Letter to the Editor for "The Supreme Court is Not Supreme"

In 2015, I wrote an extensive article for Townhall.com decrying the abortive, egregiously wrong decision Obergefell v. Hodges.

I received two responses, one which was very positive and thank me for giving hope in the face of this judicial travesty.

Thank you so much for this article! I have been downright depressed over this decision. Your column gives me hope.

--Arthur Webb

And another, a long-winded answer from a very emotional writer determined to justify something which neither natural law nor constitutional law could support.

Here's the extensive response from Mr. David Frazier:

Hey Arthur:

You acknowledge the role of judicial review, but then you say, "The Supreme Court is not the final authority. We the People are." To be sure, if the people wish to pass a constitutional amendment and repeal the 14th Amendment we certainly have the right and the power to attempt to do so. However, I don't see that happening. In order to be "a full member of society", the individual must be afforded all of the rights, benefits, and opportunities that are extended to all other individual members of society at large. As you know, the marriage bond extends beyond the physical relationship. It's a life-time partnership united by chemistry, i.e., love, mutual respect, and self-sacrifice towards that partner and shared goals. Accordingly, every Western culture has always extended special privileges to marital spouses--hospital visitation privileges, inheritance rights, Social Security benefits, insurance benefits, tax credits, owning homesteads and other assets as joint tenants with right of survivorship, enhanced opportunity to qualify for the adoption of minors, etc. In my own state of Mississippi, same-sex couples are specifically prohibited by statute from being eligible to adopt minor children. This is not just an equality issue. Rather, it goes to the "liberty" right of the individual to live his life "as God intended" as a fully functioning member of society.

 The fundamental error in this line of thought is that marriage is not a right. It's a sacrament, a covenant, an institution. People do not have a "right" to marry, because marriage is the life-long union of one man and one woman, i.e. the sacrament involves two people, and those two people need to consent to the covenant.

Furthermore, marriage requires witnesses and the consent of those witnesses. Most people tend to skip over the declaration for the officiating minister during the wedding ceremony, but those words matter: "Should anyone present know of any reason that this couple should not be joined in holy matrimony, speak now or forever hold your peace."

A right cannot be refused someone simply because someone objects, but marriage can face objections. Marriage is a sacrament, a covenant, not a right. 

Furthermore, the fact that David Frazier writes about "privileges" proves my point: marriage is not a right.

Last of all, marriage is not about liberty. Justice Scalia made this point rather wittingly when he wrote: "Ask any hippie."

You state that homosexuality is "unnatural". I have known several members of the LGBT community very well over my 61 years. I have a first cousin who has been with his partner for 35 years. Having known my cousin grow up over the years from a small child into adulthood, I can tell you that "being homosexual" is completely "natural" for him. As a dedicated theist, I assume that you believe that God is a perfect, loving god, responsible for the oversight of all of His creation. However, it also is undisputed in the scientific community that the "cause" of homosexuality in its "pure-congenital" form is a matter of nature. Therefore, the ethical question must be addressed--"Would a truly loving and all knowing god create in the womb a whole segment of human beings destined to be perceived as unnatural deviants, and therefore to be treated as social outcasts?" Even if you throw evolution into the mix and believe that for whatever reason, "pure-congenital" homosexuality is a biological mutation which occurs randomly in the womb, it nevertheless is a natural occurrence. Therefore, to continue to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry would be tantamount to the State denying people with "other" genetic mutations the right to wed or procreate when there is an absence of a compelling state interest. Clearly, that would be illegal and unconstitutional.

This paragraph is built on a throne of lies.

No, people are not born gay. The growing body of research confirms this. A recent study, summarized by Nature.com, reveals that following a longitudinal study of 500,000 people, they found no evidence of a gay gene.

As an attorney, sometimes one of the most difficult points to get across to nonlawyers is that there is a distinction between what is the proper or legal pursuant to the rule of law, and what is politically correct or popular. With the passage of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution the Equal Protection Clause exemplifies my point. When someone is a member of a protected group, or of a suspect classification which has been historically discriminated against, or if a fundamental constitutional right is involved where it is claimed that the right (like marriage) is being denied, then the government must demonstrate a "compelling state interest" that the needs of the state outweigh the needs/rights of the individual if the law, regulation, policy, practice, custom, or procedure is going to pass constitutional scrutiny. This is a very high standard, which the government, in only the most extreme cases is able to meet. Even if a fundamental right is not involved, the state's purpose in promoting denial of equal protection must be "rational."

The Fourteenth Amendment was not written to allow sexual deviants to marry whomever they wanted to. The Fourteenth Amendment merely asserted that the Bill of Rights extends to all citizens, and that the states were bound to the Bill of Rights, too, as well as the federal government. As a non-lawyer, I am surprised that I understand this issue better than the lawyer who wrote this letter to me.'

