Hey lefty - here is your leader loon. < > htt
Post# of 65629
< >
Ginsburg chided Thomas for using the term “mother” to describe women who choose to have an abortion, saying, "A woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a 'mother.’” Sorry, RBG, but a woman who has carried a child in her womb is a mother whether she wanted to be or not. Mothers who have chosen to put their unborn child to death for their own convenience are still mothers. And monsters.
A woman who has had a miscarriage is still a mother. You are not not a mother because you say so. You cannot simply identify as a non-mother for your own personal benefit.
To be fair, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. A father is still a father even if he exercises his constitutionally protected right to bear arms……and then shoots his kid. Or should I say, “terminates a childhood?” Right?
“Do you have any children, sir?”
“No. I killed all three of them earlier this morning. So, you can see I’m not a dad.”
Nice reasoning for a SCOTUS justice.
If it is illegal to hire someone on the basis of race, sex, or disability, how can it possibly be okay to exterminate them based on the same criteria?
There are those among us who still believe people were- -- and are -- created in God’s image and have been endowed with inalienable rights to life and liberty. Treating the bodies of aborted children as if they were of no more worth than “infectious waste” is a dire and inexcusable capitulation to evil.