Abortion is OK, especially if you're a certain Supreme Court Justice

[edwest2]

Very disappointing.

news.yahoo.com/ginsburg-roe-gave-abortion-opponents-target-173713855.html

It appears that for some liberals, there are only two sides to this issue.

1. I’m right.
2. I’m right.

Peace,
Ed

 

[fastenatingguy]

**Very disappointing.
**

Surely, you weren’t expecting anything else?

This is an issue that appears to be moving in the “life” direction, albeit slowly. Let’s hope that the young people truly are more in line (than not) with this position. From what I have seen in articles and surveys, it’s hopeful.

 

[april32010]

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.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

 

[edwest2]

**Very disappointing.
**

Surely, you weren’t expecting anything else?

This is an issue that appears to be moving in the “life” direction, albeit slowly. Let’s hope that the young people truly are more in line (than not) with this position. From what I have seen in articles and surveys, it’s hopeful.

No. My disappointment stems from the fact that such statements are coming from a Supreme Court Justice. My understanding of the law is that it’s a search for the truth and for justice - you don’t just decide, as a judge, that this issue is set in concrete. That all things change except for this.

Impartiality? I think she needs to check the definition.

And yes, the young are getting the message. No, they don’t all come around for the same reasons but certain things work and killing your own, by the millions, is the worst thing. It doesn’t work. Unless we want to be things, all human beings need love.

Peace,
Ed

 

[ProVobis]

She does present some interesting points.

It seems to me that only a constitutional amendment would rectify the matter.

 

[marymary1975]

Not surprised one bit, what else can you expect from Ruth Bader Gingsburg? Though is very interesting as she just gave a major hint on how she is going to vote on the DOMA and prop 8 cases.

 

[fastenatingguy]

fastenatingguy;10739593:

No. My disappointment stems from the fact that such statements are coming from a Supreme Court Justice. My understanding of the law is that it’s a search for the truth and for justice - you don’t just decide, as a judge, that this issue is set in concrete. That all things change except for this.

Impartiality? I think she needs to check the definition.

And yes, the young are getting the message. No, they don’t all come around for the same reasons but certain things work and killing your own, by the millions, is the worst thing. It doesn’t work. Unless we want to be things, all human beings need love.

Peace,
Ed

So again the hope for the future is that as people like RBG die off, they are replaced by those who do in fact seek the truth. With the advancements in science, such as ultrasound which shows a REAL human baby in the mother, it will happen. Keep praying.

 

[marymary1975]

fastenatingguy;10739593:

No. My disappointment stems from the fact that such statements are coming from a Supreme Court Justice. My understanding of the law is that it’s a search for the truth and for justice - you don’t just decide, as a judge, that this issue is set in concrete. That all things change except for this.

Impartiality? I think she needs to check the definition.

And yes, the young are getting the message. No, they don’t all come around for the same reasons but certain things work and killing your own, by the millions, is the worst thing. It doesn’t work. Unless we want to be things, all human beings need love.

Peace,
Ed

Unfortunately Ed, that is not what the law is about in this country. If you are expecting to find justice and truth in the courts …especially in the supreme court…I am sorry to tell you that you are dreaming, that is the last place, if you want truth, you are looking in the wrong place.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

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.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Kinda hard to take that the wrong way, isn’t it.

 

[april32010]

Kinda hard to take that the wrong way, isn’t it.

ya think

 

[edwest2]

edwest2;10739618:

Unfortunately Ed, that is not what the law is about in this country. If you are expecting to find justice and truth in the courts …especially in the supreme court…I am sorry to tell you that you are dreaming, that is the last place, if you want truth, you are looking in the wrong place.

No, there was a time in this country where the law was the obvious truth and we took it for granted but were rudely awakened in the 1970s.

The Supreme Court, not the people, opened the door for the murder of millions, and the ‘abortion industry,’ to this day, convinces women it’s just a blob of tissue or nothing like a baby. Come on. Are they living in fantasy land? If it’s not a human being then explain what it in fact is. Obviously, nothing previous Supreme Courts have done can compare to the murder of millions but that pleases some who ask on our board "Is the world overpopulated?’ The answer is no!

Look at the statistics and data. Where do you get the most maternal deaths and deaths from disease, malnutrition and inability to access clean drinking water? The so-called poorest Third World Countries. We’re sitting around, a mostly overweight country, with a bag of Cheetos and a soda, and people are literally dropping dead in other countries because they have no doctors or one doctor is attempting to help thousands with little in the way of resources. The “let 'em die” people are getting their wish. A lot of people are dying daily and it’s because of lack of what we take for granted.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Steinway]

I wonder what race she was referring to?

Here’s her real reason why: “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.” ~ Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

ArguingWithAtheists.com

 

[SuzanneD]

Hey, they aren’t killing babies, they are “evacuating the contents of the uterus”.
See the difference???

 

[polytropos]

Interesting that her main concern with Roe v. Wade is that it was not passed in such a way that kept her political opponents quiet.