Life Matters

In this episode of Life Matters Brian examines the month-long election drive from October 3 to November 3, 2020.

Brian explains the significance of each and every vote, not simply on the national level, but perhaps most importantly on the most local of levels. He explains the "Teaspoon Theory" and the use of the "one question test."

While many excited and passionate pro-life individuals will in fact quickly check the top of their ballots, because of media coverage of the positions of the presidential candidates - they will immediately vote for president. However, after that their eyes were glaze over.

Most ballots in California are chock-full of decisions. Because California is a direct democracy state, there are actually 12 specific laws that will be determined by the popular vote. These 12 propositions are very convoluted in the wording and often intentionally written to mislead and exploit an individual's confusion and emotions.

In previous programs Brian and Sheila Green examined the deeper aspects of these propositions.

Each and every ballot will also have down-ballot races - not simply congressional and state house races, but offices like supervisor for counties, mayoral, city council, and school boards. These are incredibly important offices particularly given the fact that Planned Parenthood seeks to establish school-based clinics in each and every school throughout the state.

The teaspoon theory. A single vote for president is important but it is a drop in the ocean of the millions that will be cast across the nation. A vote for a member of Congress is also important, but it is a drop in a swimming pool of water. A vote for a State Legislative District is a drop in a gallon of water. A vote for city council is a drop in a very large glass of water, but a vote for a district school board is like a drop in a teaspoon. It will still take many drops but only a few will turn the entire direction of the race.

Brian tells the story of Mike Spence, who has passed away. He was the vice president of California Prolife council but had run for both school board and city council. He ended up as mayor of West Covina.

His first race he had lost by several votes on election night. He went to bed dejected. But when he awoke it turned out he had actually won by three votes. Mike made it a point to fight Planned Parenthood and the radical left at every turn in that school district.

Years later, Mike determined to run for city council. The radical left ran a candidate against him. This time he was much further behind on election day but the ballots were to take several days of counting. Again, Mike, through some odd circumstances, ended up being pushed over the top. A bag of ballots on the second day was discovered. It happened to have been the ballots of his own precinct. Not only did they make up the difference in his being behind, but he put him well ahead by a mere 10 votes.

Your vote counts in every election. But it is these powerful local elections that Planned Parenthood and the left are seeking to control- your local community and school boards. This is where your knowledgeable vote can have the most effective power.

Close to Election Day, when there's very little time to assess where candidates stand, Brian suggests employing the one question test.

Ask the local candidate if they approve of Planned Parenthood coming into public schools and referring children for medical care and treatment, including abortion without parental knowledge or consent. This is applicable not merely to the school boards but the city council and county supervisors - as the abortion industry seeks government funds from these entities.

This specific policy issue allows clarity of a yes or no response. To ask a candidate if they are pro-life or pro-choice invites meandering opinions and weasel words regarding religious convictions, inclinations, personal versus public policy and other vagaries of semantic shifting. The question should always, always deal with very specific public policies that are being presented in the civic realm right now.

When people in the community hold candidates accountable before the vote it is of much greater significance than complaining after they hold office and make unwise decisions. Holding signs and heaping scorn on elected representatives is much less effective than educating and motivating them to make wise decisions before they ever have to. It also equips the voter to make wise decisions on election day. And elections really matter.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston along with California Pro-life's Vice President Sheila Green, discuss some of the many ballot propositions on the November 2020 ballot in California.

First and foremost is Proposition 14 which renews funding for the CIRM, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. In short, the CRM had been established in 2004 via Proposition 71. It received over $6 billion after counting interest and it was all to be dedicated to embryonic stem cell research and other forms of research, which then President Bush had declared unethical. The federal government would not fund such research.

So ironically that proposition only funded unethical research!

None of the promised benefits occurred. No cures of any kind were found, and many funds were directed to mysterious places, as the CIRM did not, and continues to lack, government oversight.

They have now returned to the ballot and are asking for an additional $5.5 billion! We advise a 'No' vote.

Proposition 15 changes the tax structure on corporate buildings. The argument is to help fund the schools. This is a very common taxation and bond justification. Sadly, the schools are irresponsibly run and have become a literal bastion of leftist ideology. Planned Parenthood has easy access to the public school system, often without parents knowledge or consent. The education unions are 100% pro abortion, and the funds that are earmarked for maintenance and upkeep as required by law, have been pilfered through legal action by these union entities.

Education code 17070.75 mandates that these funds should have been set aside for annual repairs renewals and replacements. The teachers union simply pilfer the money and ask for more bond measures using the children as their empathy hostages. The California State Lotto has wasted $2 billion per annum. As with Proposition 19, there is a constant drumbeat to pour money into the education system where it has been used to grade harm.

Proposition 16 actually reverses current law and makes legal the intentional discrimination against individuals on the basis of race or age or any other factor. It is clear that the radical left now wishes to justify the extreme racial divisions it has been creating. One such example is the known and documented targeting of the black and Hispanic communities for abortion by Planned Parenthood

Proposition 18 would grant the vote to 17-year-olds provided they were to turn 18 on, or before, the general election. This measure allows a whole new category of vote harvesting by the Democrat party, and its Planned Parenthood associates who would simply be free to enter the classroom, indoctrinate and even instruct in voting methods before they harvested those same ballots without any parental knowledge or consent. We suggest a 'No' vote.

Proposition 19 alters the taxation methods of individual homes, but it is clearly designed to get more tax money into state coffers, principally the education coffers. See our concerns regarding proposition 15. We recommend a 'No'.

Proposition 23 would impose new regulations and increased cost for kidney dialysis clinics. This measure with grant favorability to certain union employees would drive other more economical kidney dialysis units out of the state. Many dialysis patients are at risk of morbidity and mortality should they miss just two dialysis treatments. We recommend a 'No' vote.

With the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is a renewed understanding in the American conscience that the purpose of the Supreme Court is to affirm laws that are truly just. It is absolutely essential that we have an understanding of what determines justice from injustice.

If Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman on the Supreme Court, why is Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG) heralded as the cutting-edge, feminist icon of American jurisprudence? Simple: Political feminism is not about advancing women. It is about advancing ideology.

"There will never be enough women on the Supreme Court until there are nine."~RBG

In this special Life Matters broadcast, Brian Johnston explores the recent film lionizing "RBG", what it really says about society and the Supreme Court, and RBG in particular.

Commissioner Johnston may stun some when he asserts that there is in fact nothing original to Justice Ginsburg's political and legal theory. Even in the 1960's when Ginsburg was working her way through the legal world, her thoughts were not in fact 'unique'. Ginsburg, like many Ivy League graduates of the time, seemed to be expressing 'creative thinking' when in fact they were simply mouthing essential Marxist talking points. In the '60s such statements were not often openly credited to a Marxist worldview. That does not alter the content, nor the academic origins of this ideology to 'fundamentally change' the nature of our society.

In 1848, Marx wrote that a woman, in the 'idealized Communist state' of perfection, would no longer be seen by her husband as 'a tool in his means of production.' She was to control and be her own means of production. The natural outflow of this in the case of childbirth, is that she alone was to control how, when, or if a birth were to take place.

Ginsburg is unhappy with the Roe v. Wade decision because she understands - and proclaims in the program - that it created problems going too far at once in striking down even the mildest restrictions on abortion. (In 1973 California's/New York's/ Mass./Colorado's were all liberal abortion laws at the time.) Her preference is a sweeping decision which would give unlimited-abortion rights, the right to treat the child in the womb as disposable chattel, and to grant this right on the basis of gender; or as the title of her 'bio-pic movie suggests, "On the Basis of Sex".

The power of objective facts, and why the right to life is actually built on a much firmer foundation than opinion or religion or guesswork - the idea that just laws can be determined by observing nature and the principles revealed in nature is very much an assertion that even predates Christianity!

On Christianity's arrival it confirmed that God has revealed His invisible nature through His visible creation so that no one has an excuse. (Romans 1:20) Everyone can seek to know what is truly just, and as long as they are willing to have their personal feelings and opinions challenged by those objective facts, they can come to a clearer understanding of the truth. (Romans 2:23)

But sadly, many Christians have not spent time thinking on these principles.

With the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is a renewed understanding in the American conscience that the purpose of the Supreme Court is to affirm laws that are truly just. It is absolutely essential that we have an understanding of what determines justice from injustice.

Brian quotes Martin Luther King, Junior in his letter from Birmingham Jail. King quotes from St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine in their demonstration from scripture that God has revealed, through His creation, basic principles of justice. God has revealed that there is a higher law to which individual man and governments must answer.

This 'higher law' premise is essential for justice and freedom and the right to life.

Even before the Christian Era, Aristotle and Cicero clearly described that there is a natural order to the universe and that the best laws that man can discern are laws that attempt to reflect these higher moral principles that apply to everyone, everywhere.

This principle of natural law has been known throughout the history of Western Civilization. It is the precise foundation on which America's founders built the American experiment in freedom and liberty, upon "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

Brian asserts his alarm that many Christians themselves do not understand what is meant by these principles and the frequency with which the Bible instructs the earnest individual to look to nature. This is reflected in both the Old and New Testament. Christ's injunction to "behold the lilies of the field," the Psalmist's injunction to consider the heavens the work of God's fingers, the reminder in the parables - the very practical reality of every day life, of seeds in sewing of the workday world, God is revealing His principles. Jesus was very clear in His parables and He used every day life.

There are clear ongoing injunctions for God's followers to look at nature and understand the principles God displays there. Instead many Christians have erred toward religiousness.

One example was a pro-life group in the 90s that demanded that all American laws should conform to the laws of the Old Testament, requiring execution for all abortionists, but even the public stoning of rebellious teenagers. Fortunately, many had to re-examine this notion of "biblical voting" and examine more deeply the significance of natural law, the laws of nature and of nature's God.

That is the job of the RTL movement - not to present our personal religion, but to present the objective facts. The facts are on our side and facts are terrible things to waste.

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston examines the issue of embryonic stem-cell research and California's upcoming ballot measure Proposition 14. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) was established in 2004 with the help of more than $6 billion (after interest) by California taxpayers through then Ballot Proposition 71.

CIRM has now run out of money. It has spent billions of dollars. Though it had promised miraculous cured through the use of embryonic stem-cell research, each and every experiment was a failure. But they weren't just failures in the sense of 'not successful.' These ethically-questionable medical experiments created tumors, growths and other serious medical problems. In this episode, Brian examines the ethical aspect in addition to the medical, scientifically demonstrated problems of embryonic stem-cell research.

Brian goes into depth regarding the facts of the new Proposition 14 which is seeking 5.5 billion dollars more.

In this special pledge drive episode of Life Matters you will hear from Brian Johnston, Dr. Mildred Jefferson, guest host Toni Deaver, President Ronald Reagan, and have the opportunity to receive a copy of President Reagan's book, "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation". The pledge drive is designed to allow listeners to partner with Life Matters Radio and Podcast in informing and equipping the public at-large and the pro-life movement in particular.

There are several ways to pledge. One is through a mobile phone: By texting the word, "give" or the word "donate" to 916-347-5644, a Special Pledge page will appear on your mobile smart phone.

You can also go to: lifematters.life and pledge there, and by scrolling down to the bottom of the page, you can also send a recorded comment that can be used in the program itself.

Another way of donating is via the good, old-fashioned, direct U.S. Postal Service by sending a check to Life Matters, Care of: P.O. Box 935, Sacramento, CA 95812. Or you can donate at the California Prolife webpage: Californiaprolife.org

Studies cited:

Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050

Zinc Deficiency Laya Caulfield and Robert Black https://www.who.int/publications

Zinc ions and the fight against SARS https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/29/zinc-ions-and-fight-against-sars British Medical Journal 2003;326 dpi BMJ 2003;326:409

British Medical Journal - immunutrition for fighting Covid 19 https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/2020/05/04/bmjnph-2020-000071

In this program California's former Commissioner On Aging, Brian Johnston explores the current cultural 'climate' surrounding the COVID-19 debate.

Brian has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable and cherish their lives. Today, he discusses the now intentional fear mongering and dismissal of startlingly obvious science by those who prefer a 'police state' approach to illness.

