The Home of the Brave
February 6, 2022
Readings:
Mark 9: 42- 50
42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were
hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to
go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast
into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye,
than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.
50 Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and
have peace one with another.
Amen! That's the end of chapter 9.
But let's go to verse36- 37
36 And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto
them, 37 Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me,
receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
So, this whole section is about the kids, right. Why? Because the kids are the next generation; they are the next protectors of a civilization. Now, Lenin, Stalin, all the political Satanists, they know that he who has control over the kids for one generation, that leads to obedience. One generation! That's not
much! People say, “It's three generations away,” right? No; it's one generation away, folks! And that's what the totalitarians and the Communists and the political Satanists, anybody who works for the 666-Beast understands. You have to capture the kids, separate them from God and then you will
control that future destiny.
Now, that doesn't mean youworship children. That doesn't mean that they are God or that they are perfect; obviously they are not.
Parents’ reactions
But the point is: kids are not perfect; they still have to go through the growth stage. Parents have to still raise them. Remember we were talking about the fact that when your kids are young they will try to test their boundaries; they will try to find out what they can and cannot get away with. There's a great program that my wife, Yeon Ah Lee Moon, recommends to younger parents. We have a lot of younger parents in our PA and Tennessee communities. It's a Korean program on parenting and helping parents deal with their children's behavior.
Let's say: in one situation the child is acting crazy, crying like crazy, crying like crazy; crying, crying. And then the mom shouts, “Stop that crying! Why are you crying? I don’t understand why you’re crying!” Of course, you understand why your child is crying, but the CHILD doesn't understand why he or she
is crying. At a certain age of three, four, five, six, seven years old, they don't know exactly why they're crying.
A lot of parents fall into the emotional traps. So, we always tell the young moms, “You've got to be careful, ”and of course the dads as well, but especially the younger moms. Satan is going to try to get you with the emotional realm; he’s going to try to make you fall into his traps in the emotional realm,
because it IS frustrating and it is aggravating and it is a pain in the booty when you've got some child yelling at you, screaming, ”Aw, aw, aw!” That happens anyway. Parents, you all know what I'm talking about; it happens. So, the level of intensity of crying starts to elevate, and once they realize that doesn't work so well, so now they're going to learn and then they just keep going until they stop.
But the point is: parents, how you react to that is very important, because if you are just reacting and you say, “Stop crying! Why are you crying?” you can say all sorts of things that your child will remember. In our mind maybe those words, we won't remember; but those words have the power of life and death at the time. That's what the Scripture says. So, we have to be careful with what we say,
and we have to be careful with what kind of blessings you give, and what kind of curses you give. That's why your grandparents told you, “Don't curse,” because they understood that scripture; they understood that words also have consequences if they're said repeatedly.
With the kids, if you shout, “Oh! You dummy, etc… “ all the time, then the kid will start believing those things and he will actually start following that behavior whether we like it or not. So, it's very important that you understand that you have to be careful about what kind of life or what kind of death you give out. That kind of self-reflecting is very important, so you got to be training that muscle; you got to work out. That's a very critical ability, when it's used in the real world, real time during the week. Not at Sunday service; of course, everyone is perfect through Sunday. But anytime else, that is when the temptation comes in. Amen!
Kids can’t communicate what they want
So, when the kid is acting crazy: number one you have to understand that this is not personal. Moms, this is not personal; your child does not hate you. Now, think about it. In the normal world of adults, nobody shouts at you, “Waah!” Nobody shouts at you. So that is a very extreme type of communication. Younger parents, you will wonder, “Why is this person shouting like that? Can you shout in a nicer way so I feel empathy? Now, I feel I'm being attacked, I'm being assaulted by you.” Okay now you understand the child doesn't have the ability to communicate everything that it wants, and it doesn't have the power to be able to say why he’s stressed. This is a five-year-old child speaking. He can't say, “Well you know why I'm stressed, mom and dad? Because you know thirteen days ago you blew up. You were fighting with Mom and this and that and then I came in the room.” No, that child is not going to be able to explain why he's feeling stressed, “There's a serious event that lead to the culmination of my stress coming in over the top, and that's why I'm boiling over; that's why I'm acting like that. And that’s why I'm going to continue to shout at you and not speaking to you right now in immaculate analytical English!”
