Ginsburg cannot escape her abortion record

The following post was written by RMU student Selene Cerankosky, who has allowed me to re-post it here. I’ve made no changes to what she wrote.

Many of you know my policy when it comes to my students: You attack them, and I’m going to respond regardless of whether I agree with you. So, reply in the comment box below as you wish, but don’t dare make it personal.

I am weary of professing followers of Jesus who post or re-publish celebratory material about Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the wake of her passing. I am not advocating for us to jump for joy at the fact she is no longer alive, but to put it this way: there is one less advocate for the genocide of the unborn on our nation’s highest court.

This is a woman who spent over 27 years of her life handing down ruling after ruling that pushed forward an idea that, by default, women could never pursue a successful life without murdering their offspring — while pursuing one of the most professionally successful lives one could have with two children herself. Her ambitious irony cost this nation a now immeasurable number of innocent lives. Christians are not to mourn evil — we are to be reverent of God’s holy justice.

Some of former Justice Ginsburg’s pro-abortion decisions and their implications:

Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania (2020): Her dissenting opinion, if agreed upon by the majority, would have forced, under government hand, Christians to subsidize the abortion-causing birth control of their employees.

NIFLA v. Becerra (2018): Her dissenting opinion, if agreed upon by the majority, would have forced pro-life pregnancy resource centers, under government hand, to publicly advertise in promotion for abortion.

Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016): Her concurring opinion rejected regulations on abortion clinics that would ensure they are held to the same safety standards as hospitals performing much less dangerous “surgeries.” Prior to regulations such as these, abortion clinics in Pennsylvania, for example, only had to adhere to the same health standards as hair and nail salons.

*Gonzales v. Carhart (2007): Her concurring opinion, a tie-breaker, upheld the practice of partial-birth abortion.*…

As someone who is a sinner saved by grace herself, I would be disingenuous not to pray that she repented to and believed in Christ prior to her death. However, I withhold devastation about a pro-abortion public servant no longer being able to tout into law the continuation of the greatest human rights tragedy our blood-stained world has ever seen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.