California’s “Suicide by Liberalism” Continues

Bankrupt State falling apart?  Then what you need to do is continue to erode the moral values which once upon a time made your State great…hey, you’ve already got one foot in the grave and another on banana peel, might as well go for it!  From California Catholic Conference:

On Sept. 6, Archbishop José H. Gomez issued the following statement on California Assembly Bill 499, which would allow children 12 and older to be vaccinated against sexually transmitted disease without parental consent or knowledge.

I am praying that Governor Brown will veto AB 499, which passed the California Senate last week.

Parents have a fundamental right and duty to be responsible for their children’s physical and spiritual well-being. Children have a fundamental right to the guidance and protection of their parents.

This legislation would deny those rights.

AB 499 would allow children as young as 12 years old to decide by themselves — without their parents’ involvement — to get vaccines to prevent sexually transmitted diseases…

Come on, Archbishop – who you trying to kid?  We know that all parents can ever do is get in the way.  It is always better if bureaucrats and politicians are in control.  Parents might try – horror of horrors! – to convince their kids that sex before marriage is wrong…better if we just piece by piece remove all parental authority and allow the kids, carefully guided by liberals, decide “for themselves” what to do. Geesh, next thing you know that crazy priest will be asserting that parents can even tell kids what to wear and what to buy!  Where would this all end if it weren’t for liberals?

It is just amazing, isn’t it?  Its sort of like they know they are dying out, but they just want to do as much damage as they can before they go.  California teeters on the edge of bankruptcy, but someone in the legislature found time to draft and pass a bill requiring something that no one other than a tiny minority of anti-family fanatics cares about.

I do wonder how long it will go on – just how utterly destroyed will California be before the people wake up and elect some Republicans to save the State?


15 thoughts on “California’s “Suicide by Liberalism” Continues

  1. neocon1 September 17, 2011 / 5:28 pm

    just give it back to mexico bills and all.

    • neocon1 September 17, 2011 / 5:30 pm

      Archbishop José H. Gomez

      nuff said…..banana republic mentality.

      • Bodie September 18, 2011 / 5:33 pm

        You just can’t resist the siren’s song of racism, can you, neocon? It’s terrific–you’re always ready to disprove Mark’s whines about how conservatives aren’t bigoted.

      • Amazona September 18, 2011 / 8:27 pm

        And since when does one bigot indict an entire political movement?

        What about neo’s admittedly nasty comment is in any way related to politics? Real politics, that is—-the matter of which political system is best for governing the nation.

        I guess for you Identity Politics folks, who don’t know the difference between real politics and and shallow, personality-oriented, tabloid politics, it doesn’t really matter. You don’t know what conservatism is, so of course you have to latch onto anything you can to try to define it.

        I’m sure many Liberals would be highly indignant at having you used to brand them as mindless, snarling, insult-dependent political illiterates. But that would be only fair, wouldn’t it? If we use the same standards, that is.

      • Bodie September 19, 2011 / 11:23 am

        Kinda burns you up that I’m right, doesn’t it, Amazona? That’s good–it should.

      • Amazona September 19, 2011 / 3:32 pm

        You’re right? Only if by “right” you mean “completely unrelated to reality, fact or truth”.

        What neo said reflects on neo. Only on neo. Not on one other conservative anywhere in the galaxy.

        You can come back with the argument that when Bill Ayers bragged about bombing government buildings and getting away with it, he was in fact representing all Liberals, including his soon-to-be best buddy, Barack Obama. That when he said he just regretted “not doing enough” this was a statement that would apply to all Liberals. That when sweetie-pie and future Ayers wife Bernadine Dorhn tittered with glee about the fact that a Manson groupie stabbed pregnant Sharon Tate in the belly with a fork, thereby stabbing the unborn child as well, and started using a hand gesture of the index finger and little finger extended to represent the fork used to maim Ms. Tate, she was in fact making a statement that should reflect upon all Liberals. That when uber-Liberal Stalin starved to death millions of his fellow Russians to inhibit political opposition, he was really acting in the name of all Liberals, past present and future.

