Recently, Ruth Bader Ginsburg has achieved a near cult-like following among those who consider themselves “progressives.” Young liberals idolize her. CNN has made a documentary praising her. Law students tattoo her image on their arms.
Ginsburg, 83, the former head of the ACLU, was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Bill Clinton in 1993, where she presented herself as a “moderate and an advocate of judicial moderation.” But that was just to make her acceptable to the mainstream to ensure her confirmation.
Once she was confirmed, her true colors were exposed and she has since become the extreme ideological leader of the liberal activist faction of the Supreme Court.
It is no secret that she abhors President Donald Trump. She’s called him “a faker” and skipped his 2018 State of the Union Address in a show of disrespect for him. She has vowed to stay on the Court as long as possible to prevent Trump from appointing her successor.
In fact, she refused to retire and allow even Pres. Barack Obama to select her replacement, complaining that the political climate would not allow him to appoint anyone who was her ideological equal. Her plan was to allow Hillary Clinton to replace her, a plan that was thankfully thwarted by Trump’s election.
The Ginsburg agenda
But specifically, what tenets comprise the Ginsburg ideology, and how has that affected America over the years since she first ascended the most powerful Court in the land?
A summary of the Ginsburg philosophy has recently resurfaced. The document contains three statements that were entered into the record in 1993 in opposition to Ginsburg’s nomination to the Supreme Court. The first — and most revealing — was prepared by Susan Hirshman, who was then the Executive Director of the conservative Eagle Forum. The second was the statement of Kay Coles James, a veteran of the Reagan and H.W. Bush administrations who is currently serving as President of the Heritage Foundation. Finally, the document contains a statement by Howard Phillips, former head of the conservative Constitution Party.
The paper exposing Ginsburg’s radical positions reads like an Orwellian prophesy. One could hardly conceive of a better blueprint with which to destroy the American family and way of life.
In the 1970’s Ginsburg had developed her idea of what feminism should mean. She had complained that in the 19th century, the status of women was akin to that of Blacks under the pre-Civil War slave code. Instead of putting women on a pedestal, it put them in a cage.
Ginsburg advocated for affirmative action and supported hiring quotas for women. However, she hated the traditional sex roles and worked to create a “genderless society” – that is except where her female hiring quotas were concerned.
Her radical views were articulated in print in the 1977 book Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, which she co-authored by ultra-feminist Brenda Feigen-Fasteau, who worked with Ms. Magazine founder Gloria Steinem and partnered with Ginsburg at the ACLU.
Here are some of the radical changes for which Ginsburg advocated in that 1977 manifesto:
• Women must be drafted when men are drafted and assigned to military combat duty.
• Prisons and reformatories must be sex-integrated.
• Single sex colleges and other institutions, such as the Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts must change their names and be sex-integrated.
• The traditional family concept should be eliminated.
• Federal government must provide comprehensive child care – presumably at tax-payer expense.
• No-fault divorce implemented nationally.
It is easy to see how these concepts are aimed at destroying the family unit by stripping men and women of their God-given roles and making children essentially thought-wards of the state. Despite Ginsburg’s supposed advocacy of “women’s rights,” her ideas actually erode the rights of women to be women, and places them in harm’s way.
But Ginsburg’s brand of feminism has also sexually demeaned and subjugated women by stripping away all sexual mores that protect women (and children) from exploitation and abuse.
PRO-LIFE COLLEGE STUDENT? LifeNews is looking for interns interested in writing, social media, or video creation. Contact us today.
Here are her stated goals:
• Lower the age of sexual consent to 12 years old.
• Legalize prostitution.
• Allow for the sex trafficking of women and girls and repeal the Mann Act that makes sex trafficking illegal. (Ginsburg thought sex trafficking laws made women look weak and unable to defend against “bad men.”)
It has been since the Clinton Administration that we have heard news of millionaire Jeffery Epstein and his “Lolita Express” ferrying Clinton, along with a vast array of pedophiles and perverts, to “Pedo Island” in the Caribbean for God-only-knows what kind of perversion with children and young adults who serve as sex slaves to the elite.
It is hard to see how any of this is “liberating” for women.
