Wicked Ruth Bader Ginsburg Says, “A Woman who Terminates Pregnancy Was not a ‘Mother.'”

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a wicked, wicked woman

Medical science doesn’t matter to leftists, at least when it comes to biology. While they may cite the latest climate change myths from meteorological weather-guessers, they refuse to deal with factual matters of human biology. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a wicked womans whose life on this earth will thankfully soon be over, recently rebuked Justice Clarence Thomas for using the term, ‘mother,’ to refer to pregnant women.

Thomas had published a concurring opinion with the court when it ruled on an Indiana law that required abortion facilities to properly “dispose” of murdered infants by burial or cremation (the court upheld that part of the bill). Thomas, a conservative, used the word, ‘mother,’ in reference to women who choose to murder their child (which makes sense, because if you’re a woman who has a child, you’re a mother by definition).

Thomas’ opinion basically begged his colleagues to pick up the topic of abortion, saying that, “the court declines to wade into these issues today, [but] we cannot avoid them forever.” It was this line, however, which so sorely vexed Ginsburg:

[Speaking of the Sex-Selective and Disability Abortion Ban] “…that the mother is seeking the abortion solely because of the child’s race, sex, diagnosis of Down syndrome, disability, or related characteristics,” he wrote in his opinion.”

Ginsburg gave a dissenting opinion to the ruling in which she provided a scathing footnote underneath Thomas’ words. Ginsburg wrote…

“A woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’…

Uh, but…science and stuff.

If you’re pregnant, you’re a…you’re a (say it with me)…you’re a m-mo….(say it with me)…mother.

Ginsburg didn’t want to decide the matter at all, knowing that because of President Donald J. Trump’s recent appointments, the liberals on the court are outnumbered. Ginsburg argued, “[We should not] take up a case simply to say we are bound by a party’s ‘strategic litigation choice’ to invoke rational-basis review alone.”

Thomas said in response, “It is not a ‘waste’ of our resources to summarily reverse an incorrect decision that created a Circuit split.”

Even though the court is split with five conservatives and four liberals, two of Ginsburg liberal allies agreed with the majority that Indiana had the right to determine how infant bodies should be disposed of. The ultimate vote tally on that subject was 7-2.

In the meantime, we pray that liberals soon get a good grasp of both basic medical science and the use of words. When they do, abortion will be banned for good.

Facebook Comments