As for "compelling state interest," yes indeed the state has a compelling interest to retain the natural definition of marriage as such. Children need their mother and father. Stable societies need strong families in order to survive, and they cannot survive if the family is disintegrated or destroyed. Besides, marriage is a proclaimed public covenant, which requires a record of recognition before the state. Yes, the state has a compelling interest in marriage.

With all the talk about "equal protection," marriage is available to every individual, provided that they find a partner of the opposite sex who wishes to marry that individual. There is no violation of equal protection.

The "Equal Protection Clause" of the 14th Amendment provides that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Following Reconstruction, the Jim Crow South, in an effort to comply with the EPC, implemented with success, the policy of "separate but equal" in order to preserve racial segregation and the appartied system of the day. In a strict application of the "original meaning" of the EPC, the U.S. Supreme Court held in the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson that the EPC permits state-sponsored segregation. It was not until 1954 in the landmark case of Brown v. Bd. of Education that the Court reversed itself in a decision which many conservatives at the time considered to be a gross example of an activist liberal Warren Court. Today, Americans of all races look at Brown with a combination of shame and pride, wondering how one group of Americans could treat their fellow citizens so shamefully, but proud of an independent judiciary that is empowered to declare and set aside institutional wrongs. In fact, ever since Brown, the federal courts have taken on the mantle of protector and defender of fundamental constitutional rights for all individuals, often to protect individuals from the abuses of "state legislatures when the latter exercise their police powers" to the detriment of the fundamental rights of the minority. Why should fundamental rights like equal protection or right to privacy, be ultimately left to the whims, passions, and prejudices of state/local politicians whose concerns rarely, if ever, involve protecting the rights of the minority, when those rights may be in conflict with the agenda our beliefs of the majority who voted them into office? The judiciary is aware of human nature/frailty, political reality, and its duty to protect everyone under the law, especially from the tyranny of the majority.

Marriage is not a fundamental right, as asserted above. People are born black, but they are not born gay. Once again, this lawyer argues in circles.

We conservatives denounce the notion of "a living Constitution", and well we should! If used in a general way, it becomes totally subjective. We saw this demonstrated Wednesday in Justice Robert's majority decision in the Burwell decision. On the other hand, Justice Scalia routinely applies a "textual" approach to the interpretation of the Constitution and laws--the clear language of the text as it makes sense under the facts. His application of the "textualist" approach to interpretation is clearly demonstrated in his dissent by his stated logic regarding the government's extension of the federal tax credits under the ACA in the Burwell case. However, due to his strong and compelling sectarian convictions, Scalia abandoned the "textual" approach in the Obergafell case, and resorted to name-calling, casting aspersions, and general disrespecting of his colleagues. This attitude lends nothing to the promote the doctrine of "judicial ", or to the rule of law--not to mention to the notion of being "Christian".

There was no abandonment of Justice Scalia's originalist arguments when he dissented in Obergefell. Did he bother to read the opinion?

What members of the Christian community must remember is that our Founding Fathers created a secular democratic republic. To be sure, religion affects culture, and culture affects the law. To this end, America has always been influenced by its Judeo-Christian roots. For the most part, that has been a good thing. However, when the State seeks to impose sectarian beliefs over the electorate, without demonstrating a compelling state interest or need; or when a law, rule, or regulation denies to everyone the natural and fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, it's no contest.

The Obergafell [sic] Court decision is simply a judicial affirmation that the judiciary realizes that the American people have reached the point where we neither need, nor do we desire to have a State Lord Protector overseeing the personal lives of the nation's citizens. After all, ours is a secular democratic republic. Let's keep it that way!

The laws of nature and nature's God are clearly recognized in the Declaration of Independence AND the United States Constitution.

The Constitution speaks of "the blessings of liberty," which implies a divine origin. Article I, Section 8, Clause 10 recognizes the power of Congress to make laws commensurate with "the law of nations," which means "the laws of nature and nature's God as applied to nations," per James Wilson, who was one of only six individuals to sign the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

The signatory at the end of the Constitution references "The Year of Our Lord." Yes, there is a recognition of a divine authority in the United States Constitution, and it is wrong for anyone to think otherwise.

The Constitution references freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights, too.

David Frazier                                               

Classical Conservative Perspectives 

Saltwaterpappy.tumblr.com

BREAKING: Torrance Community Group in Panic Mode, Members Hide Identity After Exposure for Defaming Local Residents

Well, that didn't take too long.

Today, (June 24th, 2022), members of the "Torrance Community Group" are already panicking because I have exposed their secretive hatefest (and very serious cases of "Schaper Derangement Syndrome") for the public to see.

Check out their latest post:

"A history of being a stalker ..." really?!

I don't whether to laugh or cry at this point. This small cadre of individuals are truly mentally ill, or emotionally immature, or both, or something far worse.

What it all really amounts to, of course, is that they do not like the fact that common-sense residents in the city of Torrance are rising up and fighting back. They do not like the fact that conservatives and constitutionalists generally are not putting up with the social media bullying, hazing, and hating. They simply do not like the fact that everyday citizens are fighting back and giving these hateful leftists a taste of their own medicine.