But the point is: that's not going to happen. A child feels a stress that's accumulating over different things that he encounters at a young age. That stress could be from the parents; that stress could be from the siblings. It could also be from guests. If you have guests at your house all the time, your kids also will feel stressed by this. For example, we had guests through the house all the time; all the time. So it was like always a public event. You’d go out and just try to get a glass of water in the bathroom, and some guy is there, “Oh, it's a true child,” or something like that. So you said, “Who are you? I don't know you. Please, I just need water.” And it was aggravating as a child, because as a child you don’t
know how to deal with this; nobody told you how to deal with this - 10 years old, 12 years old, etc.
Don’t react!
Now Yeon Ah Lee Moon showed a beautiful video to some folks that were dealing with this issue and in the video the baby is acting nuts. It's a documentary kind of thing, so they got live TV; they got the camera crews following the parents, following the kids- all this kind of stuff to document. The baby's acting crazy. At first the mom’s so frustrated. She's always saying, “Why are you crying? Why are you crying? Stop crying!” and all this kind of stuff. Then she later learns, “Don't do that!”
Number 1: your child is acting crazy. Don't react! Don't react! Don’t shout, “Stop crying!” Don’t give the child attention. Don’t be angry. You don't have to start whopping him. Just don't react! The child will cry, the child will cry; the child will cry for about three or four minutes. Some kids go through it for four or five minutes. But there's a point where that will become tiring, and they will realize that acting crazy or crying out like that does not help; they'll start realizing that.
So, Mom learned, “Don’t react! Don't get emotionally; don't take it personally. Don't react!” Now, when the child calms down then, “Oh, hey baby, you're feeling sad about that situation,” or, “Oh you must be feeling stressed. Come here! Mommy's going to hold you!” And then of course explain what the child is feeling to the child, “Oh, you're feeling angry because your sister took your doll? I see Mommy understands. Okay, no problem, Baby, we're going to get it back. ”You see what I'm saying? You don't react like a crazy person, because then it escalated. The child is crying and you react; he's going to cry harder. You react; it's going to get to the point where you want to whoop that child. And if you do, that child’s going to react. That's what’s going to happen. So, the point is: what does being a king and priest mean? It means that you have power to be a judge too. Therefore, you have to enact proper judgment; you can't act emotionally.
Now, saying that, remember you don't have to be perfect. Why? Because your children know you're not perfect; especially young parents. Children know you're not perfect, but if you are trying they give you credit for it. Okay? If you're trying they will give you credit for it because they're not evil people. Your children are not evil people; they know when somebody is trying and they know when you're
not. Amen! So you don't have to be perfect; you don't have to have a perfect score. By the way no parents can do that.
PA “Forensic Audit” of 2020POTUS Election [PART CCLXXII] – Act 77 is Unconstitutional
The Commonwealth Court view that the PA mail-in voting law (Act 77) is unconstitutional (https://www.abc27.com/news/pennsylvania/court-finds-pennsylvania-mail-in-voting-law-unconstitutional) was understandably uncritically celebrated (https://gellerreport.com/2022/01/court-rules-pennsylvania-mail-in-voting-law-unconstitutional.html/), including on Bannon’s War Room (10 a.m. and 11 a.m., including input by Sam Faddis plus threads) but—to anticipate reversal by the Dem-dominated Supreme Court—key components of the*Opinion* must be parsed. Wally Zimolong had successfully argued the filing by Bradford County Commissioner Doug McLinko and a group of GOP state reps; on-cue, lefties running the Insurrection Index swung into action (https://insurrectionindex.org/records/person/doug-mclinko/), claiming McLinko had attended Trump’s“ Stop the Steal Rally” on J-6.
