- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Roe v Wade Was a Faulty Decision ------------- According to Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:18 am
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:18 am
With all the fretting over Kennedy's replacement in terms of Roe, some of our resident libs might be surprised to hear RBG's take on the 1973 Burger Court Opinion
quote:
Casual observers of the Supreme Court who came to the Law School to hear Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speak about Roe v. Wade likely expected a simple message from the longtime defender of reproductive and women’s rights: Roe was a good decision.
Those more acquainted with Ginsburg and her thoughtful, nuanced approach to difficult legal questions were not surprised, however, to hear her say just the opposite, that Roe was a faulty decision. For Ginsburg, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that affirmed a woman’s right to an abortion was too far-reaching and too sweeping, and it gave anti-abortion rights activists a very tangible target to rally against in the four decades since.
Ginsburg and Professor Geoffrey Stone, a longtime scholar of reproductive rights and constitutional law, spoke for 90 minutes before a capacity crowd in the Law School auditorium on May 11 on “Roe v. Wade at 40.”
“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.
“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”
LINK
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:20 am to NC_Tigah
Read harder. You guys act like she is dumb sometimes 
This post was edited on 7/5/18 at 7:23 am
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:20 am to NC_Tigah
Well yeah because it’s not based on law. Scalia said it best. No where in the Constitution is this allowed. The only way it could have been legal is through the democratic process according to him.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:24 am to bmy
quote:Read harder than a direct quote of the article?
Read harder
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:43 am to NC_Tigah
Norma ("Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade) Speaks About Being Pro-Life - YouTube
The biggest mistake of her life.
The biggest mistake of her life.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 7:49 am to bmy
quote:Read harder.
You guys act like she is dumb sometimes
I certainly feel she's made embarrassing political statements in the last 2-3yrs that she'd never have made were she in possession of her full past faculties. But dumb? Nope.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:15 am to bmy
I think you meant comprehend. Can't read harder.
It's ok. We understand liberaleese.
It's ok. We understand liberaleese.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:20 am to NC_Tigah
So she thinks it was a good decision, but for the wrong reasons...and it was too much too fast.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:20 am to bmy
quote:
Read harder. You guys act like she is dumb sometimes
I mean she is obviously Pro-Abortion but the point is that she thinks Roe v Wade is a flawed judgement. This is LITERALLY one of the things Barret is getting heat for from the left.
RBG mentions RvW decision is physician-centric (right to practice) and not woman-centric (right to have an abortion).
Correct me if I’m wrong but my understanding is that there are medical procedures that physicians are legally prohibited from doing (assisted suicide comes to mind). If the rule based on not infringing the the right to practice but yet there are things that a Dr is prohibited from doing then could abortion be added to the list of prohibited procedures?
This post was edited on 7/5/18 at 8:30 am
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:26 am to NC_Tigah
Yeah, not many people, even those that are pro-abortion think RvW was a good decision with a solid legal basis.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:35 am to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
So she thinks it was a good decision, but for the wrong reasons
Yes.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:38 am to NC_Tigah
Yeah she also said Gay Marriage should be decide by the states. Then she presided at a gay wedding before voting in favor of it.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:38 am to bmy
You do realize that it is possible to be pro-choice and simultaneously understand that Roe v. Wade was a terrible legal decision, right?
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:39 am to Eli Goldfinger
quote:No. She thinks it was a good result, but a bad legal decision.
So she thinks it was a good decision, but for the wrong reasons...and it was too much too fast.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:40 am to bmy
quote:
So she thinks it was a good decision, but for the wrong reasons
Yes.
That is not what I got out of it. She seems to like the fact that it allowed women the ability to have abortions but she also thought that it was focused on the wrong thing. Seems to me that she feels the decision is some what susceptible to not necessarily being overturned but addressed from a different direction that could have a positive or negative effect on whether a woman can have an abortion.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:42 am to BlackAdam
quote:
Yeah, not many people, even those that are pro-abortion think RvW was a good decision with a solid legal basis.
Nobody can make a constitutional argument for it. They didn't really try.
RvW was a decision pre-decided and they created an "umbra from the penumbra" validation based on 'right to privacy,' another presumed "right."
This cried out for a legislative solution where the political aspects could be sorted out and compromises defined and limitations imposed, rather than a judicial fiat which anyone with a brain can question. If an amendment is required then that is the MOST declarative statement you can make to ensure future compliance.
Leftists don't even try the right way to do anything - they want to claim ad hoc victories and expand on them, supported by mob rule.
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:42 am to CptRusty
quote:
You do realize that it is possible to be pro-choice and simultaneously understand that Roe v. Wade was a terrible legal decision, right?
Sure. USSC is not infallible.. Re: 2nd amendment incorporated against states (handguns in your home)
This post was edited on 7/5/18 at 8:45 am
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:44 am to bmy
Good now the loons can stop crying once its overturned
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:53 am to bmy
quote:Read harder.quote:Yes.
So she thinks it was a good decision, but for the wrong reasons
Posted on 7/5/18 at 8:53 am to SDVTiger
quote:
Good now the loons can stop crying once its overturned
Will republicans finally admit they are authoritarians? I doubt it but it's going to be fun to watch the mental gymnastics
Popular
Back to top


11