Check out the comments beneath this post, too:

My  property of "free rent" just got bigger.

This Judd Rose guy comments, "Dude makes himself a public figure."

Funny how he and others can say that, when they have spent much of their time on social media making public comments about me and attack me. They are responsible for making me a public figure, really.

Susan Niemeyer, who promoted hate group "The Southern Poverty Law Center" when she was defaming some of the city councilmembers, says that I am "a complete waste of a person."

They why did she spend time attacking me in the first place? Wouldn't that make her a waste of a person, too? Or at least that she is wasting her time?

There is a price to "Schaper Derangement Syndrome," no doubt, and they are all paying the price. If they just went back to taking care of their own little lives and stopped defaming others who disagree with them, they would not have so much pain and suffering. It's their own fault, and yet one of the core problems with SDS is that they refuse to take responsibility for their thoughts, their feelings, their actions. It's really sad, but in some ways, it's quite funny to see so many people melt down just because I call them out for all the hateful, dishonest things that they write and do.

"Antifa Trash, Mr. Left Coast" Captured Best Video of Antifa Harassing Me at WI Spa Protest

 Best Video of Antifa harassing me at the WI Spa Protest on Saturday, July 17:

Arthur Schaper from Mass Resistance hid behind the cops. He called me a pedohpile one time pic.twitter.com/UAgFUeMmC4

— “ANTIFA TRASH MR. LEFT COAST” RIGHT WATCH (@LCRWnews) July 17, 2021

Mr. Antifa Trash is still bitter after all these years that I called him a pedo. It must sting because it must be true. 

Drag Queen Story Hour Facing Pushback -- FINALLY!

Here's a great op-ed which featured the efforts of MassResistance to push back and stop the Drag Queen Story Hour program in Chula Vista, CA.

This was a pretty decent op-ed, actually. It's about time that more mainstream media reporters paid attenton to the great work that MassResistance is doing to stop this madness.

Drag Queen Story Hour: glittery entertainment or gender-bendingprovocation?

By PETER ROWE -- SEP 15, 2019 | 8:01 AM

There are several ways to look at the "Drag Queen Storytime" held last Tuesday in Chula Vista. Here's Tony Villafranca's view:

"They are going after the kids in their formative years with a very aggressive agenda or ideology aimed at 3- to 8-year-olds," said Villafranca, a South Bay real estate agent. "It is basically the normalizing of that whole LGBT drag queen pedophilia lifestyle. This is brainwashing."

For an alternate take, consider Lillian Faderman's view:

"It's children's entertainment," said Faderman, curator of the San Diego History Center's recent exhibit on the area's LGBTQ legacy. "I don't think drag queens are trying to convert children to a way of life. Kids respond to its color and its charm and its funniness, and they are entertained."

For years, drag queens have read picture books to young audiences in public libraries. These sessions often prompt protests like the dueling rallies seen outside Chula Vista public library's Civic Center branch last Tuesday. Separated by barriers patrolled by police, the two camps confronted each other with signs and slogans for hours.

"No hate. no fear," Storytime supporters chanted, "everybody's welcome here!"

"We are praying for you," a protester responded over a bullhorn. "Sodomy will never save you. Transgenderism will never save you..."

Arthur Schaper said his group, MassResistance, wanted to shield youngsters from "illicit entertainment."

"These are adult entertainers," said Schaper, a Torrance resident and organizer of the self-described "pro-family activist group." "It's not hateful to protect children. They have to stop pushing this agenda, this false LGBT agenda, stop pushing this on the youngest, most vulnerable members of our community."

They got everything that I said spot on. I was really grateful for this coverage.

Supporters counter that these programs are tailored to youngsters. There's nothing sexual about the readings or readers, even if the latter are decked out in flamboyant gowns and layers of glitter and mascara.

The gaslighting is unprecedented. We are talking about drag queens, sexually explicit entertainers, reading to children. There is nothing about any of this that is properly tailored for youngsters. Nothing at all.

"They are doing what they love," said Adrianna Villaseñor, 10, who attended with her mother and little sister. "And loving what they are doing."

When the library scheduled this presentation months ago, City Librarian Joy Whatley anticipated some opposition. Still, she was unprepared for the volume of calls, emails, picketers.

She should have known better, and the city of Chula Vista learned the hard way that the community did not want such filth in their city.

"I'm slightly overwhelmed," she said. "We didn't expect this to be such a huge thing."

Still, she had no regrets: "We're diverse, we're inclusive, we welcome all."

Sex offenders are welcome around children, too?

But was this the right venue for Barbie Q and Raquelita, last week's readers? John Renison Jr., an aspiring Republican politician from the South Bay, started a change.org petition calling for the library to cancel the event. His text professed support for the LGBTQ community and "equal rights for all citizens but this is something else. There's a fine line that's being crossed!

