Posted on 09/26/2020 4:32:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
In a statement announcing Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death September 18, 2020, Chief Justice John Roberts said, “Our nation has lost a jurist of historic stature. We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her – a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”
Ginsburg was a champion of something, but it wasn’t justice for the unborn. Sure, the left’s superhero was a tireless and relentless liberal judge, but she won’t go down in history as the saint Democrats suggest, far from it. Chief Justice Roberts failed to mention that because of her pro-abortion stance, millions of unborn babies won’t have the opportunity to remember Ginsburg, who fought up until the end for the legal right for mothers to kill their unborn babies.
What an awful legacy to leave behind, let alone carry into the hereafter.
While I’m sorry for her family’s loss, let’s be honest; the crocodile tears flowing down leftists’ faces have little to do with Ginsburg. Democrats mourn because they are about to lose their “insurance policy,” with the Supreme Court set to return to its commonsensical roots of interpreting the law rather than legislating it.
Oh, the agony.
For generations now, activist justices have deliberately muddied the law and found countless ways to shove their non-values down our throats. As I type, Democrats wail like snot-nosed crybabies because they fear Ginsburg’s replacement means overturning Roe v. Wade.
Lies and deceit conceived Roe v. Wade, but that matters little to death cult Democrats who worship at the altar of selfism, believing abortion is an inalienable right they’ll do anything in their power to preserve. Shortly after Ginsburg died, Biden voters called for political terrorism, “burning it all down” -- if President Trump and the Republican-controlled Senate perform their constitutional duties to fill the vacant seat.
Ginsburg sang the praises of Roe v. Wade during an Elle fashion magazine interview in 2014, displaying her zealous partisanship and passionate commitment to leftist politics. When asked about retiring, Ginsburg said, “So anybody who thinks that if I step down, Obama could appoint someone like me, they’re misguided. As long as I can do the job full steam…”
And full steam ahead she went until the end, spewing archetypal Democrat double-speak, claiming to fight for the poor and minorities, while simultaneously supporting policies that disenfranchised them.
Ginsburg’s stance on abortion seemed to edge toward eugenics during a New York Times Magazine interview in 2009 while opining about the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federally funded abortions. Ginsburg said, “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.”
“That we don’t want to have too many of.” While it’s unclear Ginsburg endorsed Roe’s eugenic motivation, it certainly was an odd thing for a Supreme Court Justice to say during the interview.
Democrats’ abortion movement has deep ties to eugenics with Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger. Ron Weddington, the co-counsel in the Roe case, made the relationship quite clear in a letter he wrote to President-elect Bill Clinton, imploring him to rush to market RU-486, the abortion pill.
“(Y)ou can start immediately to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country,” Weddington wrote. “It’s what we all know is true, but we only whisper it…Think of all the poverty, crime and misery…then add 30 million unwanted babies to the scenario. We lost a lot of ground during the Reagan-Bush religious orgy. We don’t have a lot of time left.” Weddington suggested who he had in mind when he wrote, “For every Jesse Jackson who has fought his way out of poverty of a large family, there are millions mired in poverty, drugs and crime.”
NPR reports Ginsburg’s dying request was: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” If that’s true, it means Ginsburg left this world agonizing over politics rather than things which really matter like her family and friends, or where she’d spend eternity. Pitiful.
If true, tears should be shed for a life utterly wasted.
Currently, the left accuses conservatives of dancing on Ginsburg’s grave. Not at all. Sure, we’re dancing, but it’s not on her grave; we’re celebrating that Ginsburg’s replacement will value human life and that the Supreme Court will return to what the Founders intended. After what Democrats did to Brett Kavanaugh, Republicans owe Democrats nothing and must straightaway fill Ginsburg’s empty seat, for the sake of our country and its future, both born and unborn.
The mediocre-at-best minds of the Democrats/leftists think in terms of GREEEEEEEAAAAAAT HEROES and GREEEEEEEAAAAAAT VILLAINS.
They can't think in any other terms. Truth is beyond them.
Yes, but he was crucified at the behest of certain high-ranking Jews who wanted him dead. Under the doctrine that succeeding generations must bear the guilt of deeds committed by their ancestors, they must shoulder the blame. Not that I subscribe to that doctrine, because I don't. But many others do.
Good article, excellent quotes of pure evil within it. But, I would use “tens of millions” of babies killed, because more than 63,000,000 mothers, sisters, aunts, and grandmothers have been killed since 1973. Ten times the number of Jews killed in WWII.
Everybody can say what they will about RBG, all I have to say is this. She vacated the seat while a Republican was president which was more than David Souter cold bring himself to do. For this, she deserves our gratitude.
Great Post!
Jesus redeemed all (including atheists) by His death on the cross and His Resurrection in defeating death, and our salvation is based on our acceptance by Baptism and our faith in His Truth and not dying in mortal sin.
Many are called, but few are chosen.
a swing and a miss again priest. Our salvation is through our faith in Jesus Christ and His finished work on the cross. We are saved by His grace alone and nothing else.
All of our sins (mortal and venial) caused and are responsible for Christ’s scourging, humiliations, suffering, crown of thorns, carrying of the cross and death on the cross.
If we do not accept that responsibility for our sins, then we not not understand God’s love for each one of us.
Jesus with humility chose to become man (combined with his divine nature) suffer for our sins and by His actions we are redeemed and have a chance at eternal life with God. We accept God by Baptism and Faith in His Word and by fully repenting our sins.
This pitiful excuse for a human being was more or less responsible for the slaughter of an untold number of children.
I shudder to think of the consequences for this behavior in the next life.
Years ago, there was a DOUG GINSBERG turned down for the USSC.
ANY relation to RBG???
Your knowledge of scripture is based on heresy and false teaching.
Nowhere does the Bible say that our salvation is complete and that we will enter Heaven based on Christ’s Death and Resurrection. Christ redeemed all and this is complete by Christ’s Death and Resurrection
Yes we are saved by God’s love and grace. However, we need to accept God through Baptism and faith in His revealed Truth and not dying in mortal sin. God gives us a choice to accept God and His Truth or reject Him
Baptism Mark 16:16
Mortal Sin: 1John 5:17 “All wrongdoing is sin, but there is a sin that is not deadly.” “There is sin which is deadly”
“But he who endures to the end will be saved.” Mt 10:22
Your comment that I am a priest is false. I would humbly offer my life as priest that could hear confessions and forgive sins and bring the Real Presence of Christ to the Catholic community. I am a Catholic that wants all to accept Jesus and His Truth so that they join Him in Heaven.
She was not a Jurist, she was an advocate for destroying the foundation of our Constitution.
RBG’s judicial activism was second to none.
I just tweeted this, referring to the American Thinker with great care.
Snopes tried to debunk, but the American Thinker mentioned Snopes and pointed out a follow-up quote. Ginsberg herself confirmed it.
Guys, a doctrine debate? Is this the best time?
I hope we win this election or bitter clingers will have trouble saying anything worthwhile.
Context: Our Lady of the Gavel reportedly said that Roe was essentially judicial legislation (my shorthand) to reduce the populations of races “we don’t want”.
I added follow-up sourcing in a recent post here.
Has the American Thinker ever perpetrated hoaxes?
She didnt have a scintilla of compunction admitting her blatant hatred which she satiated by defending the despicable Roe v Wade.
Ultimately, in the grand scheme of things, “someone” had to crucify Him.
By thinking we do need to do something more than faith in what Christ provided on the Cross, we fail to believe in what He provided at the Cross.
It only takes a smidgen more faith that no faith whatsoever for saving faith.
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.