Let's see now, how many other designations for public funds can we slide into the constitution? The right to free Manolo Blahniks for women who can't afford them?
This one is called, appropriately, "Tramps." A must-have for liberals.
Posted on 09/03/2008 10:28:39 AM PDT by julieee
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Change Basis for Allowing Abortions to Slavery Amdt
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In an amazing admission, pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told a feminist group that the basis for legalized abortion should be changed from the so-called right to privacy to the anti-slavery provisions found in the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at LifeNews.com ...
unbelievable
I just had a bad, non-Christian thought... All I will say now is that I hope this horrible human being retires soon.
Alzheimer’s is sad, no matter who it happens to.
Who remembers her nomination ceremony, in which Clinton ridiculed and lambasted Brit Hume for daring to ask a serious question about her and then the rest of the press corp applauded?
MM
Now I understand Obama’s reference to the “burden” of a child.
He thinks it’s slavery (does Michelle know this?)
Vote McCain-Palin!
Now child-bearing is slavery — geez. This is a practice in search of a constitutional base. How about the anti-second ammendment — the right not to bear arms, or legs, or heads . . . ?
Apparently, any familial responsibility for another person is “slavery” (unless you’re the dad, of course!)
She is an idiot.
The draft was constitutional. But it is a requirement that people give up years of their life to to a task they didn’t choose on their own. The draft is a lot like slavery.
On the other hand, a woman chooses to engage in the act which makes her pregnant, and in this day and age also chooses whether that act WILL make her pregnant.
Having chosen, she can hardly call it “slavery” to be required to take responsibility for the human being she has volunteered to be responsible for by her actions.
If the mother doesn’t want to be responsible for the child, the mother should make sure her body doesn’t pick up the child and attach it to her womb.
Once the mother has taken that responsibility for the child, it’s no different than if you stop on the side of the road and pick up someone who is injured.
You may have a right to drive on and not help an injured person. You may have a right to ignore a person in need knocking at your door.
But if you stop and pick them up, if you open the door and let them in, you have accepted responsibility, and do not have the right to then kill them because you find them inconvenient.
I wonder what her children Jane and James think of this. Will they wear a ball and chain at Thanksgiving dinner?
“Affirmative action” appointee at her judicial finest.
Some scholar. More of the same mindset in a NObomba Administration.
She’s right about one thing. There is no right to privacy written in the Constitution. She’s afraid that a Supreme Court that actually reads and follows the Constitution will over turn Roe.
yeah this is odd-she must not have been able to figure out how to “protect” abortion using some twisted logic based on the Interstate Commerce Clause-the left’s standard “catch all”
I think she’s responding to more and more criticisms about the basis of the Roe vs. Wade decision. She doesn’t want it overturned in the future and is trying to wed it to the constitution. And with the anti-life hatred sweeping so much of the country, she could be successful.
For radical feminists, having children turns women into ‘slaves’.
Therefore, they should eschew motherhood and being wives (another form of slavery), and live unattached.
Alice Walker, the author of The Color Purple and other works,
has refused to speak to her own daughter since she had a child of her own. (Because, of course, her daughter
embraces the idea of motherhood.)
And do those republicans who voted for this pos understand how bad that vote was?
NOOO they don’t, RINO turds
And we’re not supposed to question or assault these justices?
This baby murderer should be stoned in the public square.
“It has to be much more than the bare right of a woman of means to obtain an abortion,” she concluded.
Legislating FISCAL policy, not just abortion policy, from the bench. Subtle.
That would be ironic, the amendments that provided personhood and individual rights for the oppressed turned around and used to eliminate personhood. They would be 0/10ths of a person.
This woman is pure evil.
I would love to hear some damn fool lawyer actually attempt to make this argument, in the Supreme Court, in front of Clarence Thomas.
Liberals never stop.
Welcome home.
t.
Let's see now, how many other designations for public funds can we slide into the constitution? The right to free Manolo Blahniks for women who can't afford them?
This one is called, appropriately, "Tramps." A must-have for liberals.
Wow. If such a change were to occur, she wouldn’t likely approve of the outcome. Her argument basing abortion upon slavery’s prohibition would require government to also recognize “a man’s right to determine his own life.” How could she possibly hold that women have a right to determine their own lives yet men don’t? They would have to fashion a “legal abortion” whereupon a man could renounce the progeny without recourse.
Great comment!
Slavery!!!!???? Ginsberg and Obama must come from the same Satanic background...
So being pregnant is now, according to this sick ... (self edited for decency), equivalent to slavery?
Someone - please remind us who appointed this hack to the bench...
From a sound legal reasoning basis that makes more sense than the very flawed reasoning employed in the original Roe v Wade. Courts are reluctant to jump off in entirely knew directions that lack any precedent and rely only on the law and the Constitution. I would be surprised if a majority would make such a profound change, even if (God Forbid) Obama gets to appoint new Justices.
In the early stages the victims secret truths tend to leak out as their defense mechanisms start to fail.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Writing’s on the wall.. Their lies are being exposed to the light.
So-called abortion rights were fabricated from the smoke of hell.
Yeah..."retires" is the Christianized version of the thought I had, too.
LOL
I think she wants to use the anti-slavery amendment to protect against future uses of that amendment to outlaw abortion. If they cite the amendment, it’s unlikely a personhood for the unborn could ever be established. The court hates to reverse itself.
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.