Price meals. OPPOSE.

Amended four times. Repeals several sections of the Education Code relating to pupil nutrition and declaring this an urgency item.

The bill purports to be focused on providing the highest quality nutrition for students, but is all encompassing of both public, private and pre schools. It requires the schools to eliminate any competition from outside restaurant or food supply sources including the family lunch bag.

This bill is endorsed by a variety of child centered organizations including Partnership for Youth, Lambda Letters Project and a variety of public health and food advocate groups plus California Nurses Assn and the CMA.

SB 405, Darrell Steinberg, Schools: Curriculum, Opportunities for Pupils.
Creates the Fair Competition for College and Career Program. OPPOSE.

Establishes a pilot program with expanded counseling services and assistance to get students into college and provide their high schools with increased incentives to see that the chosen students get there.

It would extend the school day, school week (whatever that means) or school year to accomplish this goal.

Tracks students through school. It seems that students will be walked through school, carefully monitored to succeed and go on to a college program that is part academic and part technical in order to prepare them for the work place.

SB 777, Sheila Kuehl, (D-LA), Discrimination: The California Student Civil Rights Act. OPPOSE.
Refers to the Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 2000, also authored by Kuehl which would:

Revise the current list of prohibited bases of discrimination and the kinds of prohibited instruction, activities, and instructional materials in the Education Code, and instead would refer to the protected characteristics contained in the definition of hate crimes in the Penal Code.

This bill would also define disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation for this purpose.

This bill would change the current references to "handicapped" individuals in the Education Code to instead refer to individuals with physical disabilities.

The Legislative Analyst’s office states that:

Opponents contend that this bill would ban any instruction or activities in schools that reflect adversely upon homosexuals, transgenders and bisexuals, and therefore "any teaching promoting traditional families would be discriminatory. Any activities such as having a prom king and queen or gender-specific bathroom would also be considered discriminatory."

(Letter from Capitol Resource Institute, dated April 9, 2007.)

Opponents further argue that this bill would "silence students and teachers from the free expression of beliefs and opinions that run contrary to total and complete acceptance of all forms of sexual behavior." (Letter from California Family Council, dated April 10, 2007.)

"Schools must be careful not to (through curriculum, ancillary materials, activities or publications) foster acceptance of behaviors involving sexuality and practices that often contradict the moral and religious teaching within families." (Letter from Concern Women for America of California, dated April 11, 2007.)

HISTORY (provided by Statenet)

Source: Equality California (A strident pro homosexual lobby)

Related Pending Legislation:

Prior Legislation: AB 537 (Kuehl et al., Ch. 587, Statutes of 1999) added the characteristics used in the definition of a hate crime to the prohibited bases of discrimination found in the Education Code.

AB 222 (Kuehl of 1999) would have added sexual orientation into the prohibited bases of discrimination throughout the Education Code (This bill died on the Assembly Floor).

AB 499 (Kuehl, Ch. 914, Statutes of 1998) reorganized, updated and clarified the student civil rights protections found in the Education Code.

Proponents are a long list of gay and lesbian groups, Planned Parenthood, Anti-Defamation League and the California Teachers Assn.

SB 840, Sheila Kuehl, Single-Payer Health Care Coverage. OPPOSE

Establishes the State Universal Healthcare System, making all residents eligible for specified health care benefits under the system. In other words, socialized medicine.

This passed easily out of Kuehl’s own Health Committee and is awaiting a hearing on 5/14 in the Senate Appropriations committee like all the others.

Would establish a new state agency, the California Universal Healthcare Agency to oversee the CUHS and receive all federal, state and local monies and establish 6 new advisory type boards. It would, apparently, be under the Supervision of a Cabinet level Director, not accessible or replaceable by vote.

Related Legislation (also opposed)

SB 1014 (Kuehl) would impose a health care coverage tax on the wages of an employee paid by both the employee and employer.

SB 48 (Perata) insures all working Californians and their dependents as well as all children regardless of residency status in households with incomes up to 300% of FPL.

AB 8 (Fabian Nunez) insures all working individuals and dependents employed by firms of two or more employees, all children regardless of residency status with household incomes up to 300% FPL.

SB 236 (George Runner. R) Enacts CAL CARE Program to increase access to health care services and provide health coverage incentives.

There is one entire paige of tightly spaced supporters including a large number of Democrat clubs, Public employee unions, PP of San Diego, Jericho (a pseudo-Catholic lobby).

There are about 10 opponents including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn, Kaiser Permanente, and other private insurance carriers.