Highlighted during Bannon’s review was a startling observation that, as dicta, cries for a follow-up filing that could challenge all results of the 11/3/2020election {page 45}:
Nota single case cited by the Acting Secretary stands for the proposition that a legislature can prevent judicial review of a statute, whose constitutionality is challenged, with a statute of limitations of any duration. This is because, simply, an unconstitutional statute is void ab initio.
This Lingua Latina phrase “ab initio” suggests that everything done after Act 77 passage is vulnerable including, of course, 11/3/2020; anticipating such an affront to the Dems, the claim that its impact would cause“ confusion and impose a burden upon state and local governments” was refuted while swiping at lots a prior judicial acts {page 42 et seq.}:
The government’s investment of resources to implement a statute is irrelevant to the analysis of the statute’s constitutionality….[T]he Supreme Court observed that expenditures of “millions of dollars of school funds” for 25 years under the provisions of a statute were not reasons “for refusing to declare [the statute] void if in contravention of the constitution.” [Furthermore,] “laches and prejudice can never be permitted to amend the Constitution [because] [w]e have not been able to discover any case which holds that laches will bar an attack upon the constitutionality of a statute as to its future operation, especially where the legislation involves a fundamental question going to the very roots of our representative form of government and concerning one of its highest prerogatives. To so hold would establish a dangerous precedent, the evil effect of which might reach far beyond present expectations.
The question of Act 77’s constitutionality is a question that goes to the “very roots of our representative form of government.” Constitutional norms outweigh the cost of implementing unconstitutional statutes.
This is not the first challenge to the constitutionality of a statute to be filed years after its enactment [recalling the] constitutional challenge to state’s congressional redistricting legislation brought six years and multiple elections after its 2011 enactment [and recalling the] challenge filed in 2015to constitutionality of 1996 amendment to the Older 44 Adults Protective Services Act34 imposing a lifetime ban on persons with a single conviction from employment in the care of older adults.
For these reasons, we hold that the doctrine of laches does not bar McLinko’s challenge to the constitutionality of Act 77. {Cites omitted.}
This filing had been prospectively posited to anticipate procedural challenge selection workers face (justifying standing) rather than carrying the ambit to undermine 2020; nevertheless, it would appear that a follow-up motion could yield efforts to relitigate the election of Brandon (and activation of Electors). One could anticipate the return of the equivalent of the big-red-party-lever of the classic Shoup voting machines that were outlawed by Act 77, the tradeoff the [$%^&^$] GOP leaders were granted due to their worriment Trump could injure down-ballot candidates. [“Yeah, talkin’ to you, Corman!”]
Insights as to what the PA-Supremes might emphasize are gained when reviewing the Dissent, noting its admittedly limited scope {page 53, et seq.}:
I agree with the Majority’s scholarly opinion with respect to the issues of Petitioners’ standing, and the procedural objections to the amended petitions for review. However, I disagree with the Majority’s conclusion that Sections1 and 8 of the Act of October 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 (Act 77) violate article VII, section 1 and section 14 of the Pennsylvania Constitution by adding “a qualified mail-in elector” as a class of elector who is eligible to vote as defined in Section 102(z.5)(3) and (z.6) of the Pennsylvania Election Code (Election Code), and by adding Section 1301-D of Article XIII-D to the Election Code permitting any qualified elector, who is not eligible tobe a qualified absentee elector, to vote by an official no-excuse mail-in ballot in any primary, general, or municipal election held in this Commonwealth.
Without getting into the weeds of how the Majority generated its definition by tracing history to Colonial times vs. how the Minority allowed for expansion of the franchise, noted is its non-severability clause that would invalidate Act 77 in its entirety if any one component thereof were to be found to be unconstitutional {page 60}. Anticipating a prompt PA-Supremes decision, might upcoming primaries include a redo of 11/3/2020?
