Twisted Logic
Most of us use some level of logical analysis and/or logical reasoning in our thinking and conversations. Seldom do we find one who speaks in a manner that causes us to stop and think, and ask ourselves, “What did he/she say?” In everyday conversation we are most always likely to encounter conversation we fully understand. We don’t always agree with the one with whom we are conversing or listening to, but we do fathom the text of the message. But, this is not the case of many public figures from the lowest county level politician to the U.S. Supreme Court justices.
Recently, I read an article from of the World Net Daily regarding Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgthat goes like this. “In a recent interview with Emily Brazelton of the New York Times Magazine, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she understood that the 1973 court decision in Roe v. Wade was intended to eliminate undesirables in the country or, in her words,‘populations we don’t want to have too many of.’”
Brazelton asked Justice Ginsburg what she would “want to accomplish in a future feminist legal agenda.’
Her immediate response was, ‘Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. The states that have changed their abortion laws before Roe [to makeabortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affectsonly poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t knowwhy this hasn’t been said more often.’
The follow-up question was, ‘Are you talking about the distances some women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable? And also, the lack of Medicaidfor abortions for poor women?’
Ginsburg stated, ‘Yes. 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.’”
In 1 Corinthians 14:33 Paul states, “For God is not the author of confusion…”, but Ithink we have found her.Justice Ginsburg’s understanding of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision is that it was based on Margaret Sanger’s, founder of Planned Parenthood, position that abortion was the way to get rid of the increase in the black population in the U.S. These are who Justice Ginsburg is defining as “Populations we don’t want to have too many of.”
Although this is a very convoluted interview, the crux of the text pertains to the fact that Justice Ginsburg is stating we do not provide access or transportation for the undesirables to obtain abortions. In other words, she issaying we are discriminatingagainst those we want to kill!This is typical of liberal logic as demonstrated in a case a few years back. An individual was sentenced to die in the electric chair for murder. The left wanted to delay the execution date so they could bring an additional charge of civil rights violation against the man. Then President George W. Bush stated, “What more could that inflict on the man,we are already going tokill him?”
Although this is funny, it is scary in that Justice Ginsburg is one of the nine U.S. Court Justices who interpretour laws. Who knows when her twisted logic could become law!
Carleton Dowdle, 9-6-09
1