Good post.

I got as far as far as the seven bullet points of Section 1 Part A, and understood. The only word in those seven items that isn't 100% subjective is "safe".

The 100% subjective terms:

(1) best interest
(2) healthy attachments with adults
(3) healthy environment
(4) social and emotional well-being
(5) optimal cognitive, physical, and social development
(6) appropriate, quality education
(7) appropriate, quality health care

Ask 50 people about each of those terms, and you'll probably get 10 or 15 or 20 different definitions for every one of them.

Perfect leftist document, where the government gets to decide for us since they know better.

Oh, good grief!
Can California please become a separate country? Enough, already with the laws, regulations, and such. Must they lay out every moment in the life of a child?

this is where the left and right fascists are headed

All I had to read was "California Legislative Information." Then I unleashed a huge dinosaur snort.
Or should I spell that Kalifornia to imply rule by fascist control freaks?

Hi freedom ,
I left that looney bin 36 years ago . Now I wish they would secede.

It says regardless of immigration status. This struck me : that a child has a right to parents.
Good grief I didn't see that the child had a right granted by the state to breathe.Quick amend that bill.
I would add the child's right to flip off these kakistocrats

A lesson to you CG . This paragraph explains the absurdity of it takes a village to raise a child . Please read carefully“For the development of personality, then, strict differentiation from the collective psyche is absolutely necessary, since partial or blurred differentiation leads to an immediate melting away of the individual in the collective. There is now a danger that in the analysis of the unconscious the collective and the personal psyche may be fused together, with, as I have intimated, highly unfortunate results. These results are injurious both to the patient’s life feeling and to his fellow men, if he has any influence at all in his environment. Through his identification with the collective psyche he will infallibly try to force the demands of his unconscious upon others, for identity with the collective psyche always brings with it a feeling of universal validity – “godlikeness” – which completely ignores all differences in the personal psyche of his fellows. (The feeling of universal validity comes, of course, from the universality of the collective psyche.) A collective attitude naturally presupposes the same collective psyche in others. But that means a ruthless disregard not only of individual differences but also of differences of a more general kind within the collective psyche itself, as for example differences of race. This disregard for individuality obviously means the suffocation of the single individual, as a consequence of which the element of differentiation is obliterated from the community. The element of differentiation is the individual. All the highest achievements of virtue, as well as the blackest villainies, are individual. The larger a community is, and the more the sum total of the collective factors peculiar to every large community rests on conservative prejudices detrimental to individuality, the more will the individual be morally and spiritually crushed, and, as a result, the one source of moral and spiritual progress for society is choked up. Naturally the only thing that can thrive in such an atmosphere is sociality and whatever is collective in the individual. Everything individual in him goes under, i.e., is doomed to repression. The individual elements lapse into the unconscious, where, by the law of necessity, they are transformed into something essentially baleful, destructive, and anarchical. Socially this evil principle shows itself in the spectacular crimes – regicide and the like – perpetrated by certain prophetically inclined individuals; but in the great mass of community it remains in the background, and only manifests itself indirectly in the inexorable moral degeneration of society. It is a notorious fact that the morality of society as a whole is in inverse ratio to its size; for the greater the aggregation of the individuals, the more the individual factors are blotted out, and with them morality, which rests entirely on the moral sense of the individual and the freedom necessary for this. Hence every man is, in a certain sense, unconsciously a worse man when he is in society than when he is acting alone for he is carried by society and to that extent relieved of his individual responsibility. Any large company composed of wholly admirable persons has the morality and intelligence of an unwieldy, stupid, and violent animal. The bigger the organization, the more unavoidable is its immorality and blind stupidity. (Senatus bestia, senatores boni viri). Society, by automatically stressing all the collective qualities in its individual representatives, puts a premium on mediocrity, on everything that settles down to vegetate in an easy, irresponsible way. Individuality will inevitably be driven to the wall. This process begins in school, continues at the university, and rules all departments in which the State has a hand. In a small social body, the individuality of its members is better safeguarded, and the greater is their relative freedom and the possibility of conscious responsibility. Without freedom there can be no morality. Our admiration for great organizations dwindles when once we become aware of the other side of the wonder: the tremendous piling up and accentuation of all that is primitive in man, and the unavoidable destruction of his individuality in the interests of the monstrosity that every great organization in fact is. The man of today, who resembles more or less the collective ideal, has made his heart into a den of murderers, as can easily be proved by the analysis of the unconscious, even though he himself is not in the least disturbed by it. And in so far as he is normally “adapted” to his environment, it is true that the greatest infamy on part of his group will not disturb him, so long as the majority of his fellows steadfastly believe in the exalted morality of their social organization. Now, all that I have said here about the influence of society upon the individual is identically true of the influence of the collective unconscious upon the individual psyche. But, as is apparent from my examples, the latter influence is as invisible as the former is visible. Hence it is not surprising that its inner effects are not understood, and that those whom such things happen are called pathological freaks and treated as crazy. If one of them happen to be a real genius, the fact would not be noted until the next generation or the one after. So obvious does it seem to us that a man should drown in his own dignity, so utterly incomprehensible that he should seek anything other than what the mob wants, and that he should vanish permanently from view in this other. One could wish both of them a sense of humor, that – according to Schopenhauer – truly “divine” attribute of man which alone benefits him to maintain his soul in freedom.”

— C.G. Jung, Phenomena Resulting from the Assimilation of the Unconscious, Relations Between the Ego and the Unconscious, Collected Works Vol. 7

I think "a village" and vaccines are hugely helpful for children, BUT it's completely bogus to take people's money and give it back to them for education only if they do what I think is the right thing. In WI you can home school and get gov't provided curricula and educational software. Kids can get an education without putting other kids at risk with their parents' bad decisions.

I didn't dig into the bill deep enough to know if it applies to home schooling. It's really shame if it does. CA is an anti-vaxer hotbed. Does their statism overpower their anti-vax tendencies?

More importantly, they hold a gun to your childresns head. There are several passages in the bill that lead me to believe if the parents don't toe the line on a lot of issues, they will be declared Unfit and not appropriate parents and given over to others who fit the PC bill as to how parents should act. Just try to home school a child in that environment.
But I have been told I tend to be a little paranoid in my thinking. I just say to that;" Just because your paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you."

And in CA you haven't a gun in your holster to defend yourself. Couldn't pay me enough to live in CA again. (Left 25+ years ago.)

That's right - "All" children. Good catch.

First they say, "We're doing this for you." Then, you say, "No thanks." Then they say, "Do this. It's for the greater good. Don't you care about the herd?" And, again you say, "No thanks. I'll take my chances." Then, they threaten you with what's most valuable to you, hold a gun to your head and say, "You're going to do this now."

Oh no...you still have to pay the taxes... haha...

You should read the bill. It is not bvery long but it contains a mountain of potential expensive things and potentially things that attempt to overturn any federal immigration laws and rules (my opinion on one read of the bill).
If one believes in states rights, this bill is a declaration of open borders and more social engineering for the state of California.

So if you refuse vaccination you also get out of the propaganda indoctrination requirements?
Hmmmm. Now if it could also rebate the "school" taxation to the parents it would be a good start.

(I did not read the legislation, Abaco, just reacted to your comments;^)