Gay Gene Doesn’t Exist

Gay Gene Doesn’t Exist
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Not always but frequently, history refers to a nation or a people by its prevailing culture. And by culture, we mean the dominant behavior and beliefs present in that nation or those people.

America’s culture has always centered on the importance of the family, the moral codes of history, and the praiseworthy behavior of its people. The fundamentally important place given the family, along with a peoples’ willingness to work, and a moral code springing from the “shalls” and “shall nots” of Holy Scripture formed the culture of America.

Past history of other lands and other peoples shows far different kinds of culture. Human sacrifice, glorification of sexuality, rampant crime, and the giving over to pleasure for its own sake (Hedonism) have indeed been known to exist in the past. Sad to say, America’s cultural foundation is currently under attack. But there remain many who are repulsed by departures from the old norms and attitudes. Some prestigious individuals have even weighed in with a restating of fundamental truths and morals.

Over the past few decades, the practice of homosexuality has burst out of its closet when in the past only a very few could be found succumbing to its questionable lures. Homosexual activists have taken to claiming they are “born that way.” The result has seen many more in America than one would have imagined a generation ago proclaiming themselves to be homosexual.  And government has contributed to the rise of such a departure from the fundamental attitudes about sex and gender by sanctioning gay marriage.  Fifty years ago, few would have speculated that such relationships might be accorded any inkling of legitimacy in the United States.

Anyone anxious to maintain our nation’s culture, however, will be pleased to know that two distinguished scholars at Johns Hopkins University have concluded that the homosexual claim of being “born that way,” and the insistence of many that they possess a “gay gene” cannot be supported. The work of Dr. Lawrence S. Mayer, M.B., M.S., Ph.D. and Dr. Paul R. McHugh, M.D. entitled Sexuality and Gender has been published in the Fall 2016 edition of the journal The New Atlantis.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality has summarized the 143-page report issued by these two scholars: “Homosexual activists have been desperate to try to say they’re ‘born that way’ believing that this absolves them of the moral responsibility for their sexual behavior.” LaBarbera explains that if the public believes some people are “born gay,” there will be widespread “accepting of homosexual activism.” There could hardly be a more devastating attack on the culture of a nation and a people.

Our own point of view is very simple. It is that a person’s gender (or sex if that term is preferred) exists from the moment of conception in the mother’s womb. Each of us is either male or female from that moment. Trying to change what nature has established, or seeking to excuse deviations from nature’s decision via processes leading to transgender status is more than absurd. It’s destructive of a very important ingredient in our nation’s culture.

We’re happy to acknowledge the work of Drs. Mayer and McHugh. And we look forward to their study helping to expose the dishonesty of claims that some people are “born that way” and have a “gay gene.” Such nonsense has already negatively impacted our nation’s culture and it needs to be countered and labeled a gross absurdity.

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.


Restraining the Courts on Marriage

Restraining the Courts on Marriage
by JBS President John F. McManus

While it is true that many Americans are woefully unfamiliar with the U.S. Constitution, it is also true that some members of Congress have a deficient appreciation of the document. They know when they have to stand for reelection. And they know the part about receiving compensation for their services. But many seem to have forgotten (or never knew in the first place) that only Congress – not the President and not the federal courts – has power to make law; only Congress can send the nation into war; and only Congress has power to coin money.

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) (Image from Flickr by Gage Skidmore Some rights reserved).

Also little known is the portion of Article III which states: “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” In simple terms, this means that the only federal court required is the Supreme Court; all federal district courts could be abolished by Congress. Not only that, Section 2 of this Article gives power to Congress to limit the jurisdiction of all federal courts.

When forced busing of school children was ordered by federal courts in the 1970s, then-Congressman Larry McDonald introduced legislation to bar all federal courts from having anything to say about placement of youngsters in schools. He cited Article III, Section 2 as the authority for such a step. His measure didn’t gather enough support in Congress to be enacted but many who served at the time were at least forced to recognize that Congress possessed such power and that it actually existed and could be employed.

On April 22nd of this current year, Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) filed H. R. 1968, the “Restrain the Judges on Marriage Act of 2015.” Relying on Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, he seeks to remove jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and all lower federal courts to “hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution of, any type of marriage.” Mr. King stated his belief that the Congress could put a halt to the possibility that the Supreme Court would actually redefine marriage in a decision expected in June.

Nine co-sponsors immediately announced their support for H. R. 1968. They are Babin and Gohmert of Texas, Duncan of Tenn., LaMalfa of Cal., Massie of Ky., Palazzo of Miss., Thompson of Penn., Walberg of Mich., and Yoho of Fla.