This approach is all wrong. There is no such thing as an "LGBT community", and we should stop treating sexual perversions and natural and innate behaviors. Enough is enough!

"There is no reason to indoctrinate our children with these ideals."

By the time the show started, 10 days after posting the petition, Renison had 611 signatures.

While drag queen storytime is a recent phenomenon, male actors have performed as women for centuries. From ancient Greece through Elizabethan England, plays' female roles were traditionally played by men. In one form or another, that custom endured almost into the present.

Men playing female characters is something completely different from drag entertainment. It is comparing apples to rotten oranges.

"In vaudeville, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, this was very common," said Faderman, author "The Gay Revolution: The Story of the Struggle," a 2015 history. "This was considered family entertainment."

Julian Eltinge, a popular vaudeville female impersonator, later starred in silent films. In his alter ego, the lovely and innocent "Vesta Tilley," he became one of the era's highest paid actors. With his earnings, he built a palatial Hollywood mansion, Villa Capistrano, and bought a ranch in Alpine.

"Some of the highest paid drag queens in the past have identified as heterosexual," Faderman said. "It has nothing to do with sexual behavior. It has everything to do with entertainment."

But the whole Drag Queen Story Hour program is about normalizing sexual perversion like homosexuality. The book that the two drag queens read, "Julian is a Mermaid", has a picture of boy stripping down and putting on makeup. That is subtle pedophilia, to put it mildly.

While drag entertainers were widely accepted in their professional roles, authorities frowned on cross-dressing when it occurred off stage. From the mid-19th century until the close of the 20th century, many U.S. cities forbade people from — to quote an 1848 Columbus, Ohio, statute — publicly wearing "a dress not belonging to his or her sex." San Diego's ban was on the books until 1998.

That ban should be restored!

Starting in the 1930s, though, nightclubs with floor shows featuring men in drag opened in New York, San Francisco and other cities. San Diego's Show Biz Supper Club began its 14-year run in 1968, while a successor, North Park's Lips, is celebrating its 20th anniversary.

Today, the acts are a bit more risque than they were in the days of chaste Vesta Tilley.

There you go! "Risque" is the word. There is no way that anyone can claim that that kind of trash has any right or reason being around children!

"Guests 16+ are welcome to enjoy dinner and (select) shows," the Lips web site notes, "but please — leave the kids at home!"

HOW ABOUT THAT! "Leave the kids at home!" That says it all, doesn't it?

Telling Stories

Chula Vista's presentation was dubbed "Drag Queen Storytime," to distinguish it from "Drag Queen Story Hour," a four-year-old San Francisco-based international organization with a trademarked name. Story Hour, its website says, "captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.

What a crock! No one bought into it.

"In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real."

This year, Story Hour's San Diego chapter has hosted three sessions in a private City Heights event space, You Belong Here.

"The response has been overwhelmingly positive," said Alexandra Ott, the local chapter's organizer. "Every time the kids are thrilled to be in an environment where someone is reading to them, and being with other kids."

In contrast to the Chula Vista event, there were no protesters. Ott credits this to the fact that the shows were not widely advertised.

Ott selected the drag queens from a list of local performers who had already undergone background checks. This is a sensitive subject — earlier this year in Texas, Mass Resistance reported that at least two Drag Queen Story Hour performers were registered sex offenders.

"That made international news," Schaper said.

In Chula Vista, the performers did not undergo a law enforcement background check. But like all volunteers coming to the library for fewer than 24 hours, they were subject to a level of scrutiny.

Well, well, well. And the mayor and city council in Chula Vista claimed unequivocally that the drag queens had received background checks. What fresh hell is this?

"We check their professional affiliations," City Librarian Whatley said, "check references, talk to other librarians who may have worked with them."

Whatley and her team also met with the Chula Vista Police Department. "Just to have a safe family event," she said, "that's what we are looking at."

While physical violence has never marred a Draq Queen Story Hour event, these sessions can be emotionally bruising. In January, the Putnam County, Tenn., library's meeting room was rented by the local Story Hour chapter. On the scheduled day, entering the library meant passing a boisterous scrum of protesters and counter-protesters.

"Children were in tears," said Phil Schaller, the library director.

The parents who brought the children to the program should have been in a jail cell.

In Leander, Tex., an Austin suburb, the city council last month voted to stop renting meeting rooms in the public library to any group. Among those whose planned event was scotched: Drag Queen Story Hour. City officials insisted the step was taken for financial, rather than ideological reasons, reporting that this year's rental fees had amounted to $1,800, while security had cost $20,000.

MassResistance was instrumental in stopping that program there, too.

Rival Camps

In Chula Vista, rival spiritual camps formed on either side of the Story Time issue. More than 70 religious figures — from Methodist and Lutheran ministers to Catholic priests and a Jewish rabbi — signed an open letter praising the library's decision.