Never one to shy away from addressing the gravamen of an issue, this memo bumped a discussion of “Electoral Integrity” from the national perspective and, thus, it’s incumbent upon its author to distill the fundamental disagreement animating the two arguments. The Dissent is more terse, so defense of retaining Act 77 is the starting-point when parsing the PA Constitution and how its structure should properly be perceived to be {page 55}:
[A]rticle VII, § 4 empowers the General Assembly to provide for another means by which an elector may vote through legislation such as Act 77: “All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as maybe prescribed by law.” Thus, the General Assembly is constitutionally empowered to enact Act 77 to provide for qualified and registered electors present in their municipality of residence on an election day to vote by no-excuse mail-in ballot. Specifically, I disagree with the Majority’s faulty premise that the no-excuse mail-in ballot method of voting is merely a subspecies of voting by absentee ballot as provided in article VII, § 14, and that article VII, § 1 and article VII, § 14 have primacy over the provisions of article VII, § 4.
After having cited the petitioners’ burden [“Any doubts are to be resolved in favor of a finding of constitutionality”], it’s emphasized that “the Constitution is an integrated whole; effect must be given to all of its provisions whenever possible.” This is a setup for disclaiming any paradigm creating an outlier [“where two provisions of our Constitution relate to the same subject matter, they are to be read in pari materia, and the meaning of a particular word cannot be understood outside the context of the section in which it is used”]. Reinforcing this model is citation of a 1924 case [based upon an earlier version of the constitution] that had concluded, “the General Assembly may not by statute extend the scope of a method of voting already specifically provided for” in the Constitution, whereas it didn’t preclude enactment of “a new and different method of voting such as the no-excuse mail-in ballot provisions of Act 77.” {I will now “telegraph” my punch.}
Buried in a citation within a citation {page 57} is a citation from Thomas Raeburn White [Commentaries on the Constitution of Pennsylvania 360] composed in 1907, but on-point:
The residence required by the Constitution must be within the election district where the elector attempts to vote; hence a law giving to voters the right to cast their ballots at some place other than the election district in which they reside [is] unconstitutional.
The final component of this argument is addressing the Opinion’s alleged suggestion that “the provisions of article VII, § 4 are limited to the use of voting machines” that was “undermined by the subsequent amendment of the then-present article VII, § 6 in 1928.” This led to the conclusion that “if the provisions of article VII, § 4 are limited to the use of voting machines, there was absolutely no need to amend article VII, § 6 to provide for the use of such machines” that was synthesized into reinterpretation of precedent {page 60}:
[T]he Majority’s limited construction of article VII, § 4 renders the phrase “or by such other method as may be prescribed by law” meaningless and mere surplusage in light of the amendment to article VII, § 6 to specifically include the use of voting machines as a new and different method of casting a ballot. Thus, contrary to the Supreme Court’s observation in Lancaster City, and the Majority’s conclusion herein, article VII, § 4 may not be construed in such a limited manner to give effect to all of its provisions.
Therefore, it may be true that “if the provisions of article VII, § 4 are limited to the use of voting machines, there was absolutely no need to amend article VII, § 6to provide for the use of such machines,” but it is also true that “the provisions of article VII, § 4 WERE NOT limited to the use of voting machines” and, therefore, “there was ABSOLUTELY A NEED to amend article VII, § 6 to provide for the use of such machines.” {Ditto for no-excuses.}
It’s then concluded correctly that “sections 1, 4, and 14 of article VII must all be read together and given the same prominence and effectiveness” [without any component thereof perceivable as mooted] AND that this conclusion is met by the Opinion despite an effort to create a crack in how any “a new and different method” must be construed.
[T]he plain language of article VII, § 4 specifically empowers the General Assembly to provide a distinct method of casting a ballot for electors who are present in their municipality on a primary, general, or municipal election day by permitting the use of no-excuse mail-in ballots. This method is distinct from an elector’s appearance at his or her district of residence to cast a ballot as provided in article VII, § 1, either by paper ballot or by the use of a machine pursuant to article VII, § 6, or the use of an absentee ballot by an elector who is absent from his or her municipality on the day of a primary, general, or municipal election as provided in article VII, § 14.