Commenting on his measure, Congressman King said that removal of federal jurisdiction over the definition of marriage would have no effect on the states, each of which could decide the matter for its own people. But he was especially concerned that a mere five judges at the Supreme Court level could overturn the definition of marriage for the entire country, a definition that has been held for millennia in which marriage is considered only to be between one man and one woman.

Texas Senator Ted Cruz has introduced an identical bill in the Senate (S.1080). As of this writing, no Senate co-sponsors have been garnered.

Members of the House of Representatives should be contacted (call 202-225-3121 and email) and asked to support H. R. 1968. Thanks should be sent to Rep. King and the co-sponsors of H.R. 1968. A companion bill in the Senate (S. 1080) has been introduced by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. No Senate co-sponsors have yet been enlisted. Contact (call 202-224-3121) your senators to get them to co-sponsor and support the bill. Utilizing the email link above will send to both the House and the Senate, but be sure to call. Congressmen tell us that phone calls are more effective than emails.

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 joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.


Hillary’s War on America

Hillary’s War on America
by JBS President John F. McManus

In 2014, while campaigning in Iowa for Democrat Bruce Braley to win a Senate seat, Hillary Clinton told a Braley rally: “It’s not enough to be a woman; you have to be committed to expand rights and opportunities for all women.” Her listeners knew that her way to increase opportunities for women called for doing away with restrictions on killing helpless babies in the womb. Of course, she casually ignores the fact that half of those whose lives would be snuffed out in abortion chambers would be females who, if left alone in the womb and cared for after birth, would join the ranks of the world’s women.

Candidate Braley lost his election to Iowa’s newest senator, Joni Ernst, who is an outspoken opponent of abortion. Ms. Ernst also happens to be a woman. If elevation of women to higher positons and greater influence were Clinton’s main concern, she should have considered campaigning for Ernst. But restricting abortion is her constant target and any threat to the practice really gets her juices flowing. Her frequent reference to safeguarding and increasing the availability of the practice clearly indicates its place in what she calls the “war on women.”

The message given by this former first lady and would-be president obviously didn’t resonate well with enough voters in the Hawkeye State. Not only did Mr. Braley lose his bid for the high office, he gave up his seat in the House as well. But Hillary’s failed effort in Iowa has had little effect on her determination to proceed with the real war, the one on the unborn.

On April 23rd, the wannabe president took her crusade to the United Nations where she spoke at the “2015 Women in the World Summit.” Surrounded by like-minded enemies of the unborn who desire to upgrade women by killing unborn babies, her message included insistence that “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.” Her goal: uncontested acceptance of abortion and contraception. Accordingly, her way to promote women’s empowerment now includes altering the religious beliefs of a majority of the world’s people, especially her fellow Americans. The Clinton “war on women” has now been elevated to battling “deep-seated” cultural codes and religious beliefs wherever they stand in her way. And she expects that such a campaign will carry her to the office of President of the United States. If she wins such a prize, she will obviously use the power it contains to wage war on any opposing traditional religious and cultural standards.

Today, there are numerous countries and regions where enforcement of strict Islamic rule establishes its own religious beliefs and cultural codes. Muslims call it Sharia Law. What’s at stake with Hillary Clinton’s campaign is our nation’s long-established guarantees of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and several other freedoms – all of which are part of the American cultural code. Hillary’s obvious intent is to create something akin to Sharia law here in America. She won’t call it that, but it is what she seeks and she appears as determined as any ruling imam, ayatollah or sheik. Are there enough Americans to block her acquisition of such power? The coming year will provide the answer.

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.


McManus_2Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.


Unemployment and Job Figures Aren’t Truthful

Unemployment and Job Figures Aren’t Truthful
by JBS President John F. McManus

The U.S. Department of Labor recently claimed that the number of unemployed workers in America has shrunk to 5.6 percent. And the same source claimed that 252,000 new jobs were created during the month of December and everyone should cheer the success of the Obama administration. Shouldn’t we all be delighted with these numbers?

The real unemployment rate is 11.2 percent, exactly twice the published figure (Image from Flickr by Sean MacEntee, some rights reserved).

But there are problems with these claims – big problems. Plenty of seasonal jobs are created during the end-of-the-year, pre-Christmas buying spree. They don’t last. Celebrating temporary seasonal job growth as though it were permanent is dishonest.

