High Court Feminazis & Margaret Sanger

[Flanders]

Philosophical aspects of abortion cases that make it to the SCOTUS come down to the majority ruling to uphold Margaret Sanger or ruling to overturn her. The Nifty Nine supposedly rule on the constitutionality of the case; so I doubt if they are going to discuss that evil woman’s “contribution” to society.

Yesterday’s oral arguments brought the baby-butchers out in force. Happily, the case brought the entire Affordable Care Act back to the top of the news.

To me it seems simple. Forcing individuals or businesses to pay for abortions in any form is a violation of the First Amendment:

“This was actually the most exciting part of the oral argument this morning, when Justice Kennedy asked the government’s lawyer, ‘So under your argument, corporations could be forced to pay for abortions, that there would be no religious claim against that on the part of the corporation. Is that right?’ And the government’s attorney said yes,” Ruse said.

XXXXX​

Before the arguments reached that stage, a robust debate took place over whether businesses actually have religious freedom or whether those are only enjoyed by individuals. Ruse said she believes most of the justices are sympathetic to the companies and their owners on that question.

Frankly, I think Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius is closely related to the Elane Photography Case which is being fought being fought on First Amendment grounds.

Later this week, Supreme Court will review a highly publicized case about a New Mexico photographer who refused to shoot a same-sex commitment ceremony. If accepted, the case would be heard in the Court’s next term, starting in October.

Supreme Court Justices to ponder New Mexico photographer case
Posted 9 days ago.
By NCC Staff

Supreme Court Justices to ponder New Mexico photographer case​

In both cases the XIII Amendment is the way to go because it protects every individual when religion is not involved.

XVIII Amendment​

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Notice that Congress passes a vile law like the ACA so the courts can circumvent the XIII Amendment’s meaning of slavery and involuntary servitude.

I got a kick out of this next one. It is a great observation coming from John Roberts who could have killed the ACA.

“Chief Justice Roberts raised the point that corporations can actually file racial discrimination claims. So he said if a corporation can have a race, why can’t it have a religious claim? The government’s attorney didn’t really have an answer for that,” Ruse said.

Pin drop! Obama lawyer stuns Supreme justice
Dramatic moment at nation's highest court
Published: 16 hours ago
GREG COROMBOS

Pin drop! Obama lawyer stuns Supreme justice​

There is little doubt as to which way the sisters will go.

Justice Ginsberg said it “seems strange” that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was passed by both parties, could have generated such support if lawmakers thought corporations would use it to enforce their own religious beliefs.

XXXXX​

Other points made by the female justices:

● Justice Sotomayor: how can courts know whether a corporation holds a religious belief? And what if it’s just the beliefs of the leadership, not the entire company? What happens to a non-religious minority in a corporation?
● Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan asked: Because nobody is forcing Hobby Lobby or Conestoga to provide health insurance, they can simply pay the tax penalty instead.
● Justice Kagan: women are “quite tangibly harmed” when employers don’t provide contraceptive coverage.

Supreme Court Women Raise Questions on Contraception Coverage
Charlotte Alter
March 25, 2014

Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg Dominate Hobby Lobby Oral Arguments - TIME​

Ginsburg has no use for the Constitution.

Sotomayor has shown herself to be a racist in affirmative action cases. She will always find a way to say corporations can be racist, while they cannot be religious.

Kagan was put on the court specifically to uphold the ACA. She did not recuse herself the first time around. She should recuse herself from this case because of the abortion and religious freedom issues. No one can convince me that she did not offer Barack Taqiyya opinions on the abortion and religion aspects of the ACA when she was his solicitor general.

Naturally, High Court feminazis view themselves as the lady standing in front of the joint wearing a blindfold.

Nancy Pelosi is not nearly as high-minded as her sisters on the High Court. The dirty dame is going to accept the Margaret Sanger Award. A great article by Jeannie DeAngelis reminds us of exactly what Sanger was.

. . . Margaret Sanger, a self-proclaimed feminist who was ahead of her time as she attempted to contribute to humanity through fostering racial hatred and genocide.

A committed socialist, Margaret Sanger once said, “My own personal feelings drew me toward the individualist, anarchist philosophy…but it seemed necessary to approach the idea by way of Socialism.”

