Murder in Las Vegas: Is it the Largest Mass Murder? 

Murder in Las Vegas: Is it the Largest Mass Murder? 
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

The slaughter in Las Vegas has been labeled the “worst” mass murder in our nation’s last century. Is it worthy of such a classification? Reporters and commentators obviously insist that it is. Ordinary citizens, justifiably shocked by the deliberate killing of more than 59 and the wounding of hundreds more, have been persuaded to classify the grisly event by using the handiest superlative available. From coast to coast, in print and over the airwaves, nothing has ever been deemed more deserving of the term “worst.”

City night life along the Las Vegas strip. Image from pixabay by ngd3, CCO Creative Commons.

But wait! The most recent annual report produced by the London-based International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) admits that the IPPF was responsible for 1,094,679 abortions in 2016 alone. In the United States, Planned Parenthood snuffed out the life of 887 yet-to-be-born infants every day. Is this not worse than Stephen Paddock’s deadly rampage?

Planned Parenthood’s fans and pro-abortion partisans everywhere always claim that abortion isn’t murder. Life begins at birth, they insist, and extracting what can be found in a womb prior to birth is considered a relatively simple medical procedure. But these individuals, properly designated “pro-aborts,” produce no credible evidence to back up such claims. And science continues to demonstrate the terrifying absurdity of their falsehoods.

We are all supposed to be outraged at what occurred in Las Vegas – and in Orlando, San Bernardino, and Fort Hood where fewer were murdered. Okay, these murderous sprees are completely condemnable. But we’re also expected to demand that lawmakers outlaw private possession of weapons – not just semi-automatic military-style rifles but any weapon capable of firing a bullet into a fellow human’s body. Overlooked is the fact that no weapon ever shot a bullet by itself. Shootings are the work of shooters, not weapons.

We are also expected to accept the lies issued by PP leaders who insist that they are in business to provide “health care for women.” Aren’t half of abortion’s victims females? What kind of health care is it that deliberately terminates the lives of human beings? Overlooked in this discussion is the other PP practice whereby organs harvested from aborted fetuses are sold for profit. That these organs are taken from a live – yet to be born babe – and are salable only because they were extracted from living individuals lends credence to the argument that abortion is the taking of a life.

There’s even more to consider when assessing PP and its primary function. The organization receives approximately $500 million per year in federal funding. PP President Cecile Richards alone takes home close to $600,000 per year. This means that all U.S. taxpayers are forced to support an organization and its leader who terminate the lives of close to 900 innocent and yet-to-be-born infants every year. The killer in Las Vegas received no such handouts. And, as evil as his deed surely was, the average daily abortion toll racked up by PP exceeds the number of deaths caused by Paddock. Consider for a moment the momentous outrage if Paddock had been discovered to be a beneficiary of federal funding. The financing of his murderous spree was done with his own money. In contrast, government forces all taxpayers to finance PP and its leader.

During a 2016 hearing about taxpayer dollars being supplied to Planned Parenthood, Representative Diane Black (R-Tenn.) stated her outrage:

As a nurse for more than 40 years, I know that abortion is not healthcare and I am incensed that, year after year, my constituents see their money sent to Washington and distributed to organizations that promote or perform abortions all under the guise of “healthcare” services.

Ms. Black is as qualified as anyone to know that abortion takes the lives of innocent babes. Yet, federal funding for Planned Parenthood continued.

What happened in Las Vegas was absolutely horrible. But, as bad as it unquestionably was, designating it as the past century’s worst killing overlooks a far more deadly termination of innocent life – not in a single day, but daily.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


After A Century, Planned Parenthood Needs to be Shut Down

After A Century, Planned Parenthood Needs to be Shut Down
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

On the 100th anniversary of Planned Parenthood, one of its greatest cheerleaders sent five separate messages to celebrate the significant milestone. Interrupting her election campaign, Hillary Clinton sent out several tweets that either praised or defended the organization that has slaughtered 59 million babies in the womb since 1973.

The trend of murdering innocent babies in the womb will continue to grow worse if the very prominent cheerleader for Planned Parenthood, Hillary Clinton, becomes America's next president. Photo from Wikipedia.

The trend of murdering innocent babies in the womb will continue to grow worse if the very prominent cheerleader for Planned Parenthood, Hillary Clinton, becomes America’s next president. (Photo by Lorie Shaull (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons).

