Just about everyone knows that Democrats have a real passion for abortion. In fact, few things make them prouder to be an American than to catch sight of an abortion clinic. Of course, most never come and outright say they support abortion. No. They are pro-choice. That is until Uncle Joe let the cat out of the bag.

Your policy has been one which I fully understand — I’m not second-guessing — of one child per family.  The result being that you’re in a position where one wage earner will be taking care of four retired people.  Not sustainable.

Thank you for those encouraging words, Uncle Joe. We feel secure knowing you are representing all of us abroad.

Joe understands? Joe refuses to second guess? What exactly does he understand about forced abortions? The trauma that is inflicted upon innocent mothers as she is forced to kill off her own flesh and blood against her will? I would like to know how any of this is justified and would encourage Joe to come forward and further explain his sympathies with the CCP of China’s barbaric and murderous policies.

Speaking of something “not sustainable” below are the effects of China’s one-child policy. I wrote this at Big Peace last week. The subject is how China’s one-child policy is affecting military readiness. But more to the point here is how it has affected society.

China instituted the one-child policy in 1979 under the Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in order to control China’s exploding population rate. Then China was largely rural with a large peasantry class. That still remains the case outside of China’s major commercial cities. The policy was passed as a temporary measure but is still a fixture for roughly 40% of married couples, 30 years later. To mention that it has affected society goes without saying. Parents are forced to be selective about births. As a result, infant girls are aborted, abandoned, or go unregistered. Infant boys are overwhelmingly chosen over girls and have caused an unnatural demographic shift in the male female ratio. (I believe the natural ratio is 104:100?) This has government planning authorities worried.

(more…)

On February 22, 1983, I raised my right hand in the Los Angeles MEPS (Military Entrance Processing Station) and said, “I, Charles Stuart DeVore, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; That I will bear true faith And allegiance to the same…” With those words, I became United States Army Private First Class DeVore, joining the millions of others since 1789 who swore with their lives to “support and defend the Constitution.”

Unlike many veterans, I have been fortunate not to see combat. I was “officially” shot at only once; during the Los Angeles riots in 1992 (well, there was that time in Lebanon, but that wasn’t official; and I was carjacked in 1988 by Panamanian paramilitaries).

When the members of the armed forces of the United States of America fight, they do so not just for their colleagues in uniform next to them – virtually every soldier in history has done that – they do so not for king or country – they fight to preserve a document, the Constitution. In that, the United States Armed forces have become the greatest force for good, for freedom, that the world has ever seen because the Constitution exists to make a reality out of the promise of the Declaration of Independence to secure our “unalienable rights” of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

(more…)