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.
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?
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.