...Beyond her enthusiastically pro-abortion stance, the justice’s ideas about which Americans should be aborted struck many as horrifying. The poor, she reasoned, should have more access to abortions because it “makes no sense as a national policy to promote birth only among poor people.”
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth,” she said, “and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
http://www.rightwingnews.com/top-ne...er-ginsburg-makes-case-killing-poor-children/
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes The Case For Killing Poor Children
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Oct 15, 2014.
Page 1 of 2
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Ginsburg is a Nazi collaborator, isn't she?
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
JohnDeereFan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Simply reducing the surplus population
She's just stating what we already know.
We've heard from law enforcement sources about the drop in crime rates over the years.
Others have noted the dropping crime rate correlates with abortion statistics.
States that allowed abortion prior to the Supreme Courts Row vs. Wade decision had a statically significant drop in their rates compared to non-abortion allowing states.
These statistics followed in the rest of the country after abortion became the norm.
Aborting the poor criminally prone population reduces the crime rate.
Rob -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth,” she said, “and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
And here is the first sentence of the linked-to article in the OP:
During a recent interview with Elle, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg discussed the legacy she hopes to leave behind. Perhaps unsurprisingly, she chose the issue of promoting abortions as the realm in which she has been most influential.
And here is the article in Elle, that the rightwingnews claims the quote is from:
http://www.elle.com/life-love/society-career/supreme-court-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg
You will notice that nowhere in that Elle article is this quote to be found. Rather, that particular quote was from a NY Times magazine article from 2009. The rightwingnews is alleging that Ginsburg is worried about her legacy and that her legacy is about stopping poor women from having children. They just lifted an out of context quote of hers from five years ago in order to enhance their slant on the story. So again, I see that you get your news from unbiased sources. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
This is not her first time weighing in on the question of what by any intellectually honest standard must be described as eugenics. In an earlier interview, she described the Roe v. Wade decision as being intended to control population growth, “particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/388757/we-only-whisper-it-kevin-d-williamson -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Margarte Sanger would be proud of Ginsburg though.
-
The answer is yes.
That is the true test of the validity of the source.
You can spin it any way you like, and the author did. But she said it and meant it. No getting around it. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Let's look at it.
Thread title by RevMitch: "Ginsburg Makes Case for Killing Poor Children". Reality is that fetuses are being aborted. Are unborn fetuses "poor"?
The quote: "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."
Notice Ginsburg is talking in the third person. She is making an observation about what society in general thought about population growth, not what she necessarily thought.
So in RevMitch's world Ginsburg is making a case in 2014 for 'killing poor children' based on a quote she made in 2009 about thoughts she had concerning US society in 1973.
This is shoddy reporting and hyberbole on the OP.
That said, Ginsburg is a despicable human being who likely thinks abortions by poor people benefits society. But you don't get that by crafting a hit piece with poor journalism. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Like most liberals, she wants to put other people to death with abortion but she does not want to put Jews to death because she is Jewish. This is called hypocrisy and this is not the only reason that Clinton should never have put her on the Supreme Court. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
We know she is pro-abortion. But you're not going to get that from this particular quote.
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
"We", as everyone knows, is first person plural. That would be looking at it grammatically. You are the one looking at it anyway you want.
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 1 of 2