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

To: muawiyah

I think it is quite credible that she supported ‘choice’ both ways all along and so was against any coercive eugenic factors. Doesn’t mean I agree with just about any of her positions on the court, and yes, she was an uber-hypocrite, as so many liberals are, re: AA and her own hiring.


41 posted on 07/12/2009 6:16:43 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: 9YearLurker
No doubt you can be against "coercive" eugenics, but in favor of eugenics nonetheless.

Kind of like being a witchdoctor with a copy of Beck's Obstetrics just so she can get the babies through the birthcanal anyway.

Ruthy turns out to be the cannibal many of us always thought her to be.

42 posted on 07/12/2009 6:48:46 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

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