She Really Said THAT??

 

She Really Said That??

On Aug. 4, 1993, the New York Times reported that “Ruth Bader Ginsburg easily won confirmation” as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  With 52 Democrat votes in the Senate, this was no big surprise. 

The unthinkable was that 44 Republican Senators joined them; only three Senators stood for America on that fateful day, not unlike the three young Hebrews who refused to bow to the golden idol of ancient times, and voted no: Don Nickles (R-OK), Jesse Helms (R-NC), and Bob Smith (R-NH).  May God bless them forever. 

How could stalwart conservatives like Grassley, McConnell, and Hatch not have known about this woman’s ultra-lib, satanic agenda? They did know. They knowingly and consensually granted judicial authority to a woman who was a traitor to her country, a blasphemer of God, and a destroyer of the family. May God hold them all accountable in His own time.      

How do we know they knew that she was not “moderate” as some said, but indeed a notorious lawbreaker?

Let us look at her own words regarding women in the military, moral standards, family, and language as she wrote in 1977, for the U.S. Commission on Human Rights, “Sex Bias in the U.S. Code."

Remember: the Republican Senators called her “moderate.”

WOMEN IN THE MILITARY

Women must be drafted when men are drafted.  "Equal rights and responsibilities for men and women  implies that women must be subject to draft registration ..."  (p. 202)

Women must be assigned to combat duty. "Implementation of the equal rights principle requires a unitary system of appointment, assignment, promotion, discharge, and retirement, a system that cannot be founded on a combat exclusion for women."  (p. 26)

Affirmative action [bias based on gender, race] must be applied for women in the armed services. "The need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services."  (p. 218)

MORAL STANDARDS

The age of consent for sexual acts must be lowered to 12 years old. "Eliminate the phrase  'carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife, who has not attained the age of 16 years' and substitute a federal, sex-neutral definition of the offense. . .A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, . . . [and] the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old."  (p. 102) 

2.   Bigamists must have special privileges that other felons don't have. "This section restricts certain rights, including the right to vote or hold office, of bigamists, persons *cohabiting with more than one woman,' and women cohabiting with a bigamist. Apart from the male/female differentials, the provision is of questionable constitutionality since it appears to encroach impermissibly upon private relationships."  (pp. 195-196)

3.   Prostitution must be legalized: it is not sufficient to change the law to sex-neutral language. "Prostitution proscriptions are subject to several constitutional and policy objections.  Prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions." (p. 97) "Retaining prostitution business as a crime in a criminal code is open to debate.  Reliable studies indicate that prostitution is not a major factor in the spread of venereal disease, and that prostitution plays a small and declining role in organized crime operations." (p. 99) "Current provisions dealing with statutory rape, rape, and prostitution are discriminatory on their face. . . .  There is a growing national movement recommending unqualified decriminalization  [of prostitution] as sound policy, implementing equal rights and individual privacy principles."  (pp. 215-216)

5224.   The Mann Act must be repealed; women should not be protected from "bad" men. "The Mann Act . . . prohibits the transportation of women and girls for prostitution, debauchery, or any other immoral purpose.  The act poses the invasion of privacy issue in an acute form.  The Mann Act also is offensive because of the image of women it perpetuates. ...   It was meant to protect from the villainous interstate and international traffic in women and girls,' *those women and girls who, if given a fair chance, would, in all human probability, have been good wives and mothers and useful citizens. . . .  The act was meant to protect weak-women from bad men." (pp. 98-99)

5.  Prisons and reformatories must be sex-integrated. "If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected. ...   18 U.S.C.§4082, ordering the Attorney General to commit convicted offenders to *available suitable, and appropriate' institutions, is not sex discriminatory on its face.  It should not be applied...  to permit consideration of a person's gender as a factor making a particular institution appropriate or suitable for that person."  (p. 101)

6.   In the merchant marine, provisions for passenger accommodations must be sex-neutralized, and women may not have more bathrooms than men."46 U.S.C. §152 establishes different regulations for male and female occupancy of double berths, confines male passengers without wives to the * forepart' of the vessel, and segregates unmarried females in a separate and closed compartment.  46U.S.C. §153 requires provision of a bathroom for every 100 male passengers for their exclusive use and one for every 50 female passengers for the exclusive use of females and young children."(P- 190)

523"46 U.S.C. §152 might be changed to allow double occupancy by two ^consenting adults.' . . .  Requirements for separate bathroom facilities stipulated  in Section 153 should be retained but equalized so that the ratio of persons to facility is not sex-determined."  (p. 192)

FAMILY

"The adult world is divided into two classes—independent men, whose primary responsibility is to win bread for a family, and dependent women, whose primary responsibility is to care for children and household.  This concept must be eliminated."

LANGUAGE

 The word, "human," is not in the original text of the King James Bible. It is a word that came into use around the 12th century. "Man" or "mankind" are words used for those made in the image of God.  "Hu" can be perceived as "hue," or color. A color is a shade, and a hu+man equals a "shade of man" or "color of man." Shades are not real. Color is a semblance or appearance of something, but not the real thing.
 

Here is the concept of "color of law" to help us understand:

Color of law refers to an appearance of legal power to act that may operate in violation of law. For example, if a police officer acts with the "color of law" authority to arrest someone, the arrest, if it is made without probable cause, may actually be in violation of law. In other words, just because something is done with the "color of law" does not mean that the action was lawful.

So a human who is "color of man" is not a lawful man. Re-naming God's creation is a way of waging war on God Himself. This is exactly what Ruth Bader Ginsburg did with replacing terms within the body of law.

Lawbreakers do not qualify for judging the Law. This woman was a criminal, not only by man's law but by God's eternal Law.  Those who approved of her licentiousness are guilty themselves of the same.