Secondly, the unemployment figure doesn’t count the many Americans who have ceased looking for work after months of trying to find a job. Nor does it count others who have part-time jobs instead of the full-time employment they formerly enjoyed and would surely prefer. The statisticians compiling the government’s figures don’t include all of these individuals. If they did, the real unemployment rate swells to 11.2 percent, exactly twice the published figure.

A nation’s economic vitality – including decent-paying jobs – depends on manufacturing. A nation whose people are making things is a nation where wealth is being created. But the number of manufacturers in our country continues to shrink. Everyone knows that the stores are full of imported goods made by others in faraway lands. So, too, are many other items made outside the U.S. when they were formerly manufactured by Americans.

America’s wealth-producers took a huge hit after enactment of the 1995 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In 1993, the U.S. had a $1.66 billion trade surplus with Mexico. After NAFTA, the surplus disappeared, replaced immediately by a $15.8 billion deficit that has grown to more than $60 billion per year. The jobs that Americans formerly held haven’t returned. Many more have ended up in China where the U.S. trade deficit has ballooned to more than $80 billion per year.

The Obama administration has customarily provided dishonest unemployment figures. But the President and his team are now seeking congressional passage of two additional NAFTA-like trade agreements, one with Pacific-rim nations and the other with the European Union. If these two pacts are approved by Congress, the already bad unemployment situation will grow even worse.

Follow these links to contact Congress and tell them to reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). And messages sent to elected officials ought to demand honesty from the bureaucrats who habitually paint the nation’s economic situation with rosy colors when honesty calls for quite the opposite.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.


How Did “Withdraw All Troops” Become Adding Thousands?

How Did “Withdraw All Troops” Become Adding Thousands? 
by JBS President John F. McManus

Is it correct to state that after nearly eight years of war in Iraq and the loss of 4,500 American lives the United States has finally pulled all of its forces out of Iraq? The answer is an emphatic “No.” Reports in mid-December confirm that the “U.S.-led” coalition will be beefed up to 4,600 troops, most of whom will be Americans.

Has President Obama kept his oft-stated promise to pull all of America’s forces out of Afghanistan? Again, an emphatic “No.” A total of 5,500 will remain at least until the end of 2015.

Any honest examination of these two wars has to conclude that they were failures. And if anyone wants to use the adjective “colossal,” he’ll get no argument from this corner.

The Iraq War began in 2003 for two main reasons: 1) Saddam Hussein was building nuclear bombs and other “weapons of mass destruction,” and 2) Iraq was allied with Al Qaeda and was, therefore, partly responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. Both of these claims have been shown to be totally false.

In February 2009, President Obama said that all U.S. forces would be withdrawn from Iraq except for 50,000. In April 2009, the President announced the end of combat in Iraq. In August 2010, Mr. Obama said “the American mission in Iraq has ended.” And in October 2011, he promised that all American forces would be out of the country by the end of 2011. The effort has cost the U.S. 4,490 lives, and possibly ten times that number injured.

In mid-December 2014, however, General James Terry announced that 1,500 more troops (mostly Americans) would be added to the 3,100 still in Iraq. They are needed, according to U.S. officials, because a huge chunk of Iraq has been conquered by the forces of ISIS.

The Afghanistan War began in 2001 shortly after 9/11 and it has become the longest war in U.S. history (more than 13 years). In May 2014, U.S. officials announced that all combat operations had ended. 2,200 Americans died and 19,600 suffered wounds in Afghanistan. But outgoing Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced in December that 1,000 extra troops would be added to the 9,800 still there.

In other words, the U.S. has not withdrawn from either of these nations.

Any honest observer of conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan would have to conclude that the wars fought in both have been failures. Withdrawing completely should be the plan, not leaving thousands in each country.

Consider: Immediately after the 1941 attack at Pearl Harbor, the U.S. declared war against Japan, Germany, and Italy. Victory was achieved in what were really two separate wars, one in the Pacific and one in Europe. But there has been no declaration of war by Congress since 1941. The wars fought after WWII (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan) brought stalemates or defeats. The truth is that each of these post-WWII conflicts was waged under the oversight of the UN or its NATO subsidiary.

All of which leads to two conclusions: 1) America should bring all of its troops home, and 2) the U.S should withdraw from the United Nations. Maintaining national independence cannot be done while our leaders continue to submit to the UN.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.


Deficits Invite Catastrophe

Deficits Invite Catastrophe
by JBS President John F. McManus

Former Michigan Congressman David Stockman (1977-1981) accepted appointment as Director of the Office of Management and Budget at the launching of the Reagan administration in 1981. He stayed in that post until 1985 and left forecasting larger deficits than had ever been compiled by any previous president. He now issues his thoughts about the nation’s finances in what is called “Stockman’s Corner.”

