Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ginsburg: I thought Roe was to rid undesirables
WND ^ | 7/8/09 | staff

Posted on 07/08/2009 6:57:10 PM PDT by pissant

In an astonishing admission, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."

Her remarks, set to be published in the New York Times Magazine this Sunday but viewable online now, came in an in-depth interview with Emily Bazelon titled, "The Place of Women on the Court."

(snip)

Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: abortion; baderginsburg; bigotry; cullingtheherd; eugenics; ginsberg; ginsburg; lping; moralabsolutes; nazi; overpopulation; prolife; racist; rbg; ruthbaderginsburg; undesirables
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-229 next last
To: pissant

“An accidental stark moment of clarity.”

She has got to be on some pretty strong meds to control her cancer. More than a few of them are like truth serum. They remove the inhibitions and you think you are in control, but you aren’t. The drugs are.
That is the real danger in taking any kind of antipressant or tranquillizer and some painkillers. No inhibitors.
I hope this becomes a news storm.


181 posted on 07/09/2009 1:42:06 AM PDT by MestaMachine (Zero+Zero=Zero, OR nothing from nothing is still nothing. OR 0+R E =0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

Such happy looking women. [ sarcasm ]


182 posted on 07/09/2009 2:38:43 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight
Seriously, if a SCOTUS actually said this as a basis of natural-law,

Hmmm, Natual Law? I'm curious as to what you mean.

183 posted on 07/09/2009 3:09:44 AM PDT by Jacquerie (On the tablets of the heart a law is written, the same for all men - St. Thomas Aquinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine
I hope this becomes a news storm.

It won't, because the Justice has simply spoken plainly about what is and has always been the supermassive black hole of truth at the very center of the baby-killing galaxy. Everyone who supports abortion on demand understands and accepts it as an unremarkable and self-evident reality, including everyone in the LeftMedia - just consider what Nancy Pelosi said about "family planning" funding not long ago.

184 posted on 07/09/2009 3:38:30 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow

ping


185 posted on 07/09/2009 4:05:37 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3 (Obama is everything Oklahoma is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

Yes, I agree. We have always understood it thusly. However, to my knowledge, this is the first time a Supreme Court Justice has actually said it with such clarity and in such a completely nonchalant way, it almost takes your breath away.


186 posted on 07/09/2009 4:07:14 AM PDT by MestaMachine (Zero+Zero=Zero, OR nothing from nothing is still nothing. OR 0+R E =0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: pissant

One of her medications must have a bit of truth serum in them.


187 posted on 07/09/2009 4:08:01 AM PDT by Paige ("All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Well, that is what abortion has been about all along.
Reducing the number of black babies.

Sangar was quite clear about that, as were many of the early pro death promoters.

188 posted on 07/09/2009 4:12:31 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

60 000 RM (Reichmarks)

This is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the Community of Germans during his lifetime.

Fellow Citizen, that is your money, too.

189 posted on 07/09/2009 5:03:51 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Actually, she may have a point. There are some economists who believe that the reduction in crime we’ve experienced in the last decade or so occurred because of the massive number of abortions.


190 posted on 07/09/2009 5:20:45 AM PDT by Little Ray (Do we have a Plan B?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

“I’d be surprised if somebody doesn’t edit that out. Then again, it is the New York Times. BTT.”

I’d wager that most of their readers agree with her sentiments.


191 posted on 07/09/2009 5:42:22 AM PDT by CSM (Business is too big too fail... Government is too big to succeed... I am too small to matter...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
Is there an animation of this image to show here banging her head on the table?

If not, I hope some FReeper will make one.

United States Supreme Court Jester Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg

192 posted on 07/09/2009 6:33:03 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: hometoroost
"Jews for Genocide. It’s a small club but now we know she’s the president."

Good one!!

193 posted on 07/09/2009 6:38:20 AM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“demonstrate her commitment to the constitutional rights of privacy and choice.”

The thing that I find ironic is that the Roe decision is precisely what makes the public “option” health care invalid. If a public “option” is forced on the citizens of this once great country, then the lieberals are invalidating their favorite court decision. No longer will the “privacy” established in Roe exist and no longer will we be free to make our own choices for medical care.


194 posted on 07/09/2009 6:45:22 AM PDT by CSM (Business is too big too fail... Government is too big to succeed... I am too small to matter...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Nothing is going to happen. Some people can say whatever they want.


195 posted on 07/09/2009 6:49:47 AM PDT by SQUID
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Reading that interview gave me a headache. She can’t express herself properly, everything is couched in lib buzzwords and assorted other gobbleygook. Although the questioner made probably the most loathsome comments like “Constitutional sex-equality”. Blech.


196 posted on 07/09/2009 7:05:38 AM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: pissant
*

*

* Supreme Court Jester Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg Sanger

*

*

*

197 posted on 07/09/2009 7:19:10 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

The ugly truth; I’m surprised the NYT is going to publish it. I imagine there will be all manner of “taken out of context” calls by the baby killers.


198 posted on 07/09/2009 7:42:47 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

OMG!


199 posted on 07/09/2009 8:04:48 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Disgraceful. But at least she’s honest in her misanthropy.


200 posted on 07/09/2009 8:12:12 AM PDT by Antoninus (Time to fight back--donate to Free Republic, then donate to www.sarahpac.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-229 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson