During her recent visit to University of Chicago Law School, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she believed that Roe v. Wade was a “disappointing decision,” because it went “too far, too fast” in liberalizing abortion laws — not because it allows millions of innocent children to be legally murdered each year.
To that effect, Ginsburg reasoned that the Court should have practiced more judicial restraint to allow expansion of abortion access at the state level through legislative means. According to Ginsburg, had the Court ruled less broadly in favor of access to abortion (based on the “Constitutional right to privacy”), it would have allowed public opinion in favor of abortion to develop through the political process as a women’s rights issue at a time when the winds of change were already blowing in that direction. Instead, she argues, the Court’s sudden sweeping decision galvanized the Pro-Life movement around opposition to Roe v. Wade, which halted that change.
To some extent, I must agree with Justice Ginsburg…
The largest civil protest in the world, held annually, thanks to Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade was and still is a disappointing decision. Yet it has driven the impetus of the Pro-Life movement for the past 40 years.
But what’s Ginsburg really getting at?
In June the Supreme Court will rule on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. Will the highest court of the land go too far, too fast in rendering its decision in favor of homosexual marriage? Or is Ginsburg suggesting that her vote will side with the decision that leaves the elected officials at the state level to determine their laws?
I suppose we will find out in June. Right now, I am interested in your opinion. What’s best for America, right now?
Biltrix 
Excellent, Chip! Great insights as always.
🙂 Thanks!
Pingback: Liberal Justice Ginsburg Admits Roe v. Wade Was a Bad Decision - CATHOLIC FEAST - Sync your Soul
Good point! Will Justice Ginsberg heed her own advice? I hope so. I pray that the Supreme Court will not federalize/nationalize homosexual marriage and legalize it like previous justices did with abortion. But the fact that there are sonograms and technology has gotten better is at least in part what is responsible for the numbers of citizens who are pro-life and those who have converted from pro-choice to pro-life. God Bless.
The R v. Wade decision certainly is not the only thing that has caused the Pro-Life movement to grow, as you point out, Teresa. And even if the decision has been a strong galvanizing factor, we still cannot call it a good thing. It’s a horrible thing.
Though we cannot agree entirely with Ginsburg’s reasons for calling it a bad decision, she’s right that the law should have been left in the states’ hands.
Given last year’s stunning decision on ObamaCare, I don’t think we can predict which way the court will decide on these two marriage issues — the same goes for how they will decide on the HHS Mandate. Well, in a little more than a month we’ll find out.
There’s lot’s of praying to do in the meantime.
Ginsburg actually has said this sort of thing before. So I am not going to get my hopes up.
Ginsburg did not admit what is really wrong with Roe v. Wade. Instead of basing their decision on what the Constitution actually says, the majority of the court just decided the Constitution says what they want it to say. That’s lying; it’s dishonorable, but Ginsburg just thinks the Court went “too far, too fast” in liberalizing abortion laws, not in the wrong direction towards tyranny.
If the Constitution is to protect our rights (including the rights of the unborn), then we cannot allow judges to treat it as a “living” document and make it say things it does not say. Because Ginsburg refuses to keep her oath to support and defend the Constitution, we never should allowed her to sit on the court.
As always, Citizen Tom, you hit the nail on the head. It just goes to show, we really don’t know how this Court is going to vote until they release their decision, and even then it takes forever to interpret their interpretation, because it’s so — might I say — sophistic, for lack of a lesser word.
Thanks for weighing in with your always valued opinion. Thanks for linking back. And God bless!
Pingback: WHAT ARE THE SIGNS THAT OUR REPUBLIC IS ABOUT TO FALL? — PART 4 | Citizen Tom
ES VERDADERAMENTE DECEPCIONANTE VER QUE LOS QUE ESTAN LEGISLANDO Y PRINCIPALMENTE LOS QUE SE ENCARGAN DE ADMINISTRAR A TODA LA SOCIEDAD “JUSTICIA”NO ESTEN VERDADERAMENTE COMPROMETIDOS CON LA VIDA Y DESPUES DE VERDADEROS
GENONOCIDIOS RECONOCER LO QUE YA SABIAN ELLOS Y TODOS NOSOTROS QUE FUE LA PEOR DESICION LA DE MATAR A LOS QUE NECESITAN SER MAS DEFENDIDOS Y SIN EMBARGO HAN SIDO LOS QUE POR LEY SE PUEDEN MATAR ES IRONICO VIVIR EN EL PAIS DE LAS LEYES PARA VIVIR EN ORDEN Y EL RESPETO ENTRE LAS PERSONAS SEAN ESTAS MISMAS LAS QUE AMPAREN TANTISIMOS DELITOS MATANZAS Y LO PEOR ESQUE COMO PAIS SIGAMOS VOTANDO POR ESTAS PERSONAS QUE POR MOTIVOS DE INFLUENCIAS POLITICAS Y POR SUPUESTO EL DINERO SIGAN ELLOS MISMOS Y NOSOTROS COMO SOCIEDAD QUE LOS PONEMOS EN EL PODER LOS VERDADEROS RESPONSABLES PERSONAS QUE A ESTAN LIBRES Y CON VIDA VIDA QUE SI FUE RESPETADA Y PROTEGIDA HASTA ANTES DE ESTAS LEYES POR SUPUESTO PORQUE LOS QUE HAN NACIDO DESPUES VALLA QUE SI SON VERDADERAMENTE PERSONAS DESEADAS……DE CONTINUAR CON ESTA CULTURA DE LA MUERTE Y EGOISMO NO TARDARAN EN IMPONERNOS LA MINIMA CANTIDAD DE HIJOS PARA TENER TENGAMOS CUIDADO Y PRINCIPALMENTE RESPETEMOS LAS LEYESDE LA NATURALEZA ESAS SI NO FALLAN PUES DIOS ES EL QUE LAS HA PROMULGADO!!!VIVA LA VIDA!!!!!!PUES PARA ESO VINO NUESTRO SENOR JESUCRISTO A DARNOS VIDA Y VIDA EN ABUNDANCIA!!!!!!!!!VIVA CRISTO REY!!!!!!!!!