MY GOD....Ruth Bader Ginsburg Actually ADMITTED the reason for Roe vs Wade was that Democrats WANTED to "Limit" POOR PEOPLE and MINORITIES!

For some strange reason, I don't think she was referring to wanting to limit her OWN particular minority.

Don't be alarmed, it's in the Bible, God spoke it...

Psalms 10:2 The wicked in his pride doth persecute the poor: let them be taken in the devices that they have imagined.

Psalms 10:8 He sitteth in the lurking places of the villages: in the secret places doth he murder the innocent: his eyes are privily set against the poor.


Psalms 10:9 He lieth in wait secretly as a lion in his den: he lieth in wait to catch the poor: he doth catch the poor, when he draweth him into his net.
******************************************************
[link to www.nowtheendbegins.com (secure)]

Great perspective...but the of course, it is God.

God hates poor people?

No but he doesn't care to much for those who lack reading comprehension skills....

My Bible reads Psalms 10:2 In arrogance the wicked hotly pursue the poor; let them be caught in the schemes which they have devised.

MOLOCK

What tribe was she again?

Oy vey!

Fake News.

If you idiots read the rest of the linked article it says halfway down the page this

"So did Ginsburg mean what her critics said she meant? Did she admit that she and her peers wanted legalized abortion to reduce the number of poor and minority people?

No. It’s clear from the interview itself that she thought the court wanted to reduce the number of poor people. She was retelling a history, not giving her own view. As her defenders noted, nothing in her writings and decisions suggests she thinks like this. (And it’s often forgotten that she criticized how broad a decision Roe was.)

She was then a 39-year-old lawyer who had nothing to do with arguing the case, just looking at it from the outside. She had guessed at the justices’ mindset."




So she wasn't talking about herself. She was guessing at what the motivation of the court might have been. She herself wasn't involved in that court case and wasn't on the supreme court yet.

The woman they paid to testify said she was pregnant from a rape, neither of which were true. And that was why we all needed to fund killing babies.

Well Roe V Wade has been an epic failure then since we have tons of poor people and minorities and those numbers, at least the minority population, has skyrocketed since roe v wade was passed.

If they didn't give them more welfare for each baby there would have been a lot more abortions.

“Frankly,” said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2009, “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.”


You know what, I think I might of changed my mind...

Did she vote on roe vs. Wade?

I don’t think so....

I don’t get the connection.

Not surprised because in general, whether pro-choice (or pro-abortion or anti-abortion (or the admitted flip-side definition: anti-choice), people who treat honor, integrity and ethics as nuisances or of minor importance can easily be among the most non-empathetic, most conniving, most mean-hearted people around.

As a rule, are liberals big sticklers about honor, integrity and ethics?

That's why people of the left can easily be guilty of what this phrase from a famous French philosopher so easily applies to much of the left:

If you can be made to believe in absurdities, you can be made to commit atrocities.

Liberals/leftists/progressives/ultra-liberals/Socialists/Comm​unists have a knack for believing in absurdities.

90% of abortions go to blacks
there you have it

No statue for racist RBG

thats democrats for you.

they actually hate minorities but love to try to enslave them virtuslly or physically..

but they are failures at all they do

An updated paper was published in 2019 to review the predictions of the original 2001 paper: NBER Working Paper No. 25863 [1]

Overall the authors concluded that the predictions did hold up with strong effects. [2] "We estimate that crime fell roughly 20% between 1997 and 2014 due to legalized abortion. The cumulative impact of legalized abortion on crime is roughly 45%, accounting for a very substantial portion of the roughly 50-55% overall decline from the peak of crime in the early 1990s."

Levitt discusses this paper and the background and history of the original paper (including its criticisms) in an episode of the Freakonomics podcast. Abortion and Crime, Revisited (Ep. 384)

WTF ?

A champion of civil rights... turns out she was, "civil" ...she wanted civility.

You do know that is what the God of Moloch is right??

48 million dead black babies, let that sink in.

And they call Trump the racist. Yoooo black people wake up

You can spray perfume on it but bottom line she was a pro abortion baby killer and legalized perversion. She can rot in hell.

Abortion for the Goy

This is a really suspect reading of that quote. Here's the preceding quote, followed by the question and RBG's answer.

"JUSTICE GINSBURG: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.

Q: 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?

JUSTICE 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."

What she's saying here is that at the time Roe was decided, she assumed that it was because of concern over population growth, particularly certain populations. This is not RBG admitting that a) that was the real intention behind Roe or b) that's what RBG herself wanted. That was simply how she perceived the ruling at the time.

She later clarified this in a follow-up interview because her initial quote had been widely misinterpreted by conservative media at the time. Here's what she said...

“Emily, you know that that line, which you quoted accurately, was vastly misinterpreted,” she said. “I was surprised that the court went as far as it did in Roe v. Wade, and I did think that with the Medicaid reimbursement cases down the road that perhaps the court was thinking it did want more women to have access to reproductive choice. At the time, there was a concern about too many people inhabiting our planet. There was an organization called Zero Population Growth.” She continued, “In the press, there were articles about the danger of crowding our planet. So there was at the time of Roe v. Wade considerable concern about overpopulation.”

I asked if she was talking about general concern in the society, as opposed to her own concern or the concern of the feminist legal community. Ginsburg said yes, and then returning to the issue of whether Congress could restrict Medicaid from covering abortion, added, “But I turned out to be wrong. Not too long after Roe v. Wade”—in Harris v. McRae— “the Supreme Court said it was OK to deny Medicaid funding for even therapeutic abortions.”

That quote is from an article in Slate published in 2012. I can't link to it here because GLP doesn't like it.

People wrote that, and they did so through a framework based on the worship of ancient Egyptian gods.

(RU-486)

"Are, you, for, murder?"

It’s only racist if a Republican says it. Apparently..

You want to live in a racial jungle? Democrats are saving us from that!