XXXXX​

For Margaret Sanger, eugenics was an avenue to improve the human race by discouraging people with genetic defects or undesirable traits, blacks, immigrants and poor people, whom she called “human weeds, reckless breeders, spawning...human beings who never should have been born.”

XXXXX​

In February 1919 in The Birth Control Review, the prolific Sanger published an article entitled “Birth Control and Racial Betterment.” That means, besides Nancy Pelosi, there’s another politician who supports improving the human race through free birth control and an abortion clinic on every corner: our very own mixed-race President Barack Obama, who would probably also be amongst those of the black race Margaret Sanger deemed unfit to be born.

NOTE: Has anyone noticed that 55,000,000 “legal” abortions in America since 1973 gave us this:

For the first time in American history, non-whites will make up half or more of the next generation, likely pushing Washington toward a bigger government . . .

Pew: White majority over, next generation more than 50% non-white
By Paul Bedard | MARCH 25, 2014 AT 11:48 AM

Pew: White majority over, next generation more than 50% non-white | WashingtonExaminer.com​

It seems to me that Sanger was hellbent on wiping out the white race; so this next excerpts begs the question: Which superior race?

In 1934, Sanger wrote an article entitled “America Needs a Code for Babies: Plea for Equal Distribution of Births.” Mrs. Sanger’s ‘baby code’ said that people with “bad genes,” or dysgenic groups, should be given a choice between sterilization and segregation. Those who willingly chose sterilization would be rewarded for contributing to a superior race.

Feminazis dare not claim that one of the existing races is superior. No matter which race they selected it would be racism. Obviously, they have a new race in mind, or possibly a designation for what is now termed “mixed race.” How about the name “combinations.” Then the world would have blacks, whites, yellows, browns, reds and combinations. I should warm the feminazis before they go down that road. Designating a new race would only add another race for racists to hate. I can even see “combo” joining honky, ******, ****, and chink.

Sanger’s evil was worldwide

China does not handout permits, but its one child policy surely originated with Sanger:

. . . Sanger suggested issuing parenthood permits that would be valid for no more than one birth.

This final excerpt sums up Sanger and her feminazis:

. . . Sanger’s legacy is one of murder, racism, revulsion for the handicapped, intrinsic disgust for the male gender, and a form of twisted radicalism that viewed God-ordained marriage and the miracle of life with contempt.

March 26, 2014
This Year's Margaret Sanger Award Goes to Nancy Pelosi
Jeannie DeAngelis

Blog: This Year's Margaret Sanger Award Goes to Nancy Pelosi​

Thank God for the Internet because through all of the decades before the Net came along those who owned the printing presses and TV transmitters praised Sanger because they admired her views. Even those scribes who disagreed with the most effective baby-butcher of all time treated her with respect. Not so on the Internet. Sanger and all of her followers in high places can be identified as scum.

Finally, taxpayers are forced to fund Planned Parenthood. I’d like to know how many tax dollars are spent on the Margaret Sanger Award every year.

 

[Moonglow]

It seems to me that Sanger was hellbent on wiping out the white race; so this next excerpts begs the question: Which superior race?

except you forgot that the majority of abortions are done by Afro-Americans.

 

[bedowin62]

It seems to me that Sanger was hellbent on wiping out the white race; so this next excerpts begs the question: Which superior race?

except you forgot that the majority of abortions are done by Afro-Americans.

RUH-ROH; this leftard is about to get attacked by his fellow leftists; if not called a racist by them

 

[Delta4Embassy]

" • Blacks comprise only 13% of the population of America but account for 37% of all abortions.

• Black women are five times more likely to abort than white women.

• 69% of pregnancies among Blacks are unintended, while that number is 54% among Hispanics and 40% of pregnancies among Whites.

• Planned Parenthood, the largest seller of abortions in the United States, has located 80% of its abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods, disproportionally targeting minorities for abortion."

[Blacks = 37%; Whites 35%; Hispanic 22%; Other 8%]

Protestants = 42%; Catholics = 27%; No Religion = 24%; Other = 7%

Abortions In America

 

[mamooth]

Oh joy. Yet another thread full of fabricated Sanger quotes. Some zombie lies just won't die. It doesn't matter how often I debunk 'em, they always rise again.