Mark Leno, (D-S.F.) Chair. assemblymember.leno@assembly.ca,gov.
Mimi Walters,(R-Laguna Niguel) V. Chair, assemblymember.walters@assembly.ca.gov.

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

Expands Medi-Cal and Healthy Families Program to cover all children with family incomes at or below 300% of federal poverty level (FPL) plus establishes a Buy-in program for children in families with incomes above 300% FPL. for health, dental and vision coverage.

"Renames" the Department of Health Services to Department of Health Care Services and transfers certain (we don’t know what, yet) public health responsibilities to a newly established Department of Pubic Health.

It always amazes me that both the legislation itself and the legislative analysis never explains just what coverage will be available and who will be allowed to authorize or approve services.

CRLC is listed as an opponent because we see this as an expansion of access to abortions for minor and unmarried girls without parental notification and will allow illegal alien children to enroll in Medi-Cal and Healthy Families Programs.

Related Legislation:

AB 8 Fabian Nunez, California Cooperative Health Insurance Purchasing Program CALCHIPP. OPPOSE

Creates a one shop health care purchasing pool to provide insurance to employees (and their dependents (illegal or legal).

SB 48, Don Perata, Health Insurance Connector. Establishes the purchasing pool itself. Mandates that all workers and their families have coverage.

AB 1326. Mary Hayashi (D-Hayward) Authorizes the (currently named) DHS to implement Medi-Cal PE for children through county welfare departments.

All of these are designed to grab hold of the young child and never let them go through their teen years and into young adulthood keeping them dependent upon the state.

The lead supporters are:

100% Campaign (pro abort), Children Now, (pro abort), Children’s Defense Fund (pro abort) Children’s Partnership (I urge you to google this group. You will be devastated by the numbers of agencies covered under this heading, but even more interesting is the fact that many of the groups listed here are also listed under the Children’s Partnership. Who told all these people that they had a right to establish goals and make plans for our children?)

AB 14, John Laird, (D-Sta Cruz) Discrimination: (The Jesse Unruh) Civil Rights Act of 2007. OPPOSE.

both the assembly Judiciary (7-3) and Assembly Appropriations, (11-5). Creates broad, sweeping inclusionary groups protected from( their definition) of discrimination.

Cosponsored by Equity California, a very strident homosexual lobby and the NAACP California Conference. Also, in part, the ACLU AIDS Project, California Professional Firefighters (this is a questionable group) Gay and Lesbian Adolescent Social Services,Inc. Gay-Straight Alliance, Stonewall Democrats, Lambda Letters Project and the Transgender Law Center.


California Catholic Conference, California Family Council, Traditional Values Coalition and 3 dozen individuals and businesses.

AB 16, Ed. Hernandez (D-W. Covina) Pupil Immunizations. Amended five times. OPPOSE.

This is the bill formerly carried by Sally Lieber who took her name off the bill when it was exposed that her family had an interest in the Merck Pharmaceutical company that manufactures Gardasil.

This bill has changed from one that requires vaccination against HPV to an all inclusive government directed vaccination program.

"Defines "fully immunized" as the pupil has been vaccinated in accordance with recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), as specified."

2. "Declares that the legislature refuses to relinquish its responsibility on matters of immunization requirements and will continue oversight of this process through legislative and budgetary mechanisms, as necessary."

Who ever gave them this responsibility in the first place? Certainly parents did not.

3. "Prohibits any "governing authority" of a private or public elementary or secondary school, child care center, day nursery, nursery school or family day care home from unconditionally admitting a pupil unless he or she has been fully immunized."

In other words, only the state may have overall authority in the matter of immunizations for children, not even parents. Even if a parent should prove that the child is exempt from a specific vaccination, "the school may temporarily exclude the child until the local health officer is satisfied that the person is no longer at risk of developing [the] disease."

4. This bill, also, renames the department of health services to the Department of Health Care Services.

5. Creates a new office of Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - ACIP which will make recommendations regarding immunizations.

6. Will require the schools to provide parents with notification of an opt-out option (which usually is meaningless).


SB 533, Leland Yee (D-S.F.) Adds pneumococcus (flu) vaccine to the list of diseases for which immunization is required to enter school.

SB 676, Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-LA). Allows the DPH to review and modify the immunization requirements at will.

Supporters: ACOB/GYN, CMA, Ca. Optometric Assn, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California.

Now, what in the world does the PPAC care about immunizations when they would prefer to see all children dead before birth? I submit that it has to do with removing yet another piece of authority from the parents so that they can immunize your child, at will, from the after-effects of their sexuality training.

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