Today, sex trafficking has reached epidemic levels around the world. Young men and women have been recently seen openly trafficked on social media platforms such as Instagram. Ginsburg’s dream was being realized.
Thankfully, President Donald Trump has instituted a set of Executive Orders that have allowed for trafficking rings to be broken up world-wide and have put traffickers behind bars. Ginsburg must be peeved that her extreme and warped concept of feminism that she worked so long to implement is now being dismantled.
As an essential part of establishing Ginsburg’s genderless society and “equality principle” where all types of sexual abuse and exploitation are permissible, abortion has become a necessity for Ginsburg’s acolytes.
Abortion must be allowed in Ginsburg’s America in order to enable free sex, child sex abuse, and human trafficking.
It must also be available to limit the population, especially those “undesirables” who the globalist elitists — of whom Ginsburg is a part – want to exterminate. The smaller the population, the easier it is to control them. Abortion was to be used as an indispensable tool for reducing the population to manageable levels.
In Ginsburg’s opinion, developed at least as far back as the 1970’s, abortion should be a constitution right fully funded by the U.S. taxpayers. She especially bemoaned the Hyde Amendment that prevented Federal funds from paying for abortions since she believed it would diminish access to abortion for the poor.
But surprisingly, Ginsburg had a bone to pick with the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that decriminalized abortion in America. She believed the Roe decision was too much too fast. If only the court had made a series of more incremental rulings that slowly decriminalized abortion, Ginsburg believes that it would have been more accepted by the American people. She believes this tactic would have halted the rise of the pro-life movement, which has proved to be a monkey wrench in the abortion industry’s works ever since.
Perhaps Ginsburg persuaded the High Court to see things her way as far as rulings on gay rights. The more incremental approach, coupled with the demonization of those who oppose homosexuality on religious grounds, has essentially – but not fully – eliminated opposition to the acceptance of gays and every other fantasy gender imaginable.
But as far as Ginsburg’s anti-Christian philosophy goes, she continues to underestimate the strong faith of Christian citizens who oppose abortion and gay rights on moral grounds no matter what attempt is used to normalize child-killing and perversion.
Without abortion, it would be difficult to erode the family unit, promote free sex and pedophilia, or establish Ginsburg’s so-called “genderless society.”
Elections have consequences
Certainly, Ginsburg’s advanced age means her influence over American law and culture is coming to an end. So why is all this important now?
The Trump Administration is working hard to roll back some of the destructive aspects of Ginsburg’s radical agenda. Trump is pro-life, and that is influencing how government deals with matters related to children, families, and abortion. He has taken numerous steps through a series of executive orders to deny Federal funds to Planned Parenthood both at home and abroad – another set-back to the Ginsburg’s anti-life efforts.
Trump’s pro-life beliefs are affecting other policies, such as health care and immigration. The Department of Health and Human Services now views babies in the woman as human beings worthy of protection from the moment of conception. And it is affecting immigration, where the Trump administration is fighting to keep teens from illegally entering our country for abortions at taxpayer expense.
As mentioned, Trump is taking down the human traffickers, and rolling back other facets of Ginsburg’s globalist “Deep State” anti-family, anti-life elitist plan.
However, if Republicans lose the House or Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, the Democrats will have the unlimited ability to thwart the Trump agenda. If Trump loses re-election in 2020, another president will likely have the opportunity to replace the “Notorious R.B.G.” with someone of her ilk, who will continue the dismantling of the moral fabric of America.
Elections have consequences. Trump’s surprise election has disturbed the Deep State plans for America of which Ginsburg’s ideology is an integral part. They thought Hillary would never lose. Now they are angry and energized to regain control. But if the Democrats retake the White House and, God forbid, Congress, then the Trump protections and pro-life advancements will be undone post haste. In that case, expect Democrats to work quickly to encode as many of Ginsburg’s action items as possible to ensure no one like Trump can ever interfere with their globalist anti-life agenda ever again.
Our Constitutional Republic is literally at stake along with the lives of millions of innocent children, born and unborn. We must engage the political process to prevent the advancement of Ginsburg’s dream of a genderless, globalist, elitist society where pedophiles rule and abortion is sacramental to their paganistic hell on earth.
LifeNews.com Note: Cheryl Sullenger is a leader of Operation Rescue.