        When you make these arguments, and convince me that the act of any one person is supposed to indict all who share anything in common with this person, we can revisit your utterly stupid and bigoted commentary.

        Till then I guess we just have to settle for the stupidity of you claiming that proving you are wrong is proof you are right. Though this weird distorted thought process does go a long way toward explaining your weird distorted posts.

      • Bodie September 19, 2011 / 8:00 pm

        Well, at least you don’t defend neocon. I suppose that counts as a small victory.

        Oh, and let’s also enjoy the fact that in his spasm of bigotry, neocon didn’t notice that the guy he hates for being named “Jose Gomez” is, in fact, on his side. There ain’t no friendly fire when it comes to hatin’!

  2. Mark Edward Noonan September 17, 2011 / 7:58 pm

    The problem is not whether or not a girl shall get it, but if she shall get it without parental consent…that is what is wrong here: the deliberate destruction of the family by the liberal State. This past week I was visiting the new grandson and got in to a bit of discussion with his father…in the end, my view is that a child should receive guidance from parents who love him, not politicians on the make or money-grubbing merchants of a depraved popular culture. While some parents can be bad, you can rely on it that 99% of the time they have the child’s best interests at heart…for government and merchants, it is 0% of the time.

    • Cory September 17, 2011 / 8:08 pm

      Putting the rights of the parents has always ceased to come first when it comes to protecting the health of the child and those near to the child. I am not sure of the specifics of this vaccine, but there are a whole bunch of others that your children are /required/ to get, with or without the parent’s consent. You’ll eventually end up in jail otherwise. This is both to protect the child and to create herd immunity for the cases where a child can’t be given the vaccine and is put at risk because you decided against immunizing your child.

      And you can talk about teaching abstinence all day, but in the end, full sex education has been shown time and again to do more to prevent teen pregnancy and the transmission of STDs than teaching abstinence ever has. This is not an implicit endorsement of sexual activity among teens. It’s merely recognition that it’s going to happen whether you cover your ears and hum or not, and then an attempt to make the best of the situation.

      And if you think your child is different and an angel and would never engage in sexual experimentation behind your back, you better think that because he or she is ugly or a social outcast. Otherwise, you are probably wrong.

      • neocon1 September 18, 2011 / 10:34 am


        leftist BS….as usual.

    • Sunny September 19, 2011 / 1:07 pm

      You mean like Rick Perry? I agree with you on this one Mark.

      • Amazona September 19, 2011 / 3:38 pm

        Rick Perry took no step whatsoever to force vaccinations upon girls without their parents’ knowledge or consent. The mandate was well publicized and no effort was made to go behind parents’ backs. The ability of any parent to opt out of the program was also well publicized and often used.

        Rick Perry acted to help poor parents who could not afford the pricey vaccine, which is about $350.00 per dose, and which was not covered by insurance plans. By making it “officially” mandatory, it became covered by insurance programs thereby allowing the children of poor people to be protected.

        It was a paperwork mandate, not binding upon any parent or student but placing the vaccine into a different category where it would be covered by insurance.

        Gee, I thought the Left was all about “helping” THE POOR. Guess that rhetoric goes right out the window when there is political advantage in some other posturing, doesn’t it?

  3. theoldgoat September 17, 2011 / 10:41 pm

    If Republicans were elected in California the left would just blame them for the mess they are in. Even after they go belly up, it is Bush’s fault, the Republican’s fault, the earthquake in Japan’s fault.

    We hear about liberals talking about being progressive. Yet, the result is moral decay. Removal of fiscal responsibility and the belief that no matter what they want to give away will always have taxpayers to pay the fine… err taxes to cover it.

  4. christmasghost September 19, 2011 / 12:54 am

    There seems to be one point that most people miss in this debate, mainly that the vaccine does not cause sexual activity but does protect girls from being even further traumatized by a rape. This is a true public health crisis and thank god there is a vaccine.

Comments are closed.