This construct is punctured by awareness that a voter must PROVE “presence” in the home municipality on election-day and, thus, the General Assembly couldn’t have been empowered to provide the franchise to any voter ABSENT therefrom without excuse. The Opinion referenced/discounted the Minority view {page 27}: “The Acting Secretary does not believe there is a “place requirement” in Article VII, § 1 and, thus, she does not consider Article VII, § 14 to be an exception to the in-person voting requirement. ”Thus, working backward, because the Constitution’s black-letter “presence” requirement can only be amended, it cannot statutorily be expanded, REGARDLESS of whether a model is conjured that places any one phrase within any desired context (eschewing any other).
THEREFORE, the Opinion SHOULD survive appeal because it had anticipated/rejected an alternative construct c/o the Minority; although the Opinion doesn’t explicitly contain the expanded discussion herein, points therein can be easily linked thereto [ab initio].
Venezuela With Ice Hockey – Canada Becomes A Dictatorship
Feb 19
Americans have always had a slightly patronizing view of Canada. We have regarded it as a sometimes overly nice, rather innocuous democracy where things were perhaps too clean and people perhaps too civil. It was the USA but with all the rough edges that define the American character sanded off.
No more. That Canada died some time ago. Today’s Canada is a police state run by a dictator who will accept no resistance to his edicts. Trudeau’s response to dissent?
Crush the dissenters.
What is happening right now in Ottawa is almost impossible to believe. The full force of the Canadian government is being brought to bear in response to a protest against manifestly illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust COVID restrictions.
The two leaders of the trucker protest in Ottawa Tamara Lich and Chris Barber have been arrested by the police.
Busloads of police have been brought into the city. Fences have been put up throughout the downtown. These are not just to seal off government buildings. These are to deny access to the downtown area to those who might wish to join the protesters or come to their defense. The truckers are being cut off from reinforcements.
There are now over 100 police checkpoints in the heart of Ottawa, the capital of a supposedly democratic nation. Traffic (https://www.borderreport.com/regions/canada/truckers-hold-their-ground-despite-threats-of-crackdown/) is backed up for miles as citizens of Ottawa try to navigate this new reality.
Paul B.🇬🇧 🇺🇸🇳🇿🇨🇦🇦🇺🇮🇱@PB_RHAR
Ottawa Police Chief "It is now unlawful to protest against government, 100 checkpoints have been established" - The Last Refuge We are actually watching the fall of a democracy in to a full blown DICTATORSHIP‼️
Ottawa Police Chief “It is now unlawful to protest against government,100 checkpoints have been established” - The Last Refuge The interim police chief of Ottawa, Comrade Steve Bell, made it clear today that he and the residents of Ottawa are “sick” of the protesters. Therefore, effective immediately, no Canadian citizen will be permitted to access, enter or walk lawfully in the downtown Ottawa area. “100 policecheckpoints…theconservativetreehouse.com
February 18th 2022
Police have begun moving in and arresting protesters. Video coming out of Ottawa shows the use of force by police against protesters offering no resistance. The police have also employed mounted units, and video shows protesters being trampled by officers on horseback.
Poso Remembers Ottawa @JackPosobiec
Elderly woman on mobility scooter trampled by police horses at freedom protest in Ottawa BREAKING: Elderly woman trampled by mounted police at freedom protest in Ottawa Conflicting reports have emerged as to the condition of an elderly woman who was trampled by police on horseback.thepostmillennial.com
February 19th 2022
Canadian authorities have announced that the children of protesters will be taken away from them. Bouncy castles set up to entertain these children have been dismantled. Too much fun it appears is also a threat to the system.
The bank accounts of truckers involved in the protest are being frozen(https://www.borderreport.com/regions/canada/truckers-hold-their-ground-despite-threats-of-crackdown/). Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland recently bragged that she was personally overseeing this action to steal the money of Canadian citizens telling the press “It is happening. I do have the numbers in front of me.”