Those "religious figures" are not religious. They are apostate.

"It is clear that the opposition to this event is rooted in homophobia, bigotry, xenophobia, and discrimination," the letter said. "As faith leaders and people of faith, we believe that discrimination of any kind is an affront to the core values of our faith, and strongly oppose the use of faith as a weapon to threaten the future of events such as Drag Queen Story Hours."

Instead of trying to defend the perverse notion that it was OK to have sex offenders or sexually explicit entertainers around children, they decide to hate the parents, the grandparents, the pastors, and other community leaders who opposed the program. What a shameful display of hate!

Several Pentecostal churches staked out the opposite position. At a Sept. 4 rally on the steps of City Hall, Pastor Art Hodges of the South Bay Pentecostal Church said he didn't object to parents taking their children to a drag queen event. He objected to Story Time's site: a taxpayer-funded library.

"They're the parents, we're not protesting their right," Hodges told News10. "But they should do that privately, on their own time, in their own place, on their own dollar."

(Days later, South Bay Pentecostal was vandalized, with the words "Lucifer" and "Satan" painted on the exterior. At press time, police had no suspects.)

So much for "Love is Love" and "Love Trumps Hate", right?

Sister Donatella Soul, a self-described "drag nun," countered that Drag Queen Storytime needed to be held in a city facility. "It's important, especially in civic spaces, for people in different communities to have access," she said.

Libraries are increasingly open to once-ignored populations. The San Diego Public Library, for instance, has an San Diego Public Library's LGBTQIA Library Services Committee. (The letters stand for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, and asexual or allied.) This June, Pride Month, the library system issued "LGBT Pride" commemorative cards.

Chula Vista has also been involved with the local LGBTQ community, hosting a panel discussion of staffers from the San Diego Lambda Archives and screening a "Pride Film" series.

Patrons, Whatley said, should be able to find a wide range of materials at the library. In fact, Drag Queen Story Time was just one offering in a large catalog of summer events promoting literacy: Spanish Storytime, Toddler Storytime, Dog Days of Summer Storytime...

"And like any book or program we have," Whatley said, "you have to opt in."

Or opt out. Schaper, the MassResistance organizer, said Chula Vista's Drag Queen Storytime has been a powerful recruiting tool.

"It's grown considerably now, especially in the last month," he said. "The idea that drag queens are in the libraries is just so horrific to them."

Yes, it has! MassResistance gained considerable attention and support for our efforts to stop the Drag Queen Story Hour madness in Chula Vista. We still have members of our San Diego MassResistance chapter who are ready to step in and do what needs to be done to stop this LGBT infiltration into the public square. The men and women from many church communities reached out to us and worked with us to alert the public and raise outrage about the program. Event after the event transpired on September 10, 2019, the San Diego MassResistance team continued to hammer the city council for allowing that disgusting program to take place at the main library.

They did a great job, and then the pandemic hit. Notwithstanding the problems which ensued, our MassResistance activists around the country and the world have worked with us, and we never stopped our push to stop the LGBT agenda and its militant miscreants.

Easy Reader Reporter Admits: We Are Going Bust

 Ryan McDonald of the Easy Reader News interviewed me for a story about the fate of the Republican Party in the South Bay section of Los Angeles County.

I recorded our interview:

Here's what he had to say about Easy Reader News:

"I used to cover Hermosa. With the pandemic, a lot of Easy Reader staff got laid off, so things have been pretty different. It' tough for everybody right now."

Indeed.

Ryan McDonald also shared toward the end of our interview that he thinks that the LA Times is a newspaper of high repute, and he also believes that the Southern Poverty Law Center is a noteworthy organization.

It's really disturbing to hear how cut off from reality so many of the journalists in our current press corps have become so biased, and so blinded to their bias.

In my interview with McDonald, I pressed him a number of times about the rancorous, unyielding bias of the media against President Donald Trump. I called out the fact that they routinely lied about him, claiming that he had said that Nazis and White Supremacists were good people, when he had never said that, and he repeatedly denied referring to them.

I guess I can give Ryan McDonald some credit, in that he did not mention anything about the hate group from Alabama in his Easy Reader story. 

Still, I must say that I was shocked and dismayed that McDonald thinks that the LA Times is a newspaper of good repute. He disputed the point that I made, that the newspaper is racist, even though the editorial board and the owner of the newspaper admitted that the LA Times had a racist past. They wrote two articles about it!

At any rate, in spite of the fact that the reporter called on some sordid elements in the South Bay to try to defame me, the article was all around pretty good.

I am also glad that I am able to expose that Easy Reader News is about to close down for good, since they have spent too much time pushing a left-wing agenda, especially considering the negative cartoons they print which attack President Donald Trump and conservatives.

Organization Director for MassResistance Runs for Office, Campaigns on Conservative, Pro-Family Platform

 

In left-wing Los Angeles area, Arthur Schaper’s run for California State Assembly shocked everyone!

An uplifting election story!

He got 10,000 more votes than previous GOP candidate - who had spent $1.5 million!

He got big endorsements, lots of support. He really angered the Left - and the squishy CA GOP!

December 7, 2020

 Arthur Schaper's campaign was bold and unapologetic - unlike most of the rest of the California GOP.

MassResistance Organization Director Arthur Schaper had not originally intended to run for the California State Assembly – or any public office.

But late last year a group of local citizens who admire his strong pro-family principles and MassResistance activism approached him and relentlessly urged him to do it. They raised the $1,104.00 filing fee to get him on the ballot. They found him an experienced campaign manager and treasurer.

So Arthur agreed to run. With limited but effective campaigning and very little money, he got 84,867 votes (about 37% of the total). This was over 10,000 more votes than the previous GOP candidate in 2018, who had spent $1.5 million, had a campaign office, a large organization, and campaigned heavily throughout the district.

How did Arthur do this well? We think it was because he has a strong common-sense (and pro-family) message – including opposing the LGBT agenda in the schools – that resonated with a lot of voters who were tired of the lunacy from Democrats.

Up against a terrible anti-family incumbent – in a difficult district

On paper, it’s certainly not friendly territory. The 66th Assembly District is known as the “South Bay” area of Los Angeles County. It includes Arthur’s home town of Torrance and extends along the coast from Manhattan Beach to Rancho Palos Verdes and east to West Carson. Not surprisingly, it is a majority Democrat area. With California’s legalized ballot harvesting, early voting, mail-in voting, and the usual ballot fraud, it’s become very difficult for Republicans like Arthur to gain traction.

However, the incumbent Assemblyman, Democrat Al Muratsuchi, is an enemy of pro-family conservatives. He’s voted for every anti-family bill in the Legislature. For example, this year, he was the tie-breaking vote in the Assembly to pass SB 145, which removed the sex-offender registry requirement for adult-child homosexual sex. In 2018 he was a strong advocate for AB 2943, which would ban counseling for adults suffering from unwanted same-sex attraction. (Luckily, MassResistance was able to stop that one from becoming law.)

 California MassResistance activists confronted Muratsuchi (left) at his public events about his support for the hideous bill SB 145.

 Protesting Muratsuchi's support for AB 2493 at his district office, in 2018.

 Reacting to Muratsuchi's explanation for his support for AB 2943 at an "town hall" event in 2018.

So people across the district felt that Muratsuchi needed to be opposed, and that Arthur Schaper was the best chance there was for that. Arthur continued his full-time work for MassResistance and did campaigning on weekends and occasional evenings. He always mentioned MassResistance when he was campaigning – and took strong positions on all the conservative issues of the day. His committee of supporters did everything they could, including texting over 60,000 people in the district.

Endorsement by Ward Connerly

One of the prominent ballot questions before the state in that election was Proposition 16. Back in 1996 California voters passed Prop 209 to end the leftist practice of race-based discrimination in college admissions and hiring practices in the state. University of California Regent Ward Connerly ran that effort and became a national figure. Liberals have hated it ever since. So this year the Left put forth Prop 16 to repeal it. (Luckily, that failed.)

During the campaign, Ward Connerly was so impressed by Arthur’s bold stand against Prop 16 (and on other conservative issues) that he publicly endorsed him! (One of Connerly’s staff members has now become a MassResistance activist!)

 Ward Connerly was outspoken in his support for Arthur's candidacy!

Other key endorsements

For 20 years The National Rifle Association had not endorsed any Republican candidates in District 66 – because they were soft on the gun issue. But this time the NRA strongly endorsed Arthur!

 Endorsed by the NRA.

Torrance City Councilman Aurelio Mattucci, a strong pro-family advocate, publicly endorsed Arthur, along with Hector Gastelum, the Otay Mesa Water District Director.

Torrance City Councilman Aurelio Mattucci is a major figure in local politics. His endorsement of Arthur was a big deal!

The slimy California GOP would not endorse Arthur!

In recent years Arthur (along with many other California conservatives) has been very vocal about the leftward lurch and moral corruption of the California State Republican Party. Many have described the CA GOP as having been largely taken over by “the establishment consultant class.” In particular, they have caved in on the LGBT agenda and other pro-family issues that are important to the grassroots. (Republicans in other states will surely recognize this!) Arthur has loudly called them out on that – and they really don’t like him because of that.

For example, Arthur was president of the Beach Cities Republicans, a local GOP organization. The CA GOP warned the membership that if they re-elected Arthur as president they would revoke the group’s charter! They elected Arthur anyway. And their charter got revoked!

The Beach Cities Republicans elected Arthur president TWICE - against the threats of the state party!

The CA GOP also tried to pressure local GOP groups to “disinvite” Arthur from speaking during his campaign – but none of them complied! Arthur is clearly popular among local Republicans.

Great support from his church!

Arthur belongs to a church that most people can only dream of! The pastor is a strong social conservative and not afraid to talk about the issues – and take action. The pastor openly endorsed Arthur and had him speak at the church several times during the campaign.

Arthur definitely has a gift for speaking clearly and powerfully on political issues. Here are two of his speeches before the congregation:

Arthur’s speech at the church on October 8, 2020

Arthur’s speech at the church on October 22, 2020

 Arthur, along with his pastor (left), addresses the church congregation about the issues before them in his election.

A vicious hate campaign against Arthur – but he fought back!

Not surprisingly, the left-wing radicals in the district became unhinged when they heard Arthur was running for the State Assembly with an unflinching pro-family and pro-America message. They went on a vicious social media rampage against Arthur.

 A left-wing wacko named Alexandra Lynn led a social media campaign against Arthur. But people also defended him. Below, one of the many memes that Lynn sent out against Arthur.

As we’ve all observed, these are very disturbed people, as exhibited by their obsessive hatred and inability to deal with issues rationally. Most pro-family people cower in fear when these attacks start to happen, and worse, pull back on their principled public stands. It’s really pathetic to watch. But not Arthur Schaper. He fought back. And it worked. The leftist radicals are the ones who began to cower and shrivel away. Arthur knows that these people – who love to be “bullies” – are really cowards inside.

Here’s an example of Arthur’s successfully fighting back at one of his rabid attackers.

Final thoughts

Although Arthur didn’t win, he got more votes than any of the “experts” predicted was possible. He was a first-time candidate in a hostile district who only raised about $4,000. He had a small group, and was opposed by his own state party. But his unflinching and fearless conservative pro-family message won support that was far greater than his reach!

In short, Arthur did the opposite of what most of the GOP does. And it got surprising results in a normally inhospitable environment. This should be a lesson for the rest of the Republican Party – and for conservatives everywhere!

 For over 84,000 people it was an easy choice to make!

Report on Arthur Schaper's Bid for State Assembly (Reflection)

This article was released in October 2020, a month before the election.

I was really impressed that the article had some degree of balance to it.

I do not apologize or regret one statement that was written in the article. The reporter actually got some pretty accurate information written about me.

2020 elections: L.A. County’s Assembly races at a glance

 

Al Muratsuchi, Arthur Schaper

District 66: Al Muratsuchi (D) vs. Arthur Schaper (R)

·         The District: District 66 is home to approximately 467,745 people living in Alondra Park, Hermosa Beach, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Racho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Torrance, West Carson, and portions of Gardena, Harbor City and Harbor Gateway. About half of the district is White (46.33%), and the other half is primarily Asian (25.73%) and Latino (21.02%). The remaining residents are are mostly Black (4.84%). Despite a Democratic majority (42.72%), a Republican nominee won the seat in 2014.

·         The Incumbent: Al Muratsuchi (D-Rolling Hills Estates) has a mixed record over the last year, during which he voted for measures that capped rent increases at 5% a year, and forces debt collectors to leave the final $1,724 in bank accounts, but he also voted against bills that allow formerly incarcerated people to serve on juries, and expedited the process to obtain records of police misconduct in criminal trials. He’s received $31,000 in campaign contributions from the Los Angeles Police Protective League, and $37,000 from PORAC, which is the largest statewide law enforcement organization.

A  It's strange that the reporter spent so much time focusing on how much money and support Al Muratsuchi had receivevd from police officers and police associations. Was the press trying to push the whole "defund the police" narrative, too?

·         The Challenger: Arthur Schaper is running as a Republican, and has only managed to raise around $1,800 dollars for his campaign. Schaper, a supporter of President Donald Trump and a blogger, is against same-sex marriage, transgender bathroom rights, illegal immigration, and sex education in schools, which he claims was “foisted on us by the LGBTQ agenda.”

I    Inthe end, I raised $4,500. So far, I am within two percentage points of the previous GOP contender for this state assembly seat--and he spent $1.5 million! He also had the endorsements of the LA County and the California GOP. They Establishment did nothing for me, and I got nearly the same percentage, and I earned more raw total votes.

    

     I am also pleased to share that I stand by everything that was written in the above paragraph. Yes, I do support Donald Trump. Yes, I am a blogger. I do oppose same-sex "marriage", the notion that confused men deserve to use women's bathrooms and vice versa. This is absolute madness. Since when did we actually think that men could become women, or that we had to trip over ourselves to normalize and embrace this madness?!

    Yes, indeed, I do believe that we should simply remove sex-ed from the government schools, and put the responsibility back in the hands of parents and other local communities (churches, particularly). I don't recall where I stated that sex-ed was "foisted on us by the LGBTQ agenda", however ...

·         The Outlook: In the primaries, Schaper received about half as many votes as Muratsuchi. Additionally the majority of voters in this district are registered Democrats. While not impossible, without the major campaign contributions of his competitor, it seems unlikely that Schaper will be able to overcome Muratsuchi.

It would not  have been impossible to overcome. But hey --- I had to work a job, and I had grassroots support at the most. It was just not going to be the easiest road to hoe. That's life. I am glad that I ran, and perhaps I may run for office again. Who knows?

Final Reflection

The corporate media, including the SoCal News Group, is on its last leg. The Daily Breeze, which was bought up by SoCal News, has moved their headquarters at least two times: first from their flagship headquarters on Torrance Blvd. at the intersection with Palos Verdes Drive.

Then they moved to a set of rooms in a larger corporate building at the corner of Torrance and Hawthorne Bvld. Now they are somewhere in Hermosa Beach, in the same office as the Beach Reporter. Ouch! Oh, how the mighty are fallen!

Internationally Renowned Author and Evangelist Praises MassResistance, Interviews Organization Director

Internationally known evangelist and conservative commentator Dr. Michael Brown praises MassResistance in latest book

Features our efforts in successfully fighting—and winning—culture war battles against the LGBT agenda

Video: Dr. Brown’s exclusive interview with MassResistance national director Arthur Schaper

May 29, 2020

 Dr. Brown's show has been a prominent voice in the Evangelical Christian movement for many years.

For years, Dr. Michael Brown has been sharing the Gospel and speaking out against the abysmal culture malaise that has overrun the United States. He is an internationally recognized author and speaker, and has long hosted a popular daily radio show “Line of Fire,” heard on over 40 stations across the US and online.

Most important, unlike many conservative radio and talk show hosts, Dr. Brown has not been afraid to forthrightly discuss the LGBT agenda. His 2011 book, A Queer Thing Happened to America; and What a Long, Strange Trip It’s Been, documented the extraordinary impact that LGBT activism has had on American society.

But how can we effectively stop it? Finding common ground with an agenda that is completely based on lies can never succeed, he realized. The pro-family movement has tried that approach for 30 years, and it has failed.

In his latest book, Jezebel’s War with America, Brown not only confronts the militancy of the LGBT agenda – along with the other cultural horrors overrunning the country –he also gives special praise to MassResistance – that MassResistance’s hard-nosed, confrontational approach is what works.

Jezebel was the most wicked woman in the Bible. She was married to Israel’s wicked King Ahab. But her evil was far greater. She was determined to overwhelm the nation with idolatry, licentiousness, and utter moral destruction. She had the prophets killed, led Israel into paganism, and emasculated men.

In 21st-century America, Jezebel is not a person. But the spirit of Jezebel is alive again. The same demonic influences are felt in the massive increase of pornography, sexual immorality, abortion, radical feminism, and in the militant efforts to silence opposing voices. It plagues citizens, families, the churches, and society as a whole.

Is there any hope for stopping this?

In the final chapter of his new book, titled “How to Defeat Jezebel on a National Level,” Dr. Brown praises MassResistance for our growing victories around the world to stop the LGBT agenda:

There’s an organization that started in Massachusetts that is now going nationwide and worldwide. It’s called MassResistance, and it has been pushing back against radical activism since 1995 (and paying quite a price along the way). Not all of its members or leaders are Christians [some are Jewish], and not all Christians would be comfortable with everything they do. I don’t mean they are violent. Never! I mean they don’t mind shouting loudly if that’s the only way to be heard. But this much is clear: They’re getting results because they’re making an effort. They’re getting the truth out to local school communities. They’re exposing the darkness. And they’re winning hearts and minds.

In subsequent paragraphs, Brown lists several MassResistance articles and talks about how we stopped depraved “Drag Queen Story Hour” events across the country.

MassResistance’s Arthur Schaper Goes on Dr. Brown’s Radio show

This past week Dr. Brown asked Arthur Schaper, MassResistance’s national director, to come on the show and talk more about what we do and how we differ from the mainstream pro-family movement.

VIDEO: Dr. Michael Brown Interviews Arthur Schaper

Arthur described the successes MassResistance has been having over the last two years. Drag Queen Story Hour programs are getting shut down; reparative therapy bans have been stopped in key states; and MassResistance recently forced a school district to get rid of a graphic LGBT-based sex-ed curriculum—in the state of California, of all places!

Dr. Brown has been a vocal supporter of MassResistance, and a good friend of our executive director Brian Camenker for many years. His strong endorsement of our activism in his latest book is a great testament to the impact that our pro-family activism is having around the world!

 In 2015 Michael Brown (right) and Brian Camenker of MassResistance (center) were both featured speakers at the "Stand4Truth" Conference in Salt Lake City. At left is Sandy Rios, the moderator of the event.

   

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

Letter to the Editor: "I appreciate your article on reparations very much."

I appreciate your article on reparations very much.  Far to moral and logical for so many Americans who are moved by emotions rather than Christian based logic.

I was a Southern Californian except for my time in the Navy until six years ago.  So miss the climate and geography but not the taxes and cost of living.

Thanks again.

Kevin Shannon Bearly