Justice Ginsburg originally thought Roe v. Wade was designed to limit 'populations that we don’t want to have too many of'

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s loose cheeks just got a whole lot looser.   (Is looser even a word?  I suppose it’s not.) 

You may want to sit down for this one.

This past Tuesday Justice Ginsburg – the same woman who won the 1999 Marshall Award for her contributions to gender equality and civil rights – told the New York Times that the landmark decision Roe v. Wade hinged on the Supreme Court majority's desire to diminish populations that we don't want to have too many of."   The full interview will follow below, in just a minute.

 I should preface Ginsburg’s remarks with a little bit of background information on Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood), so that Ginsburg's egenics references do not strike you  as outlandish and absurd.  Eugenics – all of its racism and evil intentions – are, and always have been, at the heart of the pro-abortion movement.   This is not breaking news.  

Time to slap down some Sanger101:

Sanger’s original motto Planned Parenthood was “Creating a Race of Thoroughbreds.”  It reveals what no one will admit anymore: eugenics wasn’t just a side hobby for Sanger—it is the very core of her abortion propagation.  In her own words (and truly, the woman has so many blatantly revealing statements), she would use birth control to eliminate “the dead weight of human waste”. 

Sanger mourned the fact that medical technology of the day was wasted by keeping the weak and the sickly alive to procreate.  She devoted herself to preventing fertility in the physically and mentally “defective,” and wrote off anything else as weak “sentimentalism”.  To our humanitarian Sanger, the greatest achievement of her Birth Control campaign would be to stop “morons and imbeciles” (her choice of vocabulary, not mine) from having children. 

Eugenics with a vengeance was the name of her creepy little game.  “We prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feebleminded,” Sanger said. Sanger harbored a racist hatred for minority groups, and she actively encouraged African-American Ministers to preach abortion rights to black community churches with the hopes of eliminating these people she disgustingly called “socially undesirable people.”  The lady of the hour was quoted saying: "The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."   Sanger is often hailed as the “Champion of Women’s Rights.”  Puhlease.  What an insult to women.

Even though abortion activists have rewritten Margaret Sanger’s biography, her ideals remain indelibly fixed at the center of her the reproductive rights movement.  If Sanger were to come back to earth for a visit, I'm sure she’d be delighted to see our society of abortion, contraception, forced sterilization, euthanasia, racial prejudice, animosity towards God and religion, reprogenics (manipulating qualities in the baby, like sex selection, blood type, talents and physicality in order to create 'designer children'), and the sky-rocketng minority abortion rates.  

I am not being naïve.  I have many dear pro-choice friends who'd writhe at the very thought of eugenics.  But that’s the point: the founders and leaders of reproductive rights work to keep supporters unaware.  Their black-tar agenda is as thick and utterly confounding as it is dark.   And they do not authentically care about the well-being of women and minorities.

But don't take it from me.  Take it from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

Q: If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?

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.  {The ruling she's referencing is Harris v. McRae, which forbade using medicaid to cover 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.

For shame, Justice Ginsburg.  This kind of disrespect for human life knows no bounds.   

I read something of Flannery O’Connor’s once that I’ll never forget: “The truth doesn’t change according to our ability to stomach it."  Abortion and its advocates are up to no good, and the proof is all here.   Ya dig?