Back in the real world, MLK, DuBois, Bethune and all the black leaders of the era were allies of Sanger. A normal person would see that and conclude all the claims about the racist Sanger were revisionist bullshit. But perhaps Flanders has another theory. Were, perhaps, all the black leaders also trying to genocide the black race? Perhaps they were stupid dupes of the arch-villain supergenius Sanger? I eagerly await the explanation.

It's also a pro-life urban legend that PP locates in black neighborhoods. Pro-lifers claim it over and over it, but there is never any data to back up the claim. That would be because it's a fabrication. But then, little issues like claims being false won't stop a pro-lifer from making them, given that God blesses their cause and therefore the ends justify the means.

 

[DGS49]

A corporation is a ficticious person created by the state at the request of (usually) some natural person or persons ("Organizers"), in order to carry out a legal purpose. It is usually intended to create a liability wall (sometimes called the "corporate veil") between the customers and the Organizers, so that they cannot be impoverished by the torts or misdeeds of the corporation. Some businesses simply could not exist without a way for the owners to protect themselves from these liabilities.

A corporation has no feelings or beliefs. It doesn't love, it doesn't get angry, it doesn't care when a baby dies - or survives. The Directors and Officers of a corporation have a fiduciary obligation to conduct the affairs of the corporation in a manner that is consistent with the corporate charter.

Corporate directors and officers are given tremendous leeway in making decisions that may not seem logical from the outside, but which they feel are appropriate for the business. Employees can get bonuses, "silly" expenditures can be made, the possibilities are almost endless.

But I don't think a corporation can make a "moral" argument to disobey an applicable law. A corporation has no morals. If the owners want to operate as individuals (Bob's Garage Doors), then they can operate according to their individual morals, as long as doing so doesn't violate the law. But a corporation does not assume the moral beliefs and convictions of the Organizers or its officers and directors, so its decision MUST BE to obey applicable law.

Conversely, a corporation can do something that happens to be immoral (dumping hazardous waste into a kiddie pool), and it might violate the law and the corporation can be fined or punished otherwise. The corporation is not "bad," it just has a bad employee.

Although I am a card-carrying member of the Great Right Wing Conspiracy, and I hate O'Care, I don't buy the arguments that corporations can refuse to comply with any applicable law on "moral" grounds.

 

[Flanders]

It seems to me that Sanger was hellbent on wiping out the white race; so this next excerpts begs the question: Which superior race?

except you forgot that the majority of abortions are done by Afro-Americans.

" • Blacks comprise only 13% of the population of America but account for 37% of all abortions.

• Black women are five times more likely to abort than white women.

• 69% of pregnancies among Blacks are unintended, while that number is 54% among Hispanics and 40% of pregnancies among Whites.

• Planned Parenthood, the largest seller of abortions in the United States, has located 80% of its abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods, disproportionally targeting minorities for abortion."

[Blacks = 37%; Whites 35%; Hispanic 22%; Other 8%]

Protestants = 42%; Catholics = 27%; No Religion = 24%; Other = 7%

Abortions In America

To Moonglow & Delta4Embassy: You’re both missing the point. Why is the following happening irrespective of the abortion numbers?

NOTE: Has anyone noticed that 55,000,000 “legal” abortions in America since 1973 gave us this:

For the first time in American history, non-whites will make up half or more of the next generation, likely pushing Washington toward a bigger government . . .

Pew: White majority over, next generation more than 50% non-white
By Paul Bedard | MARCH 25, 2014 AT 11:48 AM

Pew: White majority over, next generation more than 50% non-white | WashingtonExaminer.com​

One answer to the question is: Even with a majority of abortions being done to blacks there has to be a whole lot of non-white immigration going on. Think about that in relation to Democrats fighting like hell to keep the borders open. In short: There is more than one way to commit genocide against the white race.

Genocide is seen as the strong murdering the weak. In today’s topsy-turvy world the parasites have acquired so much political power they are succeeding in committing genocide against the producers who are stronger in every way except number.

And doesn’t it strike you as odd that more than 90 percent of black voters vote for Democrats who are the proponents, defenders, and funders of abortion? The voting patterns of black Americans implies they are voting for genocide aimed at themselves. That makes no sense.

A corporation is a ficticious person created by the state at the request of (usually) some natural person or persons ("Organizers"), in order to carry out a legal purpose. It is usually intended to create a liability wall (sometimes called the "corporate veil") between the customers and the Organizers, so that they cannot be impoverished by the torts or misdeeds of the corporation. Some businesses simply could not exist without a way for the owners to protect themselves from these liabilities.

To DGS49: All well and good except there is no protection from unjust laws like the ACA. Less so when activist judges are determined to advance a political agenda:

Clement said Hobby Lobby would pay more than $500 million per year in penalties, but Kagan disagreed.

“No, I don’t think that that’s the same thing, Mr. Clement,” Kagan said. “There’s one penalty that is if the employer continues to provide health insurance without this part of the coverage, but Hobby Lobby would choose not to provide health insurance at all. “

And in that case Hobby Lobby would pay $2,000 per employee, which is less that Hobby Lobby probably pays to provide insurance to its employees,” Kagan said. “So there is a choice here. It’s not even a penalty by – in the language of the statute. It’s a payment or a tax. There’s a choice.”

Sotomayor, Kagan: Hobby Lobby Should Drop Insurance, Pay Penalty and Let Employees Use Exchange
March 25, 2014 - 3:01 PM
By Penny Starr

Sotomayor, Kagan: Hobby Lobby Should Drop Insurance, Pay Penalty and Let Employees Use Exchange | CNS News​

A corporation has no feelings or beliefs. It doesn't love, it doesn't get angry, it doesn't care when a baby dies - or survives. The Directors and Officers of a corporation have a fiduciary obligation to conduct the affairs of the corporation in a manner that is consistent with the corporate charter.

To DGS49: A corporation’s owners or managers might not have touchy-feely feelings or beliefs. And it’s the baby-butchers who are without feelings. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization which is the parasite version of a corporation. PP takes in millions of tax dollars for killing babies. To be fair, PP cares enough about babies to work with Kermit Gosnell and others of his ilk.

Corporate directors and officers are given tremendous leeway in making decisions that may not seem logical from the outside, but which they feel are appropriate for the business. Employees can get bonuses, "silly" expenditures can be made, the possibilities are almost endless.

To DGS49: That’s as it should be. Those who make the money can spend it any way they choose. Unfortunately, federal bureaucracies and tax dollar businesses do the same thing without contributing anything of value to society.

But I don't think a corporation can make a "moral" argument to disobey an applicable law. A corporation has no morals. If the owners want to operate as individuals (Bob's Garage Doors), then they can operate according to their individual morals, as long as doing so doesn't violate the law. But a corporation does not assume the moral beliefs and convictions of the Organizers or its officers and directors, so its decision MUST BE to obey applicable law.

To DGS49: Socialists force their decisions on corporations through applicable laws.

Conversely, a corporation can do something that happens to be immoral (dumping hazardous waste into a kiddie pool), and it might violate the law and the corporation can be fined or punished otherwise. The corporation is not "bad," it just has a bad employee.

To DGS49: You cited a perfect example of the government blurring the line separating criminal law from civil law. Neither corporations nor individuals stand a chance in either application.

Although I am a card-carrying member of the Great Right Wing Conspiracy, and I hate O'Care,

To DGS49: Your response in this thread does not support you claim. Your response in #9 permalink in a previous thread indicated otherwise:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/immig...570-socialism-s-flawed-pricing-mechanism.html

I don't buy the arguments that corporations can refuse to comply with any applicable law on "moral" grounds.

To DGS49: Moral is too vague. It’s always a question of why your morality and not mine. The First Amendment is precise. It gives them the Right to refuse on religious grounds. The XIII Amendment is equally precise. It gives everyone the Right to refuse involuntary servitude.

 

[Flanders]

I’ll be damned surprise if any one of these three charmers rules for the First Amendment:

Everything I’ve read about the oral arguments tells me that they behaved the way corrupt judges behave in fictional movies and TV shows:

Paul D. Clement, who appeared on behalf of the two companies challenging the Obamacare contraception mandate, was repeatedly interrupted and badgered by justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg. The transcript from yesterday’s hearing shows that Clement was permitted to talk less than 30 seconds before he was interrupted by Justice Sotomayor with a belligerent question that had nothing to do with any of the 49 words he had thus far uttered:

XXXXX​

Sotomayor knows perfectly well that the two companies whose case Clement was attempting to explain to the Court has nothing to do with blood transfusion, vaccines, or pork. So, Clement soldiered on for about a minute, trying to explain that the government would have a more “compelling interest” with regard to vaccinations than it does in the case of abortifacients like the morning after pill. At this point, he was again interrupted, this time by Justice Kagan:

XXXXX​

Clement tried again to explain the difference between this implausible hypothetical and the actual case under discussion. However, after another 30 seconds or so, he was interrupted by Justice Ginsburg with a non sequitur concerning the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). At this point, Justice Kennedy attempted to get the hearing back on track with the following statement to Clement: “You were beginning by giving us a framework for your argument…” Clement tried to take advantage of this opportunity, but he didn’t get very far before he was again interrupted by Kagan.

Hobby Lobby Has Its Day In Court
Despite the antics of liberal justices.
By David Catron – 3.26.14

Hobby Lobby Has Its Day In Court | The American Spectator​

 

[Flanders]

Bryan Preston closes his piece with this question:

And why is no one in the media asking Pelosi if she agrees with everything that Sanger said and did?

Most Americans know what Pelosi is. Most Americans know what every top Democrat woman is, while few would think to ask Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan the same question.

Was Sanger an advocate of genocide against black people? Sure sounds like it. From Woman, Morality and Birth Control, 1922:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.​

Congratulations, Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. You have jobs for life.

Margaret Sanger Was a Racist Monster. So Why Did Nancy Pelosi Accept an Award Named After Sanger?
by Bryan Preston
March 28, 2014 - 12:58 pm

The PJ Tatler » Margaret Sanger Was a Racist Monster. So Why Did Nancy Pelosi Accept an Award Named After Sanger?​

Why do so many black leaders advocate legal abortion? I’ve always thought they don’t care how many black babies are aborted so long as white babies are killed, too. Abortion-genocide against the white race seems to be working because the white population is decreasing while non-whites grow in numbers irrespective of the tens of millions of black babies who were sacrificed through abortion.

 

[Flanders]

In both cases the XIII Amendment is the way to go because it protects every individual when religion is not involved.

I was right. They could not have done worse than this:

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from a studio that refused to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony, letting stand a New Mexico high court ruling that helped spur a national debate over gay rights and religious freedom.

The justices left in place a unanimous state Supreme Court ruling last year that said Elane Photography violated New Mexico's Human Rights Act by refusing to photograph the same-sex ceremony "in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races."

Elane Photography co-owner Elaine Huguenin said taking the photos would violate her religious beliefs. She said she also has a right of artistic expression under the First Amendment that allows her to choose what pictures to take, or refrain from taking.

Supreme Court rejects appeal from New Mexico photographer who wouldn't shoot same-sex ceremony
By JERI CLAUSING, Associated Press

Supreme Court rejects appeal over gay bias case - US News​

 

[bianco]

The US Supreme Court stands condemned.
It must be held to account for this ruling.

In fact, best to just disband it altogether.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Anyone here actually read Sanger's books?

And, any of you rw's know that she's dead?

She was a true hero to thousands of poor and working class men and women who were desperate for any form of birth control they could get their hands on. You need to remember that these people were crammed into cold water walk up tenements. The men were working at shit jobs (no unions, back then), long hours, extremely low pay and every year, another mouth to feed. Women were using Lysol for a douche in hopes of not getting pregnant and getting beaten by angry, frustrated husbands who believed that they should get their legal rights from their chattel wife AND that they should be able to work a job that paid a living wage.

Sanger is long dead an abortion AND birth control are both legal. If you don't believe in either or both, then don't have sex, use a condom or get a vasectomy but stfu about controlling other people's lives because, unless you're adopting and supporting every single unwanted FETUS, they're none of your business.

And, even if you are adopting and supporting unwanted FETUSES, you have no right to control women's reproduction.