Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at 87. - 🦀

HeyYou said:
Poland and Liechtenstein both outlaw it except in cases of rape, dude. Several countries don't allow it in the second trimester unless the health of the woman is threatened, like Italy and France. France routinely has pro-life demonstrations and the number of people attending reached 50,000 by 2017. As always, Europe isn't as liberal as people think.
Click to expand...
50,000 people out of a population of 67 million is virtually nothing. My point still stands that abortion plainly isn't a contentious political issue in Europe. The consensus that abortion should be readily available (with some restrictions here and there) was reached decades ago here, and the issue simply isn't on the public radar.

It's only in the US and Ireland where the subject still causes division, and it's being driven primarily by single-issue obsessives who lack the courage to accept the practical consequences of what they advocate.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Dumb
Reactions: GeneralFriendliness, toothless_banana, Jackisnotaname and 7 others
It isn't a contradiction for Bitch McConnell to not allow Obama to replace Scalia as a lame duck, but to allow Trump (who is not a lame duck) to replace RBG.

It is however a contradiction all the retards reeing about Trump replacing RBG who had no problem with Obama replacing Scalia.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Nguyen Van Phuoc, The Pink Panther and 5 others
Pentex said:
I like the little grasping hand, and the veins kind of splayed out like tentacles. Very nice artistic touch.

8/10 tokophobic body horror. Would have gotten those extra two points if they added the fetus' eye peering out of the open wound.
Click to expand...
Ngl Palpable Fetal Parts is an excellent band name
 
  • Dumb
  • Horrifying
  • Agree
Reactions: ISDwarnedus, Alex Krycek, Alrakkan and 8 others
I guess it's time to refresh of memories of RBG by checking for her hidden skeletons she left in her closet.
www.americanthinker.com

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s support for racial quotas was hidden from the public during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

Before she was on the United States Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg supported a U.S. government racial quota plan when she was on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The mainstream media did not tell the ...
www.americanthinker.com www.americanthinker.com
September 19, 2020
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s support for racial quotas was hidden from the public during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings.
By Allan J. Favish
Before she was on the United States Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg supported a U.S. government racial quota plan when she was on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The mainstream media did not tell the public about it. The Democrats and Republicans in Congress did not tell the public about it. Talk-radio hosts did not tell the public about it. As a Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg continued her approval of racial preferences, aka “affirmative action” as described here, here and here.
When Ginsburg was nominated for the Supreme Court by former President Bill Clinton on June 22, 1993, before we had the Internet, I waited for the media to tell the public about her position on racial preferences. She had been a federal judge for over a decade and it was possible she had ruled in such a case. There were news broadcasts and articles about how she ruled on many other issues, but not racial preferences.
My curiosity led me to a law library where I found a case after only fifteen minutes of researching. I wrote an opinion article about the case and submitted it to newspapers and magazines all over the country. I sent it to conservative talk-radio hosts. I sent it to all of the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and to a few Republican members of the House of Representatives. Nobody to whom I had sent the information shared it with the public.
As her confirmation hearing was about to begin, I sent my article to a smaller publication, the Los Angeles Daily Journal, which is a newspaper targeted at judges and lawyers in Los Angeles. On July 13, 1993, the L. A. Daily Journal published my opinion article. As far as I know, the media and our elected officials never publicly discussed the information in my article. Ginsburg was never asked about it at her confirmation hearing, where her testimony began on July 20, 1993. When Ginsburg was confirmed on August 3, 1993, the Senate was controlled by the Democrats, who had 58 seats. She was confirmed by a vote of 96-3.
Click to expand...
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Informative
  • Feels
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Nguyen Van Phuoc, Toolbox and 6 others
Hellbound Hellhound said:
50,000 people out of a population of 67 million is virtually nothing. My point still stands that abortion plainly isn't a contentious political issue in Europe. The consensus that abortion should be readily available (with some restrictions here and there) was reached decades ago here, and the issue simply isn't on the public radar.

It's only in the US and Ireland where the subject still causes division, and it's being driven primarily by single-issue obsessives who lack the courage to accept the practical consequences of what they advocate.
Click to expand...
Most places in Europe have earlier abortion cutoffs than the US. The left in the US is extremist on abortion. While we may have a bigger contingent than them of people who want it limited more harshly, they're already more conservative on it than us.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: GrimProphet, Who dat?, Pissmaster and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back