Common sense and medical ethics would direct caregivers to provide treatment and boost the immune system of all vulnerable and immunodeficient individuals. But instead, large swaths of government and an accommodating media have adopted the 'objectified approach' to individuals, the same policy as the Chinese Communist government.

Earlier programs of Life Matters have deeply explored the actual documents and scientific evidence of how hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses, including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

Brian, in discussing literature and film surrounding dystopian cultures and science fiction, draws a contrastive analysis with today's 'real life' approach that is now subjecting large populations to greater hardships and government oppression.

Two specific works, M. Night Shyamalan's Signs, and the various iterations of H.G. Wells', War of the Worlds, provide dramatic insight into the current 'terror of the unknown,' which government entities are both fomenting and using for other expansions of government authority.

The World Health Organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness as officially, "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2)". It is nearly identical to the first severe acute respiratory syndrome, SARS 1. (Virology, May 2020)

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it.

Brian again takes a deep dive into the documented, international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls. (Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

It is the intentional suppression of these documented facts that has led to thousands of deaths, particularly in nursing homes and in immunodeficient populations.

Brian points out our current cultural environment ignores the value of these individual lives. Their value and protection as individuals has been taken from them. It is intentionally causing widespread 'surrender' to fear and ignorance. This is not science fiction. It is happening to us - now.

This inchoate fear being spread by a controlling media culture can only be ended when freedom of speech and objective facts are allowed to be examined. 'Cancel culture' and political hatred of the current administration is apparently a root cause of this cultural phenomenon.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor-patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness.

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

Citations:

Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050 Zinc Deficiency Laya Caulfield and Robert Black https://www.who.int/publications

Zinc ions and the fight against SARS British Medical Journal 2003;326 dpi BMJ 2003;326:409

In one of the most stunning and invasive actions against medical ethics, the major media and many state government organizations have acted to suppress documented medical evidence that there are treatments available for the COVID-19 illness. (America's Frontline Doctors, July 2020)

In this program, Mr. Brian Johnston, who has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable, discusses the actual documents and scientific evidence of how hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

The World Health Organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness officially as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2) it is nearly identical to the first Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS 1. (Virology May 2020)

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it.

Brian takes a deep dive into the documented international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls. (Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor-patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness.

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

In one of the most stunning and invasive actions against medical ethics, the major media and many state government organizations have acted to suppress documented medical evidence that there are treatments available for the COVID-19 illness.

(America's Frontline Doctors, July 2020)

In this program, Mr. Brian Johnston, who has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable, discusses the actual documents and scientific evidence of how Hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

The world health organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness as officially Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2) it is nearly identical to the first Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS 1. (Virology May 2020)

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it.

Brian takes a deep dive into the documented international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls. (Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor- patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness.

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

Citations

1. Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections

Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050

2. Zinc Deficiency

Laya Caulfield and Robert Black

https://www.who.int/publications

3. Zinc ions and the fight against SARS

British Medical Journal

2003;326 dpi

BMJ 2003;326:409

In this episode, Commissioner Johnston examines, along with Stephen Frank, the upcoming local elections on the November ballot.

In every one of California's 58 counties there are local, city and county elections. Whether it be for supervisor, school board, City Council, Mayor or special districts such as library district, junior college district, water districts, even fire districts.

Many are anxiously looking to the national elections and often feel helpless as they 'observe' from afar. But in point of fact, 'All politics are local."

There are literally thousands of important offices that often go uncontested or are intentionally captured by big government bureaucrat types who seek to use government position to herd citizens according to their social inclinations. The value of the human individual is minimized and often dismissed by those who see the State as the arbiter of right and wrong.

Much of our current cultural confusion is due to the fact that those who have solid moral, ethical and cultural values, have NOT been involved in the civic process.

In a masterful summation of how to plan and run a local political campaign (some have paid thousands of dollars to be trained in, and understand these strategic concepts)

Stephen Frank outlines what a newcomer should do as they examine, "entering the fray."

Stephen Frank has experience in state and local elections and is the editor of California Political Views and Review. He discusses how to run an election for local office in what is essentially a straightforward process. But essential steps need to be followed.

Key volunteers are necessary, and key tasks are easily pursued if understood. Further information on local campaigns are available from [email protected]