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

To: Lurker
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

Smells like sabotage...ends justifying means: I'd want some verification and stuff.

Also consider the source: JW is not without stain.

I'm just darn skeptical.

Not impossible....just unlikely as heck.

7 posted on 05/13/2006 12:07:24 AM PDT by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: dasboot
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

Do you really think that people who advocate the abortion of millions have scruples?

If you still don't believe it, read Mr. Weddington's own words in the New York Times:

NYT letters Jan. 23, 2003

To the Editor:

Re "30 Years After Abortion Ruling, New Trends but the Old Debate" (front page, Jan. 20):

But for Roe v. Wade, millions more children would have been born into poverty, where they would be greeted by Congress and the state legislators who failed to provide money for day care, health care, education or job training.

Millions more would have joined the ranks of welfare recipients and the homeless, the populations of prisons, prostitutes and drug addicts.

All that, simply to pander to the religious beliefs of a minority who persist in claiming that a collection of cells, without reason or awareness, is human life with something called a soul.

As co-counsel in Roe v. Wade, I applaud the determination of J'Vante Anderson, the young woman in your article, to break the cycle of teenage mothers. But if her vow of abstinence fails, I hope that she can fall back on abortion, for her future and ours.

RON WEDDINGTON

Austin, Tex., Jan. 20, 2003

15 posted on 05/13/2006 12:43:47 AM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
Only the openness of the expression is unlikely.

It's certainly well-documented that the purpose of much of the eugenics and birth control movements in the late 19th and first half of the 20th century were expressly intended to reduce and/or eliminate (over time) the 'inferior stock' in our population, whether native born poor whites (think "Five generations of idiots is enough!") and blacks, or Eastern/Southern European immigrants. (Recall at that time Asians were forbidden from immigrating)

59 posted on 05/13/2006 4:58:04 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
SARAH WEDDINGTON: The woman behind Roe v. Wade and trailblazer for women's rights

30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Conservative group details Clinton pursuit of RU-486

A Land Still Divided on Abortion

79 posted on 05/13/2006 6:52:26 AM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

Where have you been? This was started for the purpose of eugenics.


84 posted on 05/13/2006 7:08:33 AM PDT by AliVeritas (The beatings will continue until morale improves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

No doubt he never thought that his letter would see the public light of day.

It may be useful to recall that eugenics was a strong progressive movement until the defeat and exposure of the Nazi evils made it into a dirty word. Consequently, this guy doesn't come right out and espouse eugenics, but he would if it were PC to do so.

Plenty of "moderately cogent persons" have held to this kind of impulse toward imrpovement of the species throughout the last cetnury.("Three generations of imbeciles is enough"--Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes)

118 posted on 05/13/2006 7:51:24 AM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

How is this going to hurt *him*, sometimes someone might be smart enough to be a lawyer and evil enough not to see what they are saying is horrifying.. Mao was a college student..

130 posted on 05/13/2006 8:05:08 AM PDT by N3WBI3 ("I can kill you with my brain" - River Tam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

I agree.


181 posted on 05/13/2006 10:56:05 AM PDT by Panzerlied ("We shall never surrender!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
Well, Wall Street Journal ran the story here:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110007679

195 posted on 05/13/2006 12:26:48 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. -- George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

I see your point, but here's three things to consider:

1. She has never been hailed by anyone (except maybe some hardcore abortion promoters) for her scruples.

2. The abortion movement has always been about removing "undesirables" from the population. Margaret Sanger spoke about it plainly when she started this ball rolling, to the point that she used her magazine to praise the Nazi eugenics programs and even had the Nazi Minister of Racial Hygiene write a feature article in 1937.

3. In any case, Weddington is one record as believing that the solution to the difficult situations in a womans life is to cut her child into pieces and move on. Such a person would certainly see abortion as beneficial and Clinton as an ally in promoting it.

Here's a link to Taranto's page. After following this issue for a lot of years, I'm figuring this is genuine, and I'll predict that we won't see Weddington emerge next week to scream "Forgery!"

213 posted on 05/13/2006 1:41:39 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (TRY JESUS. If you don't like Him, the devil will always take you back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

Well, now I've gone and made myself look like a first class idiot--I thought we were talking about sarah Weddington, not her ex-husband Ron. Well, my comments still stand.


214 posted on 05/13/2006 1:47:45 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (TRY JESUS. If you don't like Him, the devil will always take you back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

Margret Sanger was an open advocate of eugenics through abortion.


231 posted on 05/13/2006 4:32:24 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1631334/posts

Wall Street Opionion Journal accepts this as a genuine article.


255 posted on 05/13/2006 8:53:08 PM PDT by Excellence (Since November 6, 1998)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot

If you read Weddington's book, you will see that what the guy said is really what those people believe.


285 posted on 05/14/2006 12:27:02 PM PDT by Full Court (click on my name to see the baby!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: dasboot
I'm not buying that a moderately cogent person with any scruples and legal training would plant such a bomb under his own arse.

How many tapes did Richard Nixon make?

327 posted on 05/15/2006 6:21:26 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | 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