In a recent posting, Stockman recalled that the national debt went beyond the $1 trillion plateau on October 22, 1981. His pointing this out reminded me of the “No Trillion Dollar Debt” campaign waged by The John Birch Society during that year. It was surely not one of the organization’s most successful efforts.

Stockman noted that it took 205 years to compile a single trillion dollars of indebtedness. He calculated that all those years added up to 74,984 days. But the admitted national debt, now at $18 trillion, saw its latest addition of a $1 trillion dollars added to the debt total in a single 365-day year.

We often hear that President Reagan created a minimal government and was as thrifty with the people’s money as any president had ever been. But the figures tell a different story. The Reagan-G.H.W. Bush years (1981-1993) produced three times the average annual deficit that had been amassed during the peacetime years led by Democrats Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter combined. Stockman even quotes Dick Cheney, who served in the first Bush administration, saying “deficits don’t matter.” The problem is that they do matter – very much.

Stockman expects the unrestrained government will add “at least $15 trillion of new public debt in the decade ahead.” That amount of accumulated red ink added to the total will likely top the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the year 2024.

What does all of this mean for Americans? It means that the future will grow dimmer every year, and that the nation will become more seriously beholden to creditors such as communist-led China that has vowed to destroy the U.S.

There is no way out of this increasingly grim situation but a sharp cutback in federal spending. Instead, led by a President who cares little about deficits and by leaders of both political parties who are strongly disinclined to cease buying votes with the people’s money and the Federal Reserve’s continual creation of dollars backed by nothing, the outlook for fiscal sanity appears extremely poor.

Over the years, Stockman has stated that “the Republican Party has totally abdicated its job … as guardian of fiscal discipline” and that the GOP “was hijacked by modern imperialists during the Reagan era.” Correct! As for himself, he has stated that he “invests in anything that Bernanke can’t destroy, including gold, canned beans, bottled water and flashlight batteries.”

Of course, Ben Bernanke no longer sits atop the Federal Reserve. The privately owned and completely unconstitutional Fed is led by Janet Yellen. There is no reason to expect any change in America’s suicidal fiscal policies.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.


John McCain May Acquire More Neoconservative Allies in 2015

John McCain May Acquire More Neoconservative Allies in 2015
by JBS President John F. McManus

When the 114th Congress convenes in January, Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) will become chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Together with fellow neoconservative Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the two have always called for more uses of our nation’s military. They like the idea of a U.S. empire that, supposedly, would make the world a better place. But the rest of world doesn’t want the U.S. dictating its policies.

Neoconservatives have always liked war. They want U.S. forces to meddle militarily in a variety of spats between nations or among groups of nations. If some countries don’t like their plan, McCain and Graham try to figure out some way to insert America’s nose as well as bombs into the situation. Only a few years ago, McCain was actually heard singing “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran!” in remarks he delivered at the Senate podium.

McCain and his neoconservative allies wanted U.S. forces in Libya in 2011. They didn’t prevail. They want deeper involvement in Syria and have only been partially successful. Lately, they want stepped-up U.S. meddling in Ukraine and against ISIS.

Washington watchers have suggested that the neocons are likely to increase their numbers as a result of newly elected Republican senators. Georgia’s Perdue, Alaska’s Sullivan, Iowa’s Ernst, Arkansas’s Cotton, North Carolina’s Tillis, and Louisiana’s Cassidy are potential allies of the McCain/Graham faction. We hope we’re wrong about some or all of these new senators. Other returning fence-sitters who might want to add more targets to battle America’s military arm may bow to McCain’s leadership when he takes over command of the Armed Services Committee.

Opponents of neoconservatism are regularly dubbed “isolationists” by the mainstream media. The use of that term is supposed to end the argument and force anyone who resists the urging for increased involvement to be considered an uncaring Neanderthal. Substitute “non-interventionist with sons, daughters and wallets” for the “isolationist” label and the intended stigma quickly evaporates.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson suggested avoiding international squabbles. John Quincy Adams said America “goes not abroad searching for monsters to destroy.” This is timeless advice that should never have been abandoned.

The U.S. has troops stationed in well over 100 separate nations. It’s time to bring them home. Instead, current leaders are sending more back into Iraq while refusing to honor the pledge to have all American military forces out of Afghanistan by January 1, 2015. John McCain and Lindsey Graham must be delighted. Let’s hope that their numbers do not increase in the new GOP-led Senate.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and 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.