Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes The Case For Killing Poor Children

[church mouse guy]

Sure, as in "We the People". Right?

There you go again! Still trying to justify your third person idea?

1. I - we
2. you - you
3. he, she, it - they

 

[carpro]

The people that are doing the spinning are the author's of the article in righwingnews and RevMitch.

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.

None of which changes what she said.

That is the real story.

I appreciate the Rev posting it, no matter where it came from. I didn't know she was a bigoted as she has shown herself to be.

 

[Gina B]

Shhh, you're being too loud Rev. "We only whisper it." http://m.nationalreview.com/article/388757/we-only-whisper-it-kevin-d-williamson

 

[Revmitchell]

Thread title by RevMitch: "Ginsburg Makes Case for Killing Poor Children". Reality is that fetuses are being aborted. Are unborn fetuses "poor"?

First fetuses are human beings. The use of the term fetus diminises that.These are un born chiildren. And they are being slaughtered in the womb not just aborted. I cannot bide the diminishing of human life like you are doing.

Second the poor are the parents, so it goes to say that once the child is born they are poor in poor families and that is why Ginsburg wants them aborted. Your attempt to obfuscate that is pathetic.

 

[InTheLight]

First fetuses are human beings. The use of the term fetus diminises that.These are un born chiildren. And they are being slaughtered in the womb not just aborted. I cannot bide the diminishing of human life like you are doing.

Agree with you that fetuses are human beings. I am not diminishing them in any way by calling them fetuses.

Second the poor are the parents, so it goes to say that once the child is born they are poor in poor families and that is why Ginsburg wants them aborted.

You mean once the baby is born, right?

You realize you just said, "once the child is born Ginsburg wants them aborted."

Your attempt to obfuscate that is pathetic.

No, I'm going for clarity. Your attempt to say that aborting babies is the equivalent of killing poor children is obfuscating.

 

[Revmitchell]

Agree with you that fetuses are human beings. I am not diminishing them in any way by calling them fetuses.

That is what it does. It is a common term used by abortionists. That way they do not have to deal with the fact that they murdering human beings.

You mean once the baby is born, right?

It doesnt matter. Good grief.

You realize you just said, "once the child is born Ginsburg wants them aborted."

ok?

No, I'm going for clarity. Your attempt to say that aborting babies is the equivalent of killing poor children is obfuscating.

Your so called clarity is not necessary.

 

[Revmitchell]

[/I]
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.

Baloney.............

 

[church mouse guy]

Shhh, you're being too loud Rev. "We only whisper it." http://m.nationalreview.com/article/388757/we-only-whisper-it-kevin-d-williamson

Good link, Gina! Personally, I thought that children are a blessing. If we murder Jewish children we are like Pharaoh but if it is just poor children it is okay in Ginsburg's mind.

 

[Revmitchell]

Good link, Gina! Personally, I thought that children are a blessing. If we murder Jewish children we are like Pharaoh but if it is just poor children it is okay in Ginsburg's mind.

It is all part of the population control agenda.

 

[church mouse guy]

It is all part of the population control agenda.

Of course! Notice how the left likes to use Latin words to confuse the subject--fetus is merely Latin for unborn child.

Another curious point is that Ginsburg brings the subject of money into the conversation. I don't think that she is an average Jew, but I doubt if the average Jew even in this country thinks that life is so cheap that we have to murder the unborn child just for a few bucks. But Ginsburg seems to want poor people dead. At the time Clinton put her on the Court she was worth 10 or 11 million dollars. She is probably worth 50 million now. Clearly, she does not want to spend her money on the poor. Israel probably would reject her. She will have to retire to Martha's Vineyard with all of the others of her type.