Ruthless Feminism: The Ginsburg Dissent
Catholic World Report editor George Neumayr writes at Human Events:
The dissent of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the Supreme Court's Gonzales v. Carhart decision on Wednesday rests upon the sheer ruthlessness of modern feminism. Not a word of concern is spoken in her dissent of the barbaric dismembering of the unborn child that partial-birth abortion entails. The child's "health" is simply not to be mentioned.My Comments:
Cut through all the pretentious padding and legal mumbo-jumbo and Ginsburg's dissent amounts to this: abortion is the sacred foundation of feminism, and Americans must never touch it; if this means permitting the skulls of unborn children to be crushed, oh well.
"Women it is now acknowledged have the talent, capacity and right 'to participate equally in the economic and social life of the nation,'" she writes, invoking the earlier Casey decision. "Their ability to realize this full potential, the Court recognized, is ultimately connected to 'their ability to control their reproductive lives.'"
In other words, abortion is essential to obliterating differences between the sexes by emancipating women from nature so that they are the same as men ("equality," under liberalism, means making men and women the same not in dignity, but the same in all respects, no matter how irrational the results this understanding of equality produces). And access to abortion is essential to eliminating children as hindrances to careers -- or as Ginsburg says, "equal citzenship stature."
On nothing more than her personal say-so, she in effect says that the organizing principle of the Constitution should be the modern liberal account of life which places feminism at its center. That ideology, not the document the Founders wrote, should determine what laws the people can and can't pass. She speaks scathingly of "ancient" principles, as if simply using the word "ancient" suffices as an argument-ending proof. But truly “ancient” principles were -- to put it mildly -- much less protective of women than America’s Constitution.
What's good for feminism is constitutional; what's bad for feminism is unconstitutional. That's Ginsburg’s jurisprudential principle. She complains of the majority relying upon an "anti-abortion shibboleth," namely, that abortion harms the mental health of women. But she allows herself a tissue of pro-abortion shibboleths. In a footnote, she reassures the nation that abortion is no more harmful to a woman than "parenting" a child "that she did not intend to have."
***
Ginsburg’s ideology (for that is what it is, not jurisprudence) is so dogmatic that in Wednesday's dissent, she objects to the majority's use of the word "baby" for fetus and "abortion doctors" for ob-gyns who perform partial-birth abortions.
***
Reading Ginsburg is painful. But how much more painful will it be if our next president is someone who will appoint more just like her to the Supreme Court?
[More]
Sick bi***.
Previous Pro Ecclesia posts on this subject:
Reaction to Court’s Abortion Ruling Falls Along Predictable Party Lines
The Dissenters' Reasoning & Its Logical Conclusion
Labels: Constitutional Jurisprudence, Culture of Death, Democrats, Law, Pro-Life, Radical Feminists, Supreme Court
posted by Pro Ecclesia 6:59 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Yeah, that lady sure is mainstream!
I recently heard of a comment from a female t.v. personality that this decision could be the beginning of a slippery slope.
How about it being the first foothold in the effort to climb from the large hole we've slipped into.
My perception of sin is that it begins with fear and that fear motivates a self serving choice towards alleviating the fear.
From the original sin, the temptation, the fear of not knowing what it would be to be like God, to know all, motivated original man and woman to make the self serving choice to alleviate that fear.
fear of being disrespected begets the womens movement.
fear of being hindered by children begets contraception and then, futhermore, abortion.
The resulting effect of the self serving choices associated with feminism is a culture that is confused about the roles of men and women is society. This confusion has led to complications in men and women meeting their natural desires, as by design.
The most immediate reaction to the strong feminism insurgence of the early 70's was machoism. The fears of the male culture during that period prompted self serving choices in the form of ridiculous mustaches and chest hair in the effort to alleviate fears of not being manly.
The advent of machoism prompted a reaction from the women's movement that they needed to step up their game for fear that they might lose ground in their advancement. Suddenly, relations between men and women became a competition.
This competitiveness has bred numerous types of fears for both parties that have led to more self serving choices in the effort of alleviating the fears. And, these choices continually impact the culture.
For example, the mushrooming of cosmetic surgery. Why?.. Fear. Feelings of insecurity or inadequacy has motivated the self serving augmentations and injections in the effort to alleviate those feelings.
Having evolved to being equal to men, women are perceived as not being as feminine, and thus less desireable, to the opposite sex. The reaction is the effort to accentuate the female attributes most appealing to men. This effort, however, takes them further away from their natural beauty.
On the flip side, men feeling less masculine as the result of the evolution of feminism have resorted to taking pills to jack up their manhood and alleviate any fears of being emasculated.
And, so on and so forth down the slippery slope. One's fear motivating a selfish choice. That selfish choice establishing a fear for another person. That person makes a self serving choice to alleviate their fear thus establishing another fear, etc..
Abortion has claimed nearly 50 million souls in the United States. 99 percent of those abortions were the result of personal choice. Those self serving choices were motivated by fear(of responsibity, of accountability, of capability, etc..)
My apologies for the long rant.
JC
Darn, I didn't realize that my first son had done so much harm to me. It's a good thing I've got feminists to tell me I'm oppressed! I might just have gone on living my life as if I were really happy!
Post a Comment
<< Home