Truckers have also been informed their vehicles will be seized and their licenses will be taken away. The state will not just beat and arrest you. It will deprive you of your means of livelihood and leave you destitute.
Journalists attempting to show the world what is really happening in Ottawa have been harassed, assaulted ((https://westernstandardonline.com/2022/02/journalist-lawton-pepper-sprayed-by-police-in-ottawa/), and arrested. Their crimes? Doing their jobs and believing they were still living in a free society.
Cosmin Dzsurdzsa @cosminDZS
About an hour ago the Youtuber ZOT was arrested by Ottawa police in the middle of a livestream. As he was being given a "last warning" by an officer, two others moved in and placed him under arrest before the stream cutout. #FreedomConvoy2022
February 18th 2022
Trudeau– in one of his latest pronouncements on the dangers of the truckers’ protest–perhaps betrayed the real basis for his refusal to even consider dropping COVID mandates. “They are a threat to our economy and our relationship with trading partners,” he said. “They are a threat to public safety.”
Translation. People who think for themselves and refuse orders from the corporate oligarchy must be crushed. Their role is to take orders and buy things. We can’t have a system based on free will. That would be chaos.
Fred Van Vliet 🇨🇦 God wins! @vanvlietdesign
@CPercySearle New State of Ottawa resembles an expensive African Congo .Checkpoints for ID & political orientation. Thought police on every corner. The sound of laughter left town with the #BouncyCastles. Canadians have delivered a message of freedom to your cold hearted Liberal War Lords.
February 19th 2022
People who do not listen to Trudeau are a “small, fringe minority” and most importantly they hold “unacceptable views.” Understand fully. Trudeau decides what is acceptable now. You may have thought that the concept of free speech was based on the idea that each man and woman was allowed to decide for him or her self about such concepts.
Not anymore. Free speech is dead in Canada.
All of this is happening in response to the actions of a movement with very clear, and seemingly very reasonable goals. It wants the government to end all COVID mandates and it wants an end to the COVID tracking system preventing Canadians from returning to their nation. Period.
The movement explicitly rejects all racial division and race-based politics. It is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural. Its participants come from all over Canada.
It does not seek the overthrow of the government. It does not, in fact, seek the removal of any politicians from office. It explicitly acknowledges that that is the purpose of elections.
The truckers in Ottawa and their supporters want a return to freedom and democracy. They don’t want to live in a dictatorship where a little boy playing at being a dictator decides for everyone what will and will not be allowed. They have the audacity to believe that power derives from the people – not the Prime Minister’s office.
What they want is the Canada that most of us in the United States thought still existed. Unfortunately, for them, it does not. Our northern neighbor is now Venezuela with ice hockey, another dictatorship in the hemisphere.
What is Sheriff Mack’s checklist for getting your sheriff involved?
· Call your sheriff
· Stop by your sheriff’s Office and request and appointment with the Sheriff
· Prepare yourself with the identity of the organization you represent and how many members you have
· Present your case as to why belonging to Constitutional Sheriff’s Assn would be good for your group and the rest of the constituency
· What are his plans for COVID safety, for stopping gun control/confiscation, for drug abuse control?
· Are you a member of Constitutional Sheriff and what do you think that means?
· What can we do to make sure that the Bill of Rights will not be violated in our county? How will we keep ourselves and our neighbors from being sent to quarantine camps (For information regarding the quarantine camps please type ‘cdc greenzone’ into your internet browser)
Please visit the Constitutional Sheriff and Police Officer Association's website for more informative videos. The checklist above if is from this video:
https://cspoa.org/heres-your-to-do-list/?utm_content=13359840&utm_medium=Email&utm_name=Id&utm_source=Actionetics&utm_term=Email
Synopsis: When a county election office does not remove the names of deceased voters in a timely fashion, that creates the opportunity for voter fraud to occur. A co-sponsorship memo is being circulated in the State Senate that would require the process to be sped up by requiring the Department of Health to notify the county within seven days rather than the current 60 days as stated in the current law.
