Isn't that what this was always about???
She's just being candid about the depopulation conspiracy.
Margaret Sanger & Co.
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 ...
With her pancreatic cancer she ain’t far away.
From what I understand, the founder of planned parent hood placed locations by black neighborhoods...the founder was a racist.
So then she was vigorously opposed to R v. W and the abortion industry prior to 1980, right???????
Very interesting, thanks for posting.
I still think you need a ping list [:-)
The left will have to assign someone to watch her.
I guess neither one devolve. She is sick now so best not to post them. We quit on Kennedy after he became ill.
Words fail me...
in defense of the justice, she probably meant society in general. we as a society do not want parasites sucking the taxpayers dry while they collect welfare, medicaid, food stamps, or sit in prison costing us large amounts to feed and clothe them. regardless of race, ethnic makeup, we as a society do not need these parasites. and i agree that she was not saying it was her wish for this to be so, but her interpretation at the time roe was decided.
Isn't that what this was always about???
She's just being candid about the depopulation conspiracy.
Margaret Sanger & Co.
She obviously and quite clearly states she is pro-abortion, and frets over accessibility. However, the WND snippets seem designed to imply she favors eugenics when it seems that that was her perception of the ruling, not necessarily her personal opinion regards legalized abortion.
But she is just like the rest of the feminist libs. The Left doesn’t get it when Sarah Palin says it’s about country, and people like Ginsburg don’t get it when we say it’s about life. They are all about personhood but cannot make the connection to life.
What’s the big deal? Planned parenthood’s founder, Margret Sanger, was a huge proponent of eugenics. Why should this surprise anyone?
Remember, just scratch the surface of a member of the “liberal elite,” and you’ll find support for murderous, authoritarian regimes.
Mark
She's saying that she thought that the purpose of Roe was actually to rid society of too many undesirables, but that Harris convinced her that it was actually just to control women. She's a bit tinfoily, if you ask me.
I would note, though, that she never mentions anything about the unborn children who are killed, even in partial birth abortions. The possibility that these human persons might have some rights apparently never even entered her mind. Her extreme feminism has blinded her to basic humanity.
If she thought R.v W. was based upon eugenics, then she was naturally opposed to it until 1980 when she found out it wasn’t so, right?
That’s the kind of statement of belief that makes me hate liberals. A freaking Justice of the SC no less...
Mark
If she thought R.v W. was based upon eugenics, then she was naturally opposed to it until 1980 when she found out it wasn’t so, right?
Or silence her.
I bet Hillary would jump at the chance to on the Supreme Court.
SOS is the weakest she's been in a long time.
She had more clout as first lady. She had more clout as Senator. Now she 's babysitting the ousted Marxist.
I did not get that impression from the snippets. I read it that she thought society was in favor of the reducing certain undesirable populations and this was behind the ruling in Roe.
The fact remains that she supported Roe, a ruling she perceived as based on a eugenics theory.
Is it the same thing as not criticizing Obama simply because he is Black and a Communist?
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.