One of those messages sent via her computer (a non-secured instrument this time!) stated as follows: “I’m proud to stand with Planned Parenthood. I’ll never stop fighting to protect the ability of every woman in this country to make her own health decisions.” She conveniently avoided the fact that half of the victims of abortion are females needing only time and nourishment to be able to reach womanhood in a few years. They won’t enjoy the protection she mentioned. Mrs. Clinton also equated terminating life in the womb with otherwise normal health decisions. Abortion surely doesn’t allow the victim a choice, and it surely isn’t good for his or her health.

Started a century ago as the American Birth Control League, Planned Parenthood is the legacy of Margaret Sanger (1879-1966). A prominent eugenicist (the word comes from the Greek meaning “wellborn”), she sought to rid the nation of the “unfit” by which she initially meant Negroes, Hispanics, and Jews. Her goal would be achieved by forcing down the birth rate of the unwanted classes. One of her tactics included the use of deception. She told a financial supporter of her plan to recruit “colored minsters” to do her work. Explaining, she stated, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs….” (See Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right, a 1974 book by rabid pro-abortionist Linda Gordon.)

As late as November 1939 (two months after Germany launched World War II and several years after its campaign against Jews had begun, Sanger’s Birth Control Review was still commending the Nazi campaign. Almost simultaneously, the Sanger campaign began to target Catholic immigrants to the United States, another group deemed “unfit.”

Beginning in 1970, Planned Parenthood started receiving federal grants, now totaling more than $500 million per year. The organization claims that none of the taxpayer dollars it receives are used to perform abortions. Even if that claim is accurate, the government funding it receives makes easier the use of other funding to kill babes in the womb. In 2015, some determined anti-abortion crusaders videotaped admissions by Planned Parenthood officials that they were selling the body parts of recently aborted babies. An uproar over that grisly practice led to a congressional attempt to defund the organization, a failed effort due to President Obama’s veto and the congressional inability to override it. Similar congressional moves to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that opened the floodgates for abortion have also failed.

Over its history, besides being pro-Nazi, Planned Parenthood has shown itself to be anti-black, anti-Hispanic, anti-Catholic, and anti-Jewish. Yet within these groups of Americans are millions who support the Clinton candidacy. Meanwhile, the mass media that refuses to report the truth about Planned Parenthood and its Sanger-inspired efforts chooses to paint her opponent with unsavory labels, many of which are unfounded.

One reason why the murder of innocent babes in the womb continues is that the practice has now involved millions of women and men. There is a wide lessening of disgust for a practice that, prior to 1973, was almost universally deemed abhorrent in America. This trend will only grow worse if the very prominent cheerleader for Planned Parenthood, Hillary Clinton, becomes America’s next president.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Does Zika Warrant Bringing Back DDT?

Does Zika Warrant Bringing Back DDT?  
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Jane Orient, M.D., serves as the Executive Director of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). This Arizona-based organization attracts conservative-thinking doctors and frequently finds itself in disagreement with the well-known American Medical Association.

Dr. Orient has issued a call to start using DDT in the fight against the Zika virus. Her stand places her in marked contrast to an assortment of leftist environmentalists and their political allies. To them, DDT is harmful. But examination of the claims that DDT adversely affects people, plant life, and fish shows the worries to be unreasonable if not completely false.

Created in 1874 by a German chemist, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane wasn’t found to be an effective insecticide until 1939 when Swiss chemist Paul Muller started publicizing its usefulness as an eradicator of mosquitoes and various vermin. Muller justifiably won the 1948 Nobel Prize “for his discovery of the high efficiency of DDT as a contact poison against several anthropods.”

Soon after the acknowledgement of Muller’s work, use of DDT became widespread. Typhus that had ravaged U.S. forces during World War II was largely eliminated. In the United States, sickness and death caused by malaria shrank from 15,000 cases in 1947 to compete eradication by 1951. The use of DDT in Africa and elsewhere proved sensationally effective against malaria and other mosquito borne diseases. The use of DDT, says Dr. Orient, probably saved 500,000,000 lives without killing anyone.”

In 1962, however, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring gave birth to a campaign against DDT that has led to the substance being banned for use in the United States and much of the world. Carson predicted that vegetation would disappear, fish would no longer be found in rivers and streams, birds would no longer be found, and people would face grave dangers. DDT became Enemy Number One and its use became illegal in 1972 via an EPA mandate. Soon, the United Nations joined the U.S. in condemning DDT and using it ceased in many parts of the world.

In Florida today, frantic efforts to eradicate the Zika virus have dominated our nation’s print and electronic media. Numerous athletes have declined to participate in the Olympic Games over fear of mosquito bites transmitting the Zika virus and more. To combat the threat, medical authorities are turning to everything but DDT.

“If we do nothing,” says Dr. Orient, “a lot of people will get Zika [and] some will get Guillain Barre Syndrome which causes a potentially fatal paralysis.” Labeling as a “step above nothing” the current strategy of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) – don’t get pregnant, wear long sleeve clothing, and apply a mosquito repellent – she laments the refusal to employ DDT to deal with the problem. Everything offered by the CDC and others isn’t working very well according to the AAPS leader. What would work? With a willingness to stick her neck out, Dr. Orient says it may be “the height of political incorrectness to suggest trying DDT.” But that’s what she believes would be effective.

Why did the ban on DDT develop and become virtually mandatory? Population control seems to be the hidden goal of some. In the 1960s, Environmental Defense Fund leader Dr. Charles Wurster claimed there were already too many people on earth. He proposed banning DDT “as a way to get rid of them.” In his syndicated column, Walter Williams noted that Malthusian Club founder Alexander King had written in 1990: “So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem.” In November 1991, the Paris-based UNESCO Courier, published the proposal of famed oceanographer Jacques Cousteau who called for action to “eliminate 350,000 people per day” as the way to counter population growth. Others claiming to be environmentalists have issued similarly outrageous statements.

The existing ban on DDT should be terminated. Perhaps the current scare presented by the Zika virus will lead again to the use of this remarkable and safe substance.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Death Via Abortion Far Exceeds Toll in Orlando

Death Via Abortion Far Exceeds Toll in Orlando
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

During the early hours of June 12, 2016, a nightclub frequented by the LGBT minority in Orlando, Florida, became the scene of death for 49 of its patrons. They were slaughtered by Omar Mateen, a hate-filled American who made sure everyone knew that his death-dealing rampage stemmed from his radical Islamic beliefs.

“A young girl holds up a pro-life sign at the March for Life in Washington, D.C. (2013)”–photo from Miss Monica Elizabeth, some rights reserved.

Mass media covered the gruesome story for several days. Time magazine actually named the 49 victims on its cover while radio and television spewed news of the tragic event day and night. Clearly the act of a terrorist, the Orlando massacre shocked the nation and the world. One of its consequences saw a rise in sympathy for homosexual and transgender lifestyles. Another saw a sharp increase in the number who believe a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms should be made more difficult, if not completely terminated. And a third, boosted by awareness that such crimes will continue and grow more numerous, saw many more Americans agree to allow our nation to slide more deeply into acceptance of the political goals of terrorists.

The mass murder in Orlando was indeed horrific. But there are a great many more deliberately caused deaths in America (and in many other nations) as a result of abortion. Figures supplied by the Guttmacher Institute and others note that more than a thousand abortions occur every day in the United States. Not all, but a large number of these terminations of life in the womb are carried out at Planned Parenthood facilities. Estimates place the number of lives snuffed out in the United States since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision at 59 million. With the arrival of the morning-after pill that terminates a pregnancy within days of conception, there are now uncounted additional numbers snuffed out.

Why no daily outrage aimed at this grisly practice? Why no massive media coverage of the deliberate deaths of so many unborn babes needing only a few more unmolested months before they are born? They have committed no crime. All they need to survive is more time left alone in the womb.

With others, we mourn the untimely and brutal deaths of the Orlando 49. But we also mourn the far greater numbers of those murdered via the various methods producing abortions. We don’t accept the absurd claims of many that life in the womb isn’t life, or that real life begins only at birth. Finally, we look forward to a day when abortion at any stage of life is properly treated as a crime, a label justly applied when our nation began its life almost 200 years ago.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


A New Abortion Case Reaches Supreme Court

A New Abortion Case Reaches Supreme Court
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Only recently, the Texas legislature succeeded in imposing a brake on the practice of abortion within its boundaries. Pro-abortion partisans sued to overturn the law, but the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld it. Unsurprisingly, the Appeals Court ruling has been challenged and will be decided by the Supreme Court where only eight members remain as a result of Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing. Both sides have already presented their arguments to the high court and a verdict on Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstadt will be handed down before the summer recess begins.

prolife

As ProLife Wisconsin asks, “What’s wrong with this picture?”

