Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg: 'We Will Never Go Back' to Outlawing Abortion

"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."

From LifeSiteNews
By Kathleen Gilbert

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last Thursday insisted that America would "never go back" to outlawing the murder of the unborn, now that a whole generation of women has experienced the effects of Roe v. Wade.

"Over a generation of young women have grown up, understanding they can control their own reproductive capacity, and in fact their life's destiny," Ginsburg said in remarks at the Aspen Ideas Festival. "We will never go back to the way it once was."

Ginsburg went on to point out that, should the Supreme Court restrict Roe, "the only women who would be truly affected are poor women." "Because even at the time before Roe, women who wanted abortions could have a safe, legal abortion ... Women could travel from one state to another and didn't have to go to Japan or Cuba.”

“Whatever the court may do, it's only the poor women who will suffer," she said. "When people realize that, maybe they will have a different attitude."

Ginsburg has previously lamented the lack of full abortion availability for low-income populations – although her argument was framed in less-than-altruistic terms.

"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," Ginsburg told Emily Bazelon of the New York Times one year ago.

"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."

Ginsburg also took a moment to say she was "so glad that Elena [Kagan] is joining us,” although the U.S. Supreme Court candidate's nomination has not yet been approved by the Senate.

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg: I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations Through Abortion

Many of us believe that racial and ethnic cleansing is at the heart of the pro-abortion movement. It is certainly what motivated the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger. And if one looks at the racial makeup of the fifty million aborted babies in this country, one can see why the country club Republicans and the Aryans from Darien have long included Planned Parenthood among their "charitable" causes.

But seldom do they come right out and admit that they support abortion because it helps "eradicate unwanted populations."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is in her dotage, has not been well, and has been known to doze off on the bench for twenty minutes at a time -- so the defenses are down, and the truth ...well, just came out:

From LifeSiteNews
By Kathleen Gilbert

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems to have made a stunning admission in favor of cleansing America of unwanted populations by aborting them. In an interview with the New York Times, the judge said that Medicaid should cover abortions, and that she had originally expected that Roe v. Wade would facilitate such coverage in order to control the population of groups "that we don't want to have too many of."

The statement was made in the context of a discussion about the fact that abortions are not covered by Medicaid, and therefore are less available to poor women. "Reproductive choice has to be straightened out," said Ginsburg, lamenting the fact that only women "of means" can easily access abortion.

"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," Ginsburg told Emily Bazelon of the New York Times.

"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."

Harris v. McRae is a 1980 court decision that upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.

Justice Ginsburg's remarks appear to align her expectations for abortion with those of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and other prominent members of the 20th century's eugenics movement. Sanger and her eugenicist peers advocated the systematic use of contraception, sterilization, and abortion to reduce the numbers of poor, black, immigrant and disabled populations.

Ironically, the New York Times interview began as an exploration of Ginsburg's thoughts on Supreme Court hopeful Sonia Sotomayor as she prepares for her confirmation hearings this month. Coverage of Sotomayor frequently emphasizes her success story as an underprivileged minority from the Bronx who rose to prominence at Princeton and Yale Law.

Ginsburg also defended a controversial statement repeated by Sotomayor in several speeches, where she stated she "would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

"I thought it was ridiculous for them to make a big deal out of that," said Ginsburg. "Think of how many times you've said something that you didn't get out quite right, and you would edit your statement if you could. I'm sure she meant no more than what I mean when I say: Yes, women bring a different life experience to the table. ... That I'm a woman, that's part of it, that I'm Jewish, that's part of it, that I grew up in Brooklyn, N.Y., and I went to summer camp in the Adirondacks, all these things are part of me."

The judge also praised the advent of earlier abortions with the wider distribution of the morning-after pill, saying "I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they're fighting a losing battle. Time is on the side of change."

When the Supreme Court upheld the partial-birth abortion ban in 2007, Ginsburg wrote a scathing dissent, saying the court's reasoning "reflects ancient notions about women's place in the family and under the Constitution - ideas that have long since been discredited."