The AFA of PA can now be found on Telegram (https://t.me/afaofpa) and Gab (https://gab.com/afaofpa) Join the “Pennsylvania Christian Activists” group on Gab.
AFA of PA ACTION ALERT
February 17, 2022
Issue
Removing the Deceased from Voter Rolls (https://afaofpa.org/action/?vvsrc=%2fCampaigns%2f92059%2fRespond)
Details
Did you know that in a 2020 report, the Public Interest Legal Foundation provided the Department of State with the names of at least 21,000 deceased registrants who remained on the voter rolls less than a month before the 2020 election? Needless to say, this creates many opportunities for voter fraud!
Senator Doug Mastriano is circulating a co-sponsorship memo for a bill he plans on introducing that “will amend Title 25 to state that the Department of Health must provide notice of a deceased individual to a county election commission within seven days of the individual’s death. Under current statute, the Department of Health can wait up to 60 days to report the decreased individual.”
Action Steps
Ask your State Senator to sign onto this bill by using the letter in the “Removing the Deceased from Voter Rolls” link above.
In His Service,
Diane
Diane Gramley
To Whom Do Children Belong?
February 24, 2022
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on parental authority versus state authority (https://www.catholicleague.org/to-whom-do-children-belong/):
Does the child belong to parents or the state? This issue is nothing new—Plato argued that the community in which children are raised is the proper locus of authority, not the parents. He envisioned a society where parents were denied their right to raise their own children: they would be collectively raised. He explicitly said in The Republic that the good society was one where "no parent is to know his own child, nor any child his parent."
California Governor Gavin Newsom is no Plato, but he is also not a believer in parental rights. He objects to Florida and Texas officials who are seeking to stop the state from promoting "gender-transitioning procedures" for children behind the back of parents. "This is nothing short of a state-sponsored intimidation of LGBTQ children," he said.
In other words, if parents object to child abuse encouraged by state operatives—that is what puberty blockers and the prospect of genital mutilation are—then they are the problem, not the government.
In many parts of the country children are being prompted by school officials to question their sexual orientation. Some are then encouraged to transition to the opposite sex, without the consent of their parents. How many? No one knows for sure, but we do know that some public officials, school administrators, school board members and teachers' unions believe they know better than a child's parents what's good for their kids. They are modern-day tyrants who respect no boundaries.
In a sane society they would be put away. Instead, they are awarded tenure.
In the 1920s, the Ku Klux Klan supported an anti-Catholic law in Oregon that required all children to attend a public school (thus closing down Catholic schools). The Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary sued, and in 1925 the U.S. Supreme Court sided with them. "The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations (italics in the original)."
Today's Klan is non-violent and well-educated, but they are just as dangerous as the men in white robes. Newsom and the educational establishment are wrecking the lives of young people, promoting the pernicious idea that it is normal to rebel against one's own nature. It manifestly is not.
Young people are being exploited at a record rate—girls more than boys—by tolerating, if not actively promoting, the notion that switching one's sex is very much like switching one's diet. What's wrong with being a boy today and a girl tomorrow? Isn't that like being carnivorous today and a vegetarian tomorrow?
Modern society is made up of the individual, the intermediate associations that constitute social authority—the family, school, church, voluntary organizations—and the state. Beginning with the French Revolution, the road to totalitarianism has been greased when the state crushes the intermediate associations; when civil society collapses, only the individual and the state remain. As the 20th century proved in Russia, Germany and China, that means the end of liberty. The only bulwark to state power is the social authority grounded in civil society.
Children are not mere creatures of the state. They are the natural outcome of a union between a man and a woman, ideally forged in the institution of marriage, and it is the prerogative of parents—not the state—to decide what is best for them.
Since Newsom is now telling the governors in other states how to conduct their business, it's time for people all over the nation to tell him how to conduct his business.
Contact Gavin Newsom's Executive Secretary: jim.deboo@gov.ca.gov
To contact Mr. Donohue:
Phone: 212-371-3191
E-mail: pr@catholicleague.org