Looking at the current makeup of the Supreme Court, it is safe to assume that four justices (Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor) will favor reversing the Fifth Circuit’s support for the Texas law. It also seems safe to conclude that three justices (Thomas, Alito, and Roberts) will uphold it. That leaves the eighth member, Justice Anthony Kennedy, with the deciding vote. If he sides with the three presumed upholders, the Court will have registered a non-decision and the Fifth Circuit decision will remain in force. If he joins the four and favors reversal of the Texas law, the abortion industry will have been given a new green light to continue its widespread taking of life in the womb.

The Texas law under scrutiny imposes regulations on abortion clinics and the purveyors of the practice. It says that abortionists must have hospital medical staff credentials and admitting privileges within 30 miles of their clinic. And it insists that the abortion providers must be equipped to provide the same medical treatments available as the many hospitals and surgery centers throughout the state.

Almost all of the Texas abortion clinics cannot meet those two requirements. Consequently, more than half of the 40 abortion clinics in the state have already closed their doors. More are expected to shut down because they are either not close enough to a hospital that has awarded their people admitting privileges, or they don’t have medical staff on hand to deal with complications arising from taking a fetus from a woman’s womb.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), an anti-abortion association of doctors frequently at odds with the American Medical Association (AMA), claimed in its amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court that more than 75 percent of abortions throughout the nation lead to a need for a surgical procedure that most abortion clinics are unable to perform. What these facilities aren’t equipped to provide are the ambulatory surgical procedures routinely performed by hospitals. Women seeking abortions at most of the clinics in Texas have heretofore placed themselves in jeopardy of untreatable complications such as uterine perforation, infection, bleeding, and more.

Speaking for the Obama administration, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the high court’s justices on March 2nd that the Texas law “closes most abortion facilities in the state, puts extreme pressure on the few facilities that remain open, and exponentially increases the obstacles confronting women who seek abortion.” He has thereby correctly yet ruefully summarized the effect of the law. He added that the few remaining Texas clinics still open for abortion were already overloaded and could not meet the demands of women who seek to terminate the life in their wombs.

So the Supreme Court, where laws against abortion were abolished nationwide in the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, is facing a severe test. If the court rules 4 to 4, the Texas law will remain in effect and it will apply in all 50 states. Those who believe, as does this writer, that abortion is terribly wrong because it snuffs out an already created life, will be watching for the court’s decision, a ruling that seems to be Justice Anthony Kennedy’s to decide.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Which is Worse: Abortion or a Fake Driver’s License?

Which is Worse: Abortion or a Fake Driver’s License?
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Over the past few months, videos of Planned Parenthood personnel agreeing to sell body parts of aborted fetuses commanded the nation’s attention. There is no doubt in the mind of most who saw the interviews of these Planned Parenthood employees that they were marketing the hearts, kidneys, and other organs of recently alive infants.

U.S. Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee speaking at the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. Some rights reservedPhoto by Gage Skidmore, from his Flickr account.

Following the showing of those interviews, protests from abortion partisans pointed out that the interviews were “secretly” recorded as if that were the real issue. True enough that secrecy was employed, but that was to be expected. Journalists regularly use such a tactic to get the “drop” on people with whom they disagree – as Mitt Romney found out prior to being defeated in 2012. Planned Parenthood employees would never admit to a known journalist that they were harvesting and selling the parts of babies. The videographers posed as customers and their taping had to be done secretly.

When members of the U.S. House of Representatives saw some of the tapings, they voted 240-181 to cease sending any taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood, a justifiable move. Planned Parenthood actually received $553 million from the federal government in 2014, a large portion of which, despite claims to the contrary, enabled the organization to provide abortions. There is no doubt that if the House measure ever reaches President Obama, he will promptly veto it. The number of outraged members of Congress isn’t lopsided enough to override such a veto.

Nevertheless, Congress has considered the matter serious enough to create its own investigation. A special House committee has been formed to look into abortion and related practices, including the marketing of infant body parts by Planned Parenthood. Headed by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), the panel’s spokesman has announced that investigations are underway, but there will be no conclusions reached until December, after the November elections.

A Texas grand jury looking into the matter concluded surprisingly that Planned Parenthood had done no wrong and, instead, indicted the two videographers, David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt. They were charged with a felony, the tampering of a driver’s license. And Daleiden was further charged with seeking to purchase fetal tissue. Yes, he created a phony license and yes, he admitted telling Planned Parenthood personnel of his desire to purchase what they were selling. He didn’t really want some body parts of infants torn from a woman’s womb. And he felt it necessary to hide his real identity with the marked-up license. He got what he set out to obtain and people throughout the nation saw televised evidence of Planned Parenthood personnel negotiating such deals.

Planned Parenthood officials now say they will no longer take money for marketing body parts, though they will still supply them for “research.” Defending themselves from the bad publicity generated by what has been shown of the secretly taped interviews, they have labeled Daleiden and Merritt “extreme” anti-abortion activists. In their view, abortion and marketing body parts taken from aborted fetuses isn’t extreme, nor is abortion itself worthy of such an adjective. But anyone who is opposed to abortion can expect to be so labeled.

Planned Parenthood has long been the nation’s largest abortion provider. Since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision opening the floodgates of the grisly practice, the lives of more than 50 million babies have been terminated in the so-called “land of the free.” Planned Parenthood’s abortion business does operate within the law established by that decision. The mentality driving the nation’s chief abortion provider contends that whatever the Supreme Court says is okay. That’s all they’ve ever needed. So the real issue here is the Roe v. Wade decision that ought to be overturned because life begins at conception and the taking of a life once conceived is nothing else but murder. Although murdering a child in the womb has been granted legality, it surely fails the test of morality.

Unless the charges against Daleiden and Merritt are dropped, they could end up being the only criminals associated with the horrifying practice they exposed. Abortion and the side practice of sharing body parts of infants will be granted additional legality. And should the current thinking hold, doctoring a driver’s license in order to expose what Planned Parenthood does with funding that it obtains from the American people surely will be considered the greater crime.

What’s happening here is akin to focusing on a mass murderer’s parking ticket and letting him go free because of a technicality in the filming of his taking a handicapped space for which he had no permit.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news by signing up at our Facebook page. Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Chinese Leaders Alter One-Child Policy

Chinese Leaders Alter One-Child Policy
by JBS President John F. McManus

Much has been written about the totalitarian government ruling China. As examples of the horrors following acquisition of absolute power by a cadre of criminals, the nation’s brutal twists and turns over the past six decades regarding population should never be forgotten. The kind of power they illustrate should frighten any sensible individual.

China has an one-child policy (Photo from Flickr by Anja Disseldorp, some rights reserved).

The Chinese people fell under Communist control in 1949. Their new leader, the mass murdering Mao Zedong, initiated a reign of terror that saw government liquidate between 15 and 30 million Chinese people over the next ten years. Because he also wanted recruits for the People’s Liberation Army, Mao then encouraged families to produce more children who could, in time, beef up his army and boost the number of laborers. Having successfully eliminated the potential for internal uprisings, he encouraged younger Chinese to produce larger families for all of his needs. He even forbade abortion and outlawed using contraceptives. The population soared past one billion in three decades.

Mao died in 1976 and Deng Xiaoping soon inaugurated a new family policy. Emphasizing economic growth, the new Chinese leader initiated a cap on population. Each family was now allowed only one child although some exceptions were made if the firstborn turned out to be female. Couples had to obtain a permit to bring a child into the world. Those who accepted the mandate and produced only one son or daughter were frequently given preferred housing and other awards. Ruthless state jurisdiction enforced the one-child policy with forced abortion and infanticide. Estimates place the number of infant victims at 400,000. And sterilization became the fate of women caught with a second child.

Especially were female infants targeted by the one-child rule. Today, as many as 30 million young Chinese men face the real possibility of being unable to find a woman to marry. Some have actually gone to South Korea, kidnapped a female, and brought her back to China. Add to these outrages brought on by the totalitarian regime’s social engineering are China’s aging populace and shrinking labor pool.

Faced with these new difficulties, Chinese officials recently decided to allow families to have a second child. Not a third or more of course! Some China watchers mockingly wonder now if there will be fines for those who have only one child. Others wonder if childless couples will be jailed.

There is hardly any right more basic than marrying and building a family. China’s rulers throw a dark blanket over this right. Anyone claiming to be an advocate of freedom should have nothing to do with such totalitarian monsters – and that includes the leaders of our own government who regularly treat them with undeserved respect.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news and sign up at JBS.org or